i figured since they used heath ledger as an unsuspecting choice as joker and a much younger actor why not him. no one thought heath could pull it off so what about this guy as riddler.
While I loved Maggie in TDK, I say no to her brother...
I don't want to see Riddler as it is, and I SURE AS HELL don't want to see Jake Gyllenhaal as Riddler...
If Riddler is that important, I say Ed Norton, but again, I'd rather see either Two-Face come back (with a plausible reason to come back) or someone like Reaper or Bane, who has never been in a movie before (I don't count B&R Bane)...
i was actually thinking riddler would be a nice choice for the next bat man, cause the only one he was in was the one with jim carry right?
__________________
Thanks to starlock for the sig. Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never brought a pen to a sword fight.-I AM YOUR DEMISE!!
He's not a good choice, and I hate how people use the Heath Ledger argument to justify someone being cast for a character they look nothing like and wouldn't do a good job as.
Dwayne Johnson would be a perfect Riddler. But don't deny it because we never thought Heath would be as good as he was.
__________________ You guys need to start taking things a little more seriously.
Wrong. I saw Heath Ledger perfectly. When I found out he was going to cast as The Joker, I knew the character was going to be a whole lot better. I was right.
when Health was casted i thought he be good just because he was a good actor before the dark knight and i just dont think that Jake Gyllenhaal is that good of an actor
If the movie is great, would people really care if it's Bane or Reaper and not Riddler, or Talia and not Catwoman?
I mean, look at Batman Begins: It had Ras Al Ghul and Scarecrow, two villains the general public didn't really know too well, and they STILL loved that movie...
Begins proved you don't need the rotation to make a great Batman movie...
KMC Community Forums
Aug 12th, 2008 02:19 AM
