Seen This Cat Before
Anne Hathaway‘s Dark Knight Returns catwoman get-up will be fairly utilitarian. Not too much different from Julie Newmar’s. A simple wrap-around mask, no cat tail, and no hair-concealing head mask or face-cover a la Michelle Pfeiffer‘s version. And no S & M midriff-exposure a la Halle Berry.
It goes without saying that when Hathaway gets into fights with much taller, bigger and stronger guys in this upcoming Chris Nolan film, she’ll whip their asses like they’re eight year-old boys.
This is starting to look and smell like a bomb…I know the fanboys are wetting their pants, but I don’t like what I am seeing in the photo leaks from this set, never been a fan of the whole Catwoman thing, either.
JR … I wouldn’t recommend getting into the box office prognostication game.
This is going to be HUGE.
Haha! TDKR will be a “bomb”. You heard it here first on HE.
This one looks a lot closer to Begins than Dark Knight, which to me is a good thing. You can’t beat Ledger, so don’t try. I don’t think it’s what the Nolan faithful are looking for, though.
The one thing that outfit needs is the gold belt slung low across the hips. It was a sweet look in the swingin’ 60s that I wouldn’t mind seeing revived.
I didn’t say ‘box office’ bomb. I just meant that it is going to suck as a movie that can draw in more than the fanboys and eloi. The Dark Knight did that better than any of the prior Batman films, the only Batman movie I ever liked due mainly to Heath Ledger’s Joker.
If box office is your only measure of the quality of a film, then can I assume you are ‘over the moon’ with the POTC franchise dreck?
I don’t see anyway possible that TDKR will equal TDK AND be in the discussion for the BP Oscar, much less have an actor win an Oscar.
I don’t like seeing a new photo every other week leading up to its release. It’s too much tease.
Funny that Nolan would go with the cat ears. Didn’t think he was capable of kitsch. Good for him.
One thing I’ve observed in the decade since Memento is that Nolan really has no use for women. His female characters are usually there to haunt the male leads… supply the motivation for their dark deeds or act as their conscious. But they are never EVER an active part of the story.
He probably can’t do that with Catwoman. She’ll need a real character arc.
coxcable,
You see cat ears. I see integrated satellite radio antennae for GPS and monitoring police scanner alerts, NPR Fresh Air, Howard Stern Sirius XM and whatnot.
It’s a good time to mention that 20 years from now my son will ask me how Anne Hathaway came to be a movie star and how the general public allowed it to happen. And I will have no defense.
JR you make some very good points, some of which I totally agree with.
But “bomb” is a loaded term, and in this world it has a pretty common connotation, which means a financially unsuccessful release. The “box office” part is implied whether you like it or now.
Say it looks like a “stinker” instead or something, I don’t know.
@lazarus – point taken; if i could edit my posts, I would do it…I hope my clarification suffices.
I am not a “box office” watcher anyway. Box office has little to do with genuine quality, or at least it has little to do with what I tend to enjoy the most.
JR: Fair enough on the misunderstanding of the use of “bomb”. But still, I’ve no idea how anyone can doubt Nolan at this stage, especially based on a few grainy spy-shots of some new characters. Nobody has any clue what role these people are going to play in the story, and what that story is going to be.
LOOK. AT. HER.
Those are the kind of curves you see on a Grecian vase. Timeless beauty of the gods. Let us all pause a moment and gasp at the wonder of the female form approaching perfection instead of grousing about cat ears.
@Eloi Wrath: All I am trying to say is that the whole Catwoman angle, even with Anne Hathaway in the role, is not piquing my interest in the next Batman film…that photo is a real yawner, and seeing more of the jumbo wheeled motorcycles we have already seen before is not very exciting, either…
JR, the thing is, if your whole point is that it’s not going to do as well as Dark Knight or maybe even be as good as Dark Knight, I don’t think many people would argue that. Dark Knight was the highest grossing movie of the ten-plus years between James Cameron movies. Dark Knight Rises will probably “only” make $350 million or so. And Dark Knight did have the Ledger playing the Joker, a pretty unbeatable combination. I have to imagine the final-full-performance thing, as well as the performance itself, helped some, especially on opening weekend.
But if Nolan “only” makes another Batman movie as good as Batman Begins, I’m fine with that (even if I don’t quite agree with the triple-or-quadruple-or-whatever-backlash that has Batman Begins as the actually-superior movie to Dark Knight).
