Worst.saddest misrepresented villain from 4 previous Batman movies

[Guts/Batman]

I say Bane got miusreperesented the worst.

[Santanico]

I would agree, in the sense that he was mischaracterised...only, I hate Bane, and therefore don't care. Besides, everyone in Batman and Robin was poorly written, so it probably doesn't count.

No, probably the greatest missed opportunity in the Bat-movies' history was that of Two-Face. Not only does he absolutely not need to be paired up with any other villain (hell, Harvey's got depth enough to power two movies all by himself - pardon the pun), but if there's one thing Dent is not, it's a maniacal, cackling pseudo-Joker. And the elimination of Grace from the equation in favor of - God help us - Sugar and Spice? Unforgivable.

[SeeSpeakHear]

Probably Batman.

[comic_lover]

Riddler was pretty horrendous too gents.

[Glaucon]

Definitely Bane. The man figured out who Batman was and broke his back, but in the movie he is a simple stock character.


Probably Batman.

And by the look of Batman Begins, I really think we're going to see another bad characterization of Batman. I hope I'm completely wrong though.

[Mark Thorson]

Probably could make a case for all of them, except maybe the Joker. I absolutely hated the way Two-Face was portrayed though. I haven't seen Batman & Robin, and I don't plan too, so I don't know how bad those villains were butchered.

[Grant]

I think the two that they got closest to getting right were Joker and Catwoman.

I think Two Face was the worst. They made him into Joker lite.

[Funeral Party]

I think every villain was badly portrayed in the previous series, including the Joker. Bane was butchered the worst though.

[Patient Boy]

While I think we could've done without the "Joe Chill" origin for the Joker, I think Burton and Nicholson did the character justice. I did like Batman Returns although I can't make a fair judgement without watching it again, and I think the Penguin was done alright even with the unorthodox origin and characterisation.

Two Face was way too hammy and over the top, especially in a movie that also had Jim Carrey as the Riddler.

But Bane. Oy. Was there even a reason why he was in that movie?

[karaokefanboy]

You know, I haven't read many post-crisis Penguin stories, so I actually ENJOYED Tim Burton's exploitation of the Fowl Fiend's obscure physicality. Oswald is truly one of Gotham's freaks, not as a result of a chemical bath or a science experiment gone awry -- he's DEFORMED, and with guys like Killer Croc running around, it's hard to remember that about him. So, I kinda liked that subplot.

That said, every other villain . . . misrepresented. The irony of the Joker's character is his "everyman" status prior to the Red Hood incident in "The Killing Joke." The "one bad day" M.O. is out the window. As "Jack Napier," the Joker was still a cunning murderer, just sans pale skin, showmanship, and the cackling laugh.

Also, Mr. Freeze. They wrote off Victor's Herclean build in "Batman & Robin" by dubbing him an Olympic athlete . . . why not just admit that they knew the film was gonna blow and they needed the Governator's star power to keep the flick afloat for a week in the box office? Nowadays, I would cast Patrick Stewart. Yes, he's old, but that's the point. The strength is in his suit, and his real power is his genius. The irony of an old guy beating up Christian Bale would make for a few sweet scenes.

I know there's an Episode I edit out there for fans that didn't like the film . . . has anyone considered this for B & R?

Russ
www.geocities.com/geeklyweekly

[The Joker]

Two Face = Most missed opportunity.

Bane = Most misrepresented villian.

Runner Up: Mr. Freeze.

I know there's an Episode I edit out there for fans that didn't like the film . . . has anyone considered this for B & R?

That would mean editing the entire movie though.

[frankbullitt]

I think Two-face was the worst misuse of a villain and i think that is the ONE bad Tommy lee Jones performance,for a method type actor and a man who takes his work very seriously,why didn't he at least read one comic for just alittle research???? He even tauted and harassed Carrey for not being a "real" actor,just some lowly comic,but at least Carrey got most of his character right.
Mr Freeze gets a pass because he was always some low level B villain. He ONLY got interesting on the BAS,the movie would have done good to follow that variation and cast Patrick Stewart.....but i would never want my favorite episode of BAS tainted by a bad movie,so i'm glad they used the campy,dumb version of freeze,doing it right would not have saved the movie anyway.
If you want the definite version of anything Batman,you can't go wrong with BAS,it's the best version of batman ever,comics,movies,anything.

