Justin Timberlake wants to play The Riddler in Batman/Superman movie
 

http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/new...#ixzz2dPApcSLI


While I doubt it'll ever happen, I'm really not surprised so many people want The Riddler in the next Batman film. If I remember correctly didn't people want The Riddler in the last Nolan film before we knew about Bane and Catwoman?

Could get behind this. Timberlake is a decent actor.

There's most likely going to be at least one Batman villain in the new movie too.

I think the reason why so many people want Riddler is because he and Lex Luthor would work well together. Both are incredibly intelligent and could scheme together toward their own ends.

Eh. I'm neutral on Riddler but I can't stand Timberlake.

I don't mind Timberlake. I don't mind The Riddler, but I'm not to sure about Timberlake as Riddler.

They should honestly give Jim Carey another shot at this, but get him to play it straight. He's unhinged, and a great actor to boot.

Wouldn't be surprised if they did get him involved. I'd rather see Crispin Glover as the Mad Hatter. Fund it.

admittedly, he is a pretty good voice actor

I think it would be neat to see Justin play a villain as it's something we haven't really seen from him, and I think he could pull it off, especially since he's a fan of The Riddler.

Jim Carrey's Riddler was the only redeeming part of Batman Forever. That and Nicole Kidman who was absolutely stunning in that movie.

Not sure if Timberlake has teh chops for it. But im sure since affleck has final approval of the script he'll be more involved with everything unofficially. it could work. "In Time" was a good movie.

I hated Carrey's Riddler. It wasn't just over-the-top, it was over the freakin' moon. Thus literally everyone in "Batman and Robin" followed his lead from "Forever" and put on a horrendous display of over-acting. His take was also oddly homo-erotic, which I'm sure was entirely because of the director.

As a kid I was excited to see both Riddler and Jim Carrey's take on it (although I was annoyed how they rewrote the entire script around just him and paid him a bunch more money than anyone else got). In the end I just didn't care for it. The character itself is already a bit too cheesy to work anywhere but the comics and the Adam West show; taking the 60s portrayal and turning it up to 11 didn't thrill me.

I'd be up for a more grounded, less silly and slightly more sinister take on the character, though. I do enjoy the character, but the stories where he's handled to full potential are few.

A Riddler like the one in Arkham City would work for me.

^ If he can pull off Jigsaw Riddler, I'm fine with that.

I'd be cool with seeing Riddler. And he seems like a cool villain to team up with Luthor. As for Timberlake, I have no idea. I haven't really seen him act.

I don't know that I even am in any hurry to see the Riddler on the big screen again.

And no, Jim Carrey's Riddler was ghastly. As was every aspect of both Schumacher movies.

I think The Riddler would be perfect, even if it's just a cameo thing in Gotham. Of course, I would like to see a darker take on Riddler, like in Arkham City. And no to Justin, nothing against him, just no. Other than that, I think it'll be kind of lame to have him team with Luthor. I'd still rather see Metallo while Luthor works behind the scenes.

Not gonna lie, if nothing else was right about either movie, I thought the Robin costume in Forever was as good as could possibly be done on film. That's the *one* thing I liked from the start and still like. You can scrap the rest of both of 'em, though.

I've always thought they should go with the Tim Drake Red Robin costume if Robin ever makes a big screen appearance again.

Also, Batman Forever was fun and way the **** better that Batman Returns. Bleh.

Batman Forever had too many problems to enjoy it fully:

- No Michael Keaton as Batman. His replacement was just dull and forgettable.

- Robin does little in the movie. At the end he's tied up and Batman has to save him, essentially making Robin not much more than a useless sidekick for Batman to look after

- Two-Face was horrible. They tried making him into a Joker clone. Why was Two-Face giggling and laughing throughout the entire movie? Since when did Two-Face become a poor mans version of Joker? I just couldn't get over how horribly handled he was.

- The overall plot was awful. Didn't like Riddler's brain-drain device or whatever that was supposed to be.

- Really bad campy dialogue at points, not as bad as Batman and Robin but it was almost at that point.


Jim Carrey's Riddler was alright though, at least for laughs. Jim Carrey was having tons of fun in that movie and you just had to like him whether he was a good Riddler or not.

Oh and Nicole Kidman was hot. Too bad she turned into an ugly hag in the years after.

That tends to happen when someone's had lots of plastic surgery and then they age. "Allegedly".

I think what annoyed me most about "Forever" was that most of it seemed like Gotham was inside some kind of neon discotech. Tommy Lee Jones only did the movie for his kid or something, so his heart wasn't in it. I also figured they'd have to replace Keaton eventually, but doing it with someone who had no resemblance to him at all was jarring. I also didn't like that they allegedly ended up paying Carrey more than the amount they'd *refused* to pay Keaton. Essentially, they decided Jim Carrey's guest-starring role in one movie was more important than keeping the main franchise player. I didn't, and don't, agree.

As the story goes and went, The Riddler role was originally the supporting villain role to Billy Dee Williams's Two-Face, but they couldn't agree on what to pay Williams or Robin Williams, who really wanted the Riddler part but wanted it to be bigger a bigger part and have a bigger payday. So basically, WB discarded three major stars, two of whom were already under contract, and bet the entire movie on Jim Carrey. Since I was following the news on production (the first movie I really did that with), by the time the movie came out I was already disappointed with it. I liked it more than I thought I would, but I doubt it was any better than the movie that was originally intended.

I was only like 9 or 10 years old when Forever hit, so as a kid I thought it was good although I immediately recognized that Batman was different since Keaton was gone. But I revisited it as a teen and then again in recent years and it makes me realize how bad the movie actually was.