But betting against the overall quality of a Nolan movie doesn’t seem like smart money, unless you have a far weaker opinion of Batman Begins, Dark Knight, Insomnia, The Prestige, Memento, or Inception than I do (and it’s certainly possible… but in that case, how excited were you ever going to be about his third Batman movie?).
As far as female characters, I’m definitely interested in Nolan having to deal with a more active lady character this time around, but I’d say that Ellen Page and Hilary Swank had cool stuff to do in Inception and Insomnia beyond “haunt” the hero. They both are sort of the moral centers of their respective movies… which I guess is a form of haunting, but neither of them are playing The Dead Wife or whatever.
And of course, it should go without saying that people talking about how these grainy paparazzi photos aren’t getting them excited is ridiculous. Has anyone ever seen a paparazzi photo that made them go HOLY SHIT THIS MOVIE LOOKS AWESOME? You guys remember that movies have cinematography and music and editing and stuff, right?
I loved Inception, the first half of Batman Begins, Memento, and Insomnia – fair to say I am a Nolan fan from way back.
I ‘liked’ TDK, but I didn’t care for the “bomb on the boat” stuff and I thought it had a muddled and confusing final 20 minutes that took away from my overall enjoyment of the film.
I despised The Prestige, and I did not care for the mundane 2nd half of Batman Begins that did not live up to the wonderful first half, so you can’t win ‘em all.
FWIW, I am not a huge super hero flick fan, but occasionally one really grabs my attention, like Ironman.
Nerds.
WHY WEAR A MASK? THAT’LL FOOL GORDON!
I like Hathaway. I think she’s talented, fun, interesting, pretty and often HOT.
But she’s not SEXY. Fine distinction between HOT and SEXY, but you can be hot and not sexy or sexy but not hot. Hathaway is hot but not sexy and that’s an f*%@ing shame.
Regarding the movie, I think it’ll disappoint. How can it not? TDK was EVERYTHING.
Doesn’t mean I won’t see this three times in a theater or rewatch it a dozen times on HBO (INCEPTION SUCKS ME IN EVERY DAMN WEEK)
Been saying this for a year, might as well say it again:
This will be a BIG hit. It will NOT, however, be a gigantic phenomenon like TDK was. It’ll make less money overall, get poorer reviews, people won’t be going back ten more times etc. It’ll be judged to be a “dissapointment” as a follow-up to TDK – you cannot catch lightning in a bottle twice.
Also, and this I’m less sure about but “feels” more likely by the day… I’m getting the sense that the fanboy-hype tide is turning slightly from the everything-needs-to-be-gritty-and-serious thing to the more high-fantasy stuff, and I would not be surprised if that particular side of the buzz-machine will find another trip through Nolan’s de-comic-ized style to be a bit of a comedown after they’re all still flipping out over the straight-out-of-the-comics “Avengers.” (TDK probably still makes more money, of course.)
As to the costume, Nolan makes the most asexual movies you’ll ever see at this level; so its going to be odd to see his version of a character that’s ALL about sexuality. I’m also amused that he’s finally found a silly comic-book costume staple he doesn’t want to jettison… and its having superheroines wear heels (so much for practical.)
@actionlover,
How is being excited for the next movie from a brilliant director any more nerdy than being a “big baseball guy”, as you’ve admitted to being on the Moneyball posts?
I’m just curious.
Fantasy baseball. OPS. WHIP. Nothing nerdy about any of that.
WHY WEAR A MASK? THAT’LL FOOL GORDON!
Gordon’s in the hospital. All you have to do is fool Detective Gerard “I’m just gonna have to enjoy it even more” Stephens. Or Flass, if he’s still around.
“you cannot catch lightning in a bottle twice.” If you believe this, you must not have seen Human Centipede Two.
Actually, TDK didn’t even catch lightning in a bottle once, at least for 3 whole acts. It’s a Batman movie. People were extremely excited for it (remember the video of Ben Stiller probing the mind of his nephew) and it mostly delivered and did comparable inflated numbers to the Nicholson one. To say it caught lighting in a bottle somewhat diminishes that phrase, which should be saved for whatever project Nia Vardalos does.
I do wonder, too, if this movie kinda-sorta violates the strongest sequel-anticipation timeline, which I’ve always thought of as being three years. This is purely anecdotal and obviously imperfect, but it seems like in terms of box office, a three-year wait builds up demand perfectly. All of the previous Batman sequels that broke the opening weekend records at time of release (Returns, Forever, Dark Knight) came three years after their predecessor. Batman & Robin, in addition to having terrible buzz, was only two years after Forever, and Begins, besides not really being a sequel, had that eight-year gap (although that movie not opening huge may have been a case of eight years not even being really enough).