[Astonishing X-Fan]

Words can not express how badly Freeze, Poison Ivy, and Bane were butchered in "Batman & Robin."

[soda]

worst mis-representation - Bane. This is easy. There is NOBODY in the history of cinema who got the short end of the stick more than Bane. What the director did in BF and B&R with all the bad guys is just criminal (that's why, around my shop, we don't ever say his name, we don't call him by name, for fear of summoning an evil incantation that will destroy us all. Hey, I may not believe in black magic, but I know enough to be afraid of it. We just refer to "him" whenever we want to as "the anti-Paul Dini", just to give it sort of a biblical feel. I'm thinking of adopting the same protocol with the guy who wrote the GK issue that astonishing x-fan "didn't like", to put it mildly, any ideas?) however, there was nobody who was more criminal than Bane.

In the books, he had the greatest idea to beat Batman ever: cause the walls of Arkym to come tumbling down. Simple, yet effective. He was both smart, and savy enough to know precisely how to defeat Batman, and he was extremely interesting. The Bane we saw in knightfall has more than enough presence to carry a movie by himself, but for "the anti-paul dini" he's just reduced to a cardboard cut-out of himself.

worst missed opportunity - I'm going to have to go with some others here, and say that Two-face was probably the second worst representation, and that he's definitely the biggest missed opportunity. It's just that Bane was so damn wrong, so wronger than wrong, that Harvey's wrong seems pedestrain by comparison. I think that Two-face is one of the guys who could carry a movie by himself. Say someone gave me four Batman movies to do, I'd give Harvey his own movie and I'd do exactly what Nolan is doing with this new series: whichever movie the Joker gets, Harvey gets the very next one. I'd go Joker in the first one (he's the king, you have to give him his due), Harvey in the second, Ra's in the third, and Harley & Ivy in the fourth. (even though I voted Ra's the second best batman villian in the other thread, Ra's does have a lot of "overhead", Harvey's more famous and more recognizeable to the general public. I'd only want to do a Ra's story when the franchise was more thoroughly established).

as for the best representation, I didn't really like the Joker in the first one, I think Nicholson did the character justice, and they certainly got a lot of the character right. I think Phifer's Catwoman was probably the best, just because they got the whole love/hate relationship thing with Batman right (Best line, Bruce and Selina are dancing, and they realize who each other are, and Selina asks "do we have to start fighting?"). Everyone else stunk, the riddler, the penguin, Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze. The riddler was the best of that bad bunch, and poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze are just behind Bane and Two-face on the ladder of being butchered.

On the plus side, I think Nolan's nailed the Roman and the Scarecrow in the new movie, it's only Ra's that gives me cause to pause.

[BlueOrange25]

Definitely Bane. A world away from the guy he was in the comics.

[Astonishing X-Fan]

I'm REALLY worried about Ras. No Talia? No Lazarus Pits? I don't like it.

[soda]

I'm REALLY worried about Ras. No Talia? No Lazarus Pits? I don't like it.

My thoughts exactly! My local comic book store guy is going to go and see the flick tonight, and I'm probably going to chew the fat with him about it on Wednesday night (when I go to get my new books for the week), I'll tell you guys what he thought, he's really good with this stuff.

While the prospect of Ra's getting mis-represented is troubling, the Roman and the scarecrow look top notch, so there's that. I'll reserve comment till I talk to my guy and he's seen it, but yeah, Ra's scares me.

On the other hand, all the reviews of the movie, so far, have been really positive, so there's that, take it for what it's worth.

[Alan2099]

Two-Face got it the worst. Al his depth was replaced by doing a poor Joker impression.

Mr. Freeze gets second place. The tragic character was replaced by a typcial Arnold role.

