What's new
By:

The Dark Knight Rises

Anne Hathaway is cute. I wouldn't categorize her as sexy though. She is a decent actress though, so maybe it will work out.
 
NUMBERICA said:
I would like to know more. I'm no expert, I've just never found the character to be anything but slop and pollution.
Click to expand...

I don't really know how to respond to this because I don't know what people are basing their opinions on. Since Catwoman (like all comic book characters) is a serial character with many different authors, that appears in many different mediums, and that has significant editing and creative differences in many different decades it's possible that everyone is talking about a totally different version of the character. I mean, this was how catwoman looked in the 1950s:

274895-53224-catwoman_super.jpg


And this is how she was last depicted in a movie.

catwomanhb1.jpg


So there's a lot of variation and I don't know what baseline people are looking at.

This is actually particularly true for catwoman whose exact position on the hero-villain continuum is fuzzy and has undergone a lot of change. It's a character that has run the gamut from a somewhat pure Batman antagonist, to a semi-sanctioned vigilante, to (in one continuity) Batman's wife, to a periodic bad-girl love interest of Batman, to a sometimes murderer (as recently as about five years ago), to (in her current incarnation) someone who stars in a functional Sex and the City with supervillains storyline where she shares an apartment with Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn.

So when LG says she's never added anything, I have no idea which version of the character he's talking about or even if he's aware of the variation involved. I do know that she's beloved by a certain fanbase and had a very successful (and usually pretty good) comic book all her own in the 90s.

In my experience her interactions with Batman in his books are generally less than satisfying, in large part because since she's a woman and he's a man there seems to be a pathological need to get them together, but that she can be handled well by the right author. The Nolan films have tended to draw from a wide-range of Batman-based source material so it's very difficult to tell what the character will be or how she will function in the film.
 
Sirkickyass said:
I don't really know how to respond to this because I don't know what people are basing their opinions on.

So when LG says she's never added anything, I have no idea which version of the character he's talking about or even if he's aware of the variation involved. I do know that she's beloved by a certain fanbase and had a very successful (and usually pretty good) comic book all her own in the 90s.

In my experience her interactions with Batman in his books are generally less than satisfying, in large part because since she's a woman and he's a man there seems to be a pathological need to get them together, but that she can be handled well by the right author. The Nolan films have tended to draw from a wide-range of Batman-based source material so it's very difficult to tell what the character will be or how she will function in the film.
Click to expand...

I stopped reading Batman-related comics in the 80's. I read most of what I could get my hands on during the 80's, which included a collection of my friend's from the mid-60's. I just never liked the character in any iteration. I never felt it as particularly well-developed or doing anything but diluting the Batman story. So I guess your point above on bold is what I was basing my opinion on.

And from the movies and tv shows there have been, no one has portrayed catwoman as anything but silly and superfluous. They focus entirely on sex (see the dominatrix version posted above) and rarely have they cast an actress that could bring more to the role than superficial sex anyway, something that was completely washed out by the utter silliness of the character as mostly portrayed in film.

Hence, with yet another film iteration, and the fact that I have been sorely underwhelmed by the female leads in the new Batman series so far, and add in that I have never been impressed with Hathaway as either an actress nor considered her particularly sexy, I do not have high hopes for this one.

Again, I am afraid of catwoman just taking screen time away from the better parts of the mythos in the name of...what exactly? I just don't see it.

I sure hope I am wrong and they pull off something brilliant though.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I stopped reading Batman-related comics in the 80's. I read most of what I could get my hands on during the 80's, which included a collection of my friend's from the mid-60's. I just never liked the character in any iteration. I never felt it as particularly well-developed or doing anything but diluting the Batman story. So I guess your point above on bold is what I was basing my opinion on.
Click to expand...

So let's be clear here: you're basing this on a lot of books that are totally divorced from anything resembling modern comic book writing standards. Batman probably referred to Robin as his "chum" a lot, there were lots of goofy and recycled plot lines involving very gimmicky crimes, and the dialogue was very expositional. Many comics likely included a break in the action when Batman announced he had solved the case along the lines of "Dear reader, you have seen everything the Detective has? Can you identify the killer?" Batman probably spent an inordinate amount of time chasing down jewel thieves as well. Given all that, I would posit that very few things about the Batman mythos were at that point what you would consider "well-develooped" today. In some ways, those comics could be styled "Hardy Boys in Tights."