I also think of Spider-Man: the second movie was the only one of the three not to set an opening weekend record. Of course, it did fine, and was opening over July 4th so it had more of an extended opening than a concentrated weekend, but it was also just about two years after the first, whereas Spider-Man 3 (even though people didn’t like it as much) seemed like even more of a huge event, following three years later.
The X-Men movies also did well with three-year gaps, and I wonder if the shift to two-year gaps with these spinoff/prequel movies is part of why the last couple haven’t done quite as well.
The Star Wars prequels (which all opened huge for their times), and come to think of it the originals too, all came at a steady three-year clip.
Of course, The Lost World broke a record when it came out four years after the original… but even at the time, I remember feeling like it didn’t have quite the same excitement as a Jurassic Park sequel would’ve a year earlier.
I mean, as a fan, I love getting sequels on the faster side, if they can maintain quality, but maintaining that balance between general-audience anticipation and feeling like a movie either isn’t that special, or is yesterday’s news, can be tricky, I think. The Abrams Star Trek slipped out of the three-year cycle, too, and I wonder if opening in summer 2013 (if that happens; maybe they’ll go holiday) won’t defuse some of the excitement.
@SaveFarris, there are several other shots floating around that show Gordon in this very scene, standing next to Catwoman.
Remember how the original fanboy line was It’s Selina Kyle! It’s NOT Catwoman! So much for that.
The first thing that I get from this picture? I can’t believe they are sticking with those original tires, it’s pretty clear by now that that motorcycle contraption can’t be steered well at all without rounding them off a bit.
The other thing everyone seems to be forgetting is that this will undoubtedly be sold as “Chris Nolan finishes off his BATMAN trilogy — see how he does it!” That will guarantee big numbers by itself.
I’m actually most curious what WB decides to do with the franchise after this. No more Nolan — do they continue in the same “universe” absent Nolan, even if that means no Bale? Or do they — heaven help us — reboot yet again?
Jesse- I too agree with the 3 year rule, but there are lots of big exceptions, the LOTR movies being the biggest.
Also, one of the biggest sequels in terms of MY anticipation was Aliens, which came 7 years after the original (and I remember at the time thinking that was INSANE that people were making a sequel SEVEN YEARS after the original).
What’s the longest wait between original and sequel, by the way (not counting remakes or TV shite)? Color of Money has to be up there.
i’m a fanboy, and waiting for more pictures. I like the new look
“What’s the longest wait between original and sequel, by the way (not counting remakes or TV shite)? Color of Money has to be up there.”
“The Return of the Pink Panther” came about ten years after “A Shot in the Dark”. (not as long as “Color of Money”)
Good question, Ray.
Gots me thinking.
“Godfather 3″? What’s that? 17 years?
Tron was 28 years in between. The Hustler was only 25 years before its sequel.
Matrix Reloaded came 4 years after, and opened as big as possible.
@Mark
Regardless of it’s actual merits, TDK was a “Titanic”-style cultural phenomenon that you just can’t repeat. People were going back dozens of times, politics/culture sites were publishing articles analyzing it from a political-analogy perspective, folks were writing thesis on it, the whole “monument to Heath Ledger” aspect, etc… and let’s not forget that it was briefly the biggest movie “ever” as a sequel to a movie that only did so-so originally. That’s what I mean by “lightning in a bottle,” and thats what it’s basically impossible for this to measure up to. It’s not gonna outgun “Avatar,” which means no “biggest ever,” which means it’s a “dissapointment” compared to the previous one.
@Mr. F
Jeff Robinov has been saying they’re already planning to reboot (probably not another origin story, but new actors and no adherence to Nolan’s “universe” or continuity) as soon as Nolan is done.
Warners wants a running stream of “DC Universe” movies building-to and connected-by a “Justice League” feature to replace “Potter” and compete with Disney/Marvel’s “Avengers” model, (that business with Angela Basset in “Green Lantern” was apparently supposed to set that up, but we know how that turned out…) but they know they can’t do it without making Batman part of the equation and no one outside WB Animation is allowed to touch Batman until Nolan has relinquished it – that’s why they weren’t allowed to have “teenage Bruce Wayne” on Smallville; and it was widely rumored that Nolan’s displeasure was a big reason George Miller’s “Justice League” movie got torpedo’d.