Bane gets number three spot.

[1HELLBOY]

I think Bane got the it the worst. I mean, he's supposed to be Batman's rival in the brains department. In Batman & Robin, he was portrayed as a dribbling idiot. More hired muscle then established Rogue.

I think that they got the Joker spot-on. True, he was a little too chubby, but they got the characterization down pat.

Mr. Freeze, I think, they got him right. Arnold had the angst and the more emotional moments down very well for Freeze. If the movie was more serious and the script was a lot better, I think he would've made a GREAT Mr. Freeze. I think Ivy had a good rep, too. Once again, if it was a more serious, darker movie, and the characters were more thought out and researched, they would have been great.

Two-Face was ok, too cartoony and looney. He is supposed to be a very serious, evil person(s). Riddler was good. Carrey I liked as the Riddler.

Catwoman and Penguin were perfect. Couldn't have asked for better. Along with the Joker.

[Nefarius]

I would agree, in the sense that he was mischaracterised...only, I hate Bane, and therefore don't care. Besides, everyone in Batman and Robin was poorly written, so it probably doesn't count.

No, probably the greatest missed opportunity in the Bat-movies' history was that of Two-Face. Not only does he absolutely not need to be paired up with any other villain (hell, Harvey's got depth enough to power two movies all by himself - pardon the pun), but if there's one thing Dent is not, it's a maniacal, cackling pseudo-Joker. And the elimination of Grace from the equation in favor of - God help us - Sugar and Spice? Unforgivable.
I agree.Two-face was butchered completly

[steeler80]

My first instinct was to go with Two-Face. He was taken from a classic tragic villian and made into--well basically an idiot.

But Bane really rates up there too. They could have put any large body in his place in that movie and it wouldn't have skipped a beat (well actually it never hit a beat but you know what I'm saying).

[Artemis1]

Joker was pretty good. They used him too much in the film, but he was still great. 4/5

Penguin was good. They made him the ultimate sex mongering criminal monster ever. 4.5/5

Catwoman was plain awesome. Incredibly portraid. 5/5

Two Face was alright. Though not the best ever, he had an interesting new world to him. 4/5

The Riddler rocked out loud. 5/5

Mr. Freeze was terrible. The jokes screwed him up. 2/5

Bain was a piece of crap. If they used his older version he would be amazing. 1/5

Poison Ivy was OK. Nothing special, though. 3/5

[Grant]

While the prospect of Ra's getting mis-represented is troubling, the Roman and the scarecrow look top notch, so there's that. I'll reserve comment till I talk to my guy and he's seen it, but yeah, Ra's scares me.

From the script I read they seemed to really get Ra's right. I'm excited to see to his character play out in the movie.

[Catatonic]

Catwoman was excellent, but i didn't like the fact that she got the powers and the 9 lives and everything like that. I would have prefered the Selina who was a prostitute and the greatest theif in gotham and possibley the world. I think a huge chunk of her character was lost, though they got the love hate thing going pretty good.

[handOFfate]

Bane. From an intelligent, dangerous foe to a retarded musclehead.
Two-Face just beats out Mr.Freeze for second. The difference is that at least Freeze did have a soft side to him. Harvey is just a joker-clone.

Nicholson's Joker was great. Different from the comics, but a lot of fun.
Catwoman was also well-done. She had a good love-hate relationship vibe with Batman. Penguin was probably a little too freaky for me, but it could have been a lot worse.
Riddler was a lot of fun. Didn't have much of a problem with him. Plus, he was smart.

For the new movie, the villains look good to me. I'm not a big a fan of Ra's as most people, so I wont care if the character is a bit different. Scarecrow looks right on, though.

[OverMaster]

I'm REALLY worried about Ras. No Talia? No Lazarus Pits? I don't like it.

Well, I have the feeling the general, mainstream public could find the concept of the Lazarus Pits a bit hard to swallow. If they reinterpret Ra's in a right way, he could still end up looking good, even if he is changed a lot (like Dr. Octopus in Spider-Man 2, who was a lot more sympathetic, more distanced from reality and less cruel than his comics version).