Some of this may be off depending on how far into the 1980s you were reading. But if you read the entire decade I'm sure you're well aware there are extreme qualitative differences between where the character was in 1980 and where he was by 1988. In many ways, Catwoman is no different. You might be surprised by her portrayals today. Or not. If you stopped reading before 1986 then the catwoman you are familiar with is, and I mean this quite literally, not even in the same fictional universe as the present one.


Personally my favorite catwoman is Eartha Kitt.

550w_movies_catwoman_eartha_kitt.jpg


Technically, Julie Newmar was probably sexier. But Eartha has a LOT going on.
 
Sirkickyass said:
So let's be clear here: you're basing this on a lot of books that are totally divorced from anything resembling modern comic book writing standards. Batman probably referred to Robin as his "chum" a lot, there were lots of goofy and recycled plot lines involving very gimmicky crimes, and the dialogue was very expositional. Many comics likely included a break in the action when Batman announced he had solved the case along the lines of "Dear reader, you have seen everything the Detective has? Can you identify the killer?" Batman probably spent an inordinate amount of time chasing down jewel thieves as well. Given all that, I would posit that very few things about the Batman mythos were at that point what you would consider "well-develooped" today. In some ways, those comics could be styled "Hardy Boys in Tights."

Some of this may be off depending on how far into the 1980s you were reading. But if you read the entire decade I'm sure you're well aware there are extreme qualitative differences between where the character was in 1980 and where he was by 1988. In many ways, Catwoman is no different. You might be surprised by her portrayals today. Or not. If you stopped reading before 1986 then the catwoman you are familiar with is, and I mean this quite literally, not even in the same fictional universe as the present one.
Click to expand...

So let's be clear here: the only fans the movie-makers are supposed to be catering to are those who have read every single episode of every comic and fan fiction known to man, those who made it their life's work to critique comic-book writing as if it were an art form. And they are supposed to ignore the other 99% of the population in doing so. And if you haven't read everything contained in that particular mythos, you have no right to an opinion.

Gotcha.
 
LogGrad98 said:
So let's be clear here: the only fans the movie-makers are supposed to be catering to are those who have read every single episode of every comic and fan fiction known to man, those who made it their life's work to critique comic-book writing as if it were an art form. And they are supposed to ignore the other 99% of the population in doing so. And if you haven't read everything contained in that particular mythos, you have no right to an opinion.

Gotcha.
Click to expand...

No. That's not what I said at all.

In fact, from everything I've heard (I didn't see it) part of the reason Green Lantern was so terrible is that in engaged in too much fan service. I will never take the position that those who are deeply entrenched in the mythos aren't allowed to have an opinion. That would exclude even myself from many of the comic book films and adaptations that are out there since I only read a small slice of what is published. In fact, I think if you read my post a little more closely and with less self-seriousness you'd realize most of the post is designed to poke fun at the goofiness of Batman comics generally and not at you specifically.

What I did say is that your blanket judgment about a particular character "never" being particularly well developed and generally diluting the Batman story is based on very outdated information. There's a difference between saying that you have to have read everything and saying that the opinion means more if you have a passing familiarity with the last 25 years of publication of a particular character.

In fact, that differentiation of information depending on the context of time was the basis for my initial response to Numberica with respect to the idea that I had no idea how to respond to criticisms of the character because it was possible, even likely, that everyone was talking about a totally different iteration of the character. Your judgment that Catwoman is, per se, a bad idea to add to the film is based on experiences with the character that occurred before I was even born. The vast majority of my experiences with the character took place in a universe that you've never inhabited. There is no rational point of comparison for us to even discuss what catwoman brings to the table.