I remember batting the sequel issue around on another thread. Psycho II came out 23 years after the original. Any longer than that?
know the fanboys are wetting their pants,
Actually the fanboys aren’t liking anything. It’s quite funny how they’ve turned on Nolan. There’s even some revisionist TDK backlash
Jesse: Spider-Man 3 had Venom who is hugely popular.
Yeah the “Titanic” comparison is apt, the Ledger/Joker/death thing was once in a lifetime publicity that can’t be repeated. One problem is that saying “Tom Hardy is Bane!” will just draw a big “Who is what now?” from average folks who were maybe expecting Penguin or Riddler. I’m wondering if that’s why we’re getting Catwoman too, to give the public at least one iconic character they recognize.
And I wonder if there will be a Spider-Man 3 ‘too many characters’ syndrome. If you’ve got to juggle Bane, Catwoman, Talia al Ghul, and whatever Joseph Gordon Levitt is doing. Everyone loved what Raimi was doing with Spider-man…until the third one when they tried to cram too much in. Just sayin’.
Does 101/102 Dalmations qualify? If so, it’s the winner (39 years)
How is the Titanic comparison apt? It’s an absurd comparison. Cultural phenomenon? TDK had a domestic multiplier of 3.5 and a foreign number equal to the 2nd Transformers. Titanic had a multiplier of twenty-effen-one.
There’s also the Fairuza Balk Return to Oz, 46 years after Garland.
What I’ve always liked about Nolan’s take on the BATMAN universe, is that the design and function of the costumes, props and vehicles, while somewhat fantastic, always seemed practical. Anne Hathaway’s costume, however, seems to violate this aesthetic in a number of ways.
It’s pretty useless as a disguise, she can’t run in spike heels and the body suit looks a bit too confining. As for the ears, well, they might actually conceal a lot of high-tech surveillance gear, but they don’t exactly look cool.
I’m surprised Nolan and company didn’t go with the Catwoman look that artist Jim Lee (I think) came up with for DC comics, and which they’ve been using as the default house style for somewhere around the last 10 years: a hood that covers the entire face and conceals the hair, oversized goggles that allow for increased visibility in a variety of lighting conditions (infrared, night vision), gloves with nasty metal claws for climbing and combat, and large ears (almost bat-like) packed with electronics. And yes, the costume has a tail, but it always is drawn to appear prehensile (which also would be a useful for climbing and combat).
As for her combat abilities, I hope Nolan’s Catwoman beats larger, stronger opponents through agility, intelligence, speed and stealth. However, no matter how impressive his Catwoman ends up being, I just don’t think he’s gonna be able to beat Michelle Pfeiffer’s undead, patent leather, whip-wielding bondage queen.
I’m both a Nolan super-fan AND someone who’s kind of been asking if this isn’t an inevitable bad idea to return to this material, I wish Nolan would do his own stuff instead of “another” Batman, etc, etc…
But is it not semi-possible that the detractors (self semi-included) are kind of looking at this the wrong way? Most complaints are of the “How is he gonna top TDK?” variety, “Bane is no Joker,” etc, as if we’re all just expecting a “Spider-Man 3″ type “one more” movie. Oh, it’s another Batman adventure with villains in a teeming urban crime-scape…
But who’s to say this isn’t gonna be a post-INCEPTION, Nolan-emboldened super-epic bit of audience-fucking craziness? Do we really think after that (and especially after it was a HIT), he’s going to just do a straight Batman adventure with Batman fighting Bane (whoever the fuck THAT is) and Hathaway issuing Poison-Ivy style come-ons off to the side?
Sure lots of pics are floating about, but how do we know this isn’t some REVERSE WORLD MIND FUCK where Batman’s gonna be dead from the jump and half-hallucinating/dreaming these characters in some super-fucking-complicated nightmare world where he’s mooning over his dead wife Catwoman who never really existed or something? Obviously that’s kind of a lame way to explain what I mean, but why the assumption this is going to be some terrestrial summer adventure movie, and not some inverted freak-show “rug pulled out” movie… Most Nolan popcorn movies build off his previous, more experimental one, so I don’t think it’s safe to assume any of this will be played relatively straight, as it was in “Dark Knight.” It’s probably about some mental patient who creates a dream world where he’s an annoying superhero asshole, and none of it’s for real.
Those are not “ears”. They’re goggles that only look like ears when worn on top of her head.
Also:
LOOK AT HER!