As for past villains, Bane, Two-Face and Poison Ivy got it worst. A shame, since with good scripts, Tommy Lee Jones and Uma Thurman would have been perfect fits for their characters. But I actually kinda like Schwarzenegger's Freeze, except for his lame jokes. He at least brought some emotional depth to his role, and that's saying a lot coming from Arnie, who isn't exactly the greatest character actor ever.

[Guts/Batman]

Well, I have the feeling the general, mainstream public could find the concept of the Lazarus Pits a bit hard to swallow. If they reinterpret Ra's in a right way, he could still end up looking good, even if he is changed a lot (like Dr. Octopus in Spider-Man 2, who was a lot more sympathetic, more distanced from reality and less cruel than his comics version).

Call me crazy but I wasn't too thrilled with either Spider-Man villain. GG wasn't the sick, sadistic mofo that i read in the comics and Ock was ok but not what i was looking for. Too many comics read leading too a feeling of disppointment.

But I think if they would have done the characters true to the character in the comic they would have turned many viewers away so i can see why they did it.

[Alan2099]

What about Jason Woodrue from Batman and Robin? He didn't even get to turn into the Floronic Man.

[1HELLBOY]

Catwoman was excellent, but i didn't like the fact that she got the powers and the 9 lives and everything like that. I would have prefered the Selina who was a prostitute and the greatest theif in gotham and possibley the world. I think a huge chunk of her character was lost, though they got the love hate thing going pretty good.


If you're referring to the Batman Returns Catwoman, she didn't have any powers. The "9 lives" thing she was talking about was just a metaphor to say that she was very hard to kill and/or very lucky.

The only Catwoman to EVER have powers was the Halle Berry version. Which sucked so hard it took a piece of my soul with it. And I didn't even see it. I knew it was gonna suck. I mean, Catwoman has NEVER had powers. EVER. They totally screwed up everything to even REMOTELY do with that character. Even the general public didn't like the movie. Let alone the comic book following.

[karaokefanboy]

I think the implication was that Catwoman DID have superpowers. Remember the short-lived WB Birds of Prey series, which relied on imagery from the Bat-flicks. Huntress -- Batman and Catwoman's daughter -- is half "meta" on her mom's side. I may be wrong, but I'm sure they meant to use that Tim Burton continuity...

Russ
www.geocities.com/geeklyweekly

[OverMaster]

I think the implication was that Catwoman DID have superpowers. Remember the short-lived WB Birds of Prey series, which relied on imagery from the Bat-flicks. Huntress -- Batman and Catwoman's daughter -- is half "meta" on her mom's side. I may be wrong, but I'm sure they meant to use that Tim Burton continuity...

Russ
www.geocities.com/geeklyweekly

But the Joker died at the end of Burton's "Batman", yet he was alive in Birds of Prey. That plays against your theory.

[fuaak]

Lessee...

The best of the bunch was Pfeiffer's Catwoman by far - that Jekyll/Hyde pastiche was easily the best version of that character not only on film, but across all media. Also, Nicholson did a simply great job as Joker. About the only thing that doesn't match is the shape of his head, and that's hardly the guy's own fault.

Now, Jim Carrey would have done a great job too, except somebody forgot to tell him that he was supposed to play the Riddler, not the Joker. Then there was the always reliable Tommy Lee Jones, who was ALSO playing the Joker for some reason, and DeVito was excellent as the Creature of the Black Lagoon. These people would probably have done their jobs right, but the parts they were given were misfires.

By the fourth movie, they just kind of blend into one mess of awfulusia.

Speaking of Jekyll and Hyde, Keaton's Bruce Wayne was great for the same reason - usually, Bruce is portrayed as a shallow facade of a playboy, but Burton/Keaton's Bruce was a real person that just never got over the murder of his parents. As Batman, he's full of aggression and confidence, but as Bruce, he's timid and looks uncomfortable wherever he goes, and it's not an act. They should use that in the comics.