Given all that, my only point is that maybe you shouldn't be so hard-set in your idea that the character sucks and will be a drag on the film. She's not my favorite either, but we really have almost no basis to determine what Anne Hathaway's character will be because the publishing history to draw from is so variable. She could be a brothel madame (there's basis for that), a millionaire heiress (that too), a romantic interest (tons of that), a basic villain catburglar, etc etc. We truly have no idea what narrative role she will play. Any judgment you, or anyone else for that matter, could draw based solely on the name "catwoman" comes from a pretense of knowledge.
 
Sirkickyass, I barely remember reading comic books as a child, but I do remember the character "Creeper". Would he or would he not be an interesting inclusion in a Batman movie?
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
Sirkickyass, I barely remember reading comic books as a child, but I do remember the character "Creeper". Would he or would he not be an interesting inclusion in a Batman movie?
Click to expand...

He could be. But I don't think Nolan would use him because he's tended to shy away from anything that's supernatural in nature.

Considering the Creeper's alter ego (Jack Ryder) is effectively a Keith Olbermann/Sean Hannity type he could theoretically be deployed humorously.
 
Sirkickyass said:
No. That's not what I said at all.

In fact, from everything I've heard (I didn't see it) part of the reason Green Lantern was so terrible is that in engaged in too much fan service. I will never take the position that those who are deeply entrenched in the mythos aren't allowed to have an opinion. That would exclude even myself from many of the comic book films and adaptations that are out there since I only read a small slice of what is published. In fact, I think if you read my post a little more closely and with less self-seriousness you'd realize most of the post is designed to poke fun at the goofiness of Batman comics generally and not at you specifically.

What I did say is that your blanket judgment about a particular character "never" being particularly well developed and generally diluting the Batman story is based on very outdated information. There's a difference between saying that you have to have read everything and saying that the opinion means more if you have a passing familiarity with the last 25 years of publication of a particular character.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you read my post more carefully, I qualify my opinion by telling you exactly what time period I based it on (as you questioned in an earlier post). I did not say that her character was "never" developed. I pointed out that, in the comics I read, and the TV and movie portrayals I have seen, the character was rarely more than a dilution of the batman story.

I stopped reading Batman-related comics in the 80's. I read most of what I could get my hands on during the 80's, which included a collection of my friend's from the mid-60's. I just never liked the character in any iteration. I never felt it as particularly well-developed or doing anything but diluting the Batman story. So I guess your point above on bold is what I was basing my opinion on.
Click to expand...

You may be entirely right. Maybe during the 90's they filled it out much better than before. I wouldn't know about that, as I fully admitted. But from what I had seen of the character, it isn't anything all that strong in the batman mythos, especially for people who are casual fans (as most people who see the movie likely are) rather than hard-core fan-boys.

So I stand by this opinion, but remain hopeful that Nolan pulls this off better than I think he will.

Hence, with yet another film iteration, and the fact that I have been sorely underwhelmed by the female leads in the new Batman series so far, and add in that I have never been impressed with Hathaway as either an actress nor considered her particularly sexy, I do not have high hopes for this one.
Click to expand...
 
In the Batman storyline as I ma familiar with it, there are basically two women of recurring significance: Selina Kyle and Talia al Ghul. (daughter of Ra's). In different continuties/universe, each has had a child with Batman. I would not be surprised if they were combined into a single charater for the movie. It's been advertised as a conclusion; Batman retiring and getting married would make it that.
 
One Brow said:
In the Batman storyline as I ma familiar with it, there are basically two women of recurring significance: Selina Kyle and Talia al Ghul. (daughter of Ra's). In different continuties/universe, each has had a child with Batman. I would not be surprised if they were combined into a single charater for the movie. It's been advertised as a conclusion; Batman retiring and getting married would make it that.
Click to expand...


but then they might have to do battle with this guy...

30913_article_main.jpg
 
One Brow said:
In the Batman storyline as I ma familiar with it, there are basically two women of recurring significance: Selina Kyle and Talia al Ghul. (daughter of Ra's). In different continuties/universe, each has had a child with Batman. I would not be surprised if they were combined into a single charater for the movie. It's been advertised as a conclusion; Batman retiring and getting married would make it that.
Click to expand...

Thalia al ghul is ALSO in dark knight rises
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top