I’m looking at her but, in reality, you gotta figure that she stinks pretty bad after running around in that leather, form-fitting outfit all day.
Lex- Nolan is undoubtedly powerful in WB-land, but I doubt even he is that powerful. It’s one thing to mess with the Batman myth in some alternate-universe straight to DVD animated title. It’s quite another to do so in the flagship movies. It’s hard to sell a Batplane at Christmas if all the kids are heartbroken over Batman being crippled or dead. Sometimes real world considerations do enter into it.
If you’ve got to juggle Bane, Catwoman, Talia al Ghul, and whatever Joseph Gordon Levitt is doing
Is this any different than TDK:
Harvey’s issue
Rachel
Lao
Reese
Two-face
corrupt cops
Maroni
And on top of those The Joker. Spider-Man 3 failed, not because of the characters, but because Raimi sucks and didn’t know how to use them.
Gotta agree with Lex on this one. Don’t see Nolan backtracking after the worldwide artistic, critical and commercial success that was INCEPTION.
@LexG,
I’d still be surprised, but you could be on to something. The ONLY reason anyone has ever given a shit about Bane (a terrible character even by “villains created in the shitty 90s standards) is that he’s the guy who put Batman in a wheelchair for awhile in the comics.
I’ll give Nolan this – if he really does end this with Batman dead or crippled (which is really the logical conclusion of the whole “this is the real world” B.S.) it’d be pretty damn ballsy.
JR: I’m feeling it at least underperforming, too. Another case of “too many cooks”. Should’ve continued off with Two-Face, dammit. Plus, every Batman associated with Catwoman, even the Burton one, which I liked, always came off at least a tad half-baked, ‘cus she was a female character written by men. [I.E. the Whedon problem.]
Bob: I think the Avengers is probably gonna bomb. Downey’s done one too many paycheck gigs; Whedon has not shown he can sell a product to general audiences; they’re bringing back the Hulk again, when it worked so well the last two times; and they have to fit in the conflicting back-stories in a way which does not drag down the main one. So yeah, Avengers is probably gonna be next year’s Green Lantern.
Not sure if I saw this posted, but 22 years elapsed between PSYCHO and PSYCHO II, both with original star Tony Perkins (and Vera Miles).
JLC – I hear what you’re saying. It is possible that Nolan came to them with this really dark, grim tale of Bane breaking Batman’s spine, and there was some back and forth with the studio, eventually resulting in a more audience friendly “OK…but you’ve gotta put Catwoman in there too!”
Kaki’s predicting an Avengers bomb. Time to load up un Disney stock.
JLC — please note the Deezer’s overuse of the word “probably.” That way when Avengers DOESN’T tank… he can write “I never said Avengers would definitely fail!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcpJxIWd_R8
Nolan’s film universe just can’t support a Catwoman and if it could, Hathaway is not the choice. He should have picked someone like Michelle Rodriguez (from Avatar? the pilot) who would be a dirty street fighter and a real threat to Batman and to actual human beings. Hathaway looks like she’s playing pretty princess playtime with her kitty mask in this picture and it’s just ridiculous. She’s too weak as an actress to carry off any threat.
Pfff… Another movie you can place in the collection of Rubbish
The most beautiful charming gorgeous hot sexy pretty women and girl from worldwide
Nice Post.I like it very much
Download Pc games full free
I think Anne Hathaway is the prettiest Catwoman from the Trilogy. I’ve seen the movie recently and it was worth it. Still I think I want something else than the classy batmobile and Batman’s accessories.
Hathaway is just looking fine to me in her Catwoman outfit.
I hope the motorcycle is not hers. Not done….but maybe i’m wrong. Maybe its only his bike?
STOP watch this!
i am not a huge fan of the nolan style batman films. i find them quite dull in comparison to the larger then life comic book adventures from the 90′s. saw TDKR, honestly it was just more of the same from what we got with the last 2 films. but the worst thing was anne hathaway. LOL…..this isnt the 1960′s, this is a bug budget film and you’d think they would have done something better with that kinda money. the suit looked silly, like julie newmar for gosh sakes! i thought this series was going for realism….shes STILL hopping around in high heals! the lack of a cowl and whip and just about every catwoman-esque thing is just terrible. and she wasnt nearly as sexy, beautiful or deep of a character as michelle pfieffers version. i mean, michelle pfieffer, one of the most beautiful women of our time, and anne hathaway who is an ugly duckling who i never found very attractive. most dissapointing thing about the new film.