I don't think people realized back in 1995 that this was truly a poor movie, if you look online at the reviews for the movie from 1995 it got fairly decent reviews at the time. Its only after Batman and Robin came out that people wondered where the decline started and looked back at Forever and realized how much a departure it was from the Tim Burton films. Of course when the Nolan movies started the hatred of the last two films before reached an all-time high.

It makes me sad that Tim Burton and Michael Keaton didn't get to do a trilogy. Batman Forever could have been excellent if it was made similar to the first two.

Possibly, but the franchise was already going off the rails with Returns. After he success of the first one and bowing to certain studio demands, Burton got to make "his" Batman movie with the sequel, and frankly it's kind of a mess. The plot and character motivation is kind of a muddle, Catwoman, while hot, isn't really Catwoman, they tweaked Penguin just to play into Burton's obsession with "freaks", and all the metaphors about "freaks and outcasts" and how "we all wear masks/have two faces" was really heavy-handed and overdone. It could have been seeds for Billy Dee's turn as Two-Face in the next movie, but he was barely in Returns so if it was supposed to lay seeds for the sequel it did a fairly poor job of it.

Ultimately, it ended up just being less a Batman movie and more a "Tim Burton" movie, and it was too unnerving and "weird". Losing the McDonald's marketing sponsorship really hurt the movie's bottom line, costing them millions of dollars, and already had WB deciding the next movie would be getting far away from Burton's vision of things. If he had just reigned himself in a little bit on "Batman Returns", we *might* have gotten that trilogy after all, but he fell into a big trap he always sets for himself: He puts far too much of himself into his films at times. It's good in cases like Beetlejuice and Edward Scissorhands, where he's simply telling his own stories, but when he tries to adapt someone else's work he's fairly bad at it, because he always comes in with the same attitude of, "I don't care about the source material one bit, I'm just going to project my ideas onto a loose skeleton of the original concept."

"Returns" was a decent movie, but it really wasn't the best way to take the franchise, ultimately, because it scared the studio away from what they thought was a sure thing, the "dark and gritty" approach of the first. So they ended up going *too* far the other way with "Forever" and "Batman and Robin". Burton openly disdains comic books, so he was always a very, very odd choice to make a comic book film in the first place. At the time, he claimed to have studied the comics of the day for information, but it later came out that by "studied" he mostly meant "looked at artwork panels for iconic imagery to use". The visuals are there in spades, but honestly, any storyline similarities between Burton's Batman and the comic book Batman were *entirely* by accident. It just so happened that some of his original ideas on the first film clicked well, not so much for "Returns".

Billy Dee Williams as Two-Face, though... I *really* wanted to see that. Although it would have been better if they had used him more in the first two, so that when he turned in part three it would have had more impact. Although, I can't imagine it having *less* impact than it did in "Forever", what with the whole, "We join our story in progress, Harvey Dent's a bad guy now, don't ask just roll with it" way they presented it. That was horrible.

Haha, no thanks. Timberlake's one of the most overrated goons on the planet and would destroy the Riddler (who happens to be one of my favourite Bat enemies). He's an even worse actor than he is musician so I'd rather he just crawled back into his hole, if he doesn't mind.

Awww. Such a little rebel! Got a Justin Beiber rant in ya?

I've seen you about, always making snarky comments to others. I'm not sure why my comment warranted such a cheeky response but, unlike others, I'm not the type of guy who will sit and take your bullying, so get to **** you cowardly little freak. You're a bellend.

Oh, and I'm more anti-One Direction than anti-Bieber. Dickhead.

I'm sure you're the most badass guy on the block. Hating pop acts and saying they're overrated. Fight that grain, dawg!

Bellend is a new one. Put that on the big board I guess.

And if you're implying that my two line paragraph on Timberlake was some form of rant (you asked if I'd do similar with Bieber, after all), then it's clear you have much to learn about me. If I was ranting you'd know about it.

See, this is a bit of a straw man that you've created. I make an innocent post expressing my disdain for a celebrity (which nobody on here should find offensive) and then you attack me like the coward that you are. I stand my ground and tell you that I won't accept being bullied and disrespected by you like others do (and I've seen others take it from you when they really shouldn't) and you attempt to twist it as me thinking I'm some sort of macho man? Since when was standing up for oneself a form of dominance? If anything you're the one who's trying to be a 'badass' here by denigrating me and trying to make me your subordinate. Also, I most certainly don't think I'm a 'hardman' by insulting pop stars. If you knew me you'd know I have perspective - there's many other people who I dislike more than pop stars.You don't have much of an education do you?

The second 'paragraph' is just pure drivel. Let me clue you in - 'bellend' is British colloquialism for the head of a penis. You seem like an insular American so I knew you'd struggle with this phrase. As a result I also added in the similar insult 'dickhead'. Despite this, you still don't seem to understand that you're a complete tool. "Putting on the big board" is just inane nonsense.

Seriously, if you're going to bully people on here, you'll need to be wittier because you're a failure of a troll. I've seen (and dealt with) far, far better.

Before you reply with more gibberish, just remember that I've been lurking here for years. I've thought you were a complete non-entity long before you were even aware of my existence - I've cringed at many of your posts. I expected I'd cross paths with you at some point. I'm sad to say that the experience has been as unpleasant as expected, but not as unpleasant as your horrid personality. It's been a great displeasure conversing with you.

Now THAT is a rant.

Curiosity got the better of you eh? I thought you were done and didn't wanna argue any more :lol:

Yes, it's a rant (although not really by my standards), but it's interspersed with accurate points i.e. that he attacked me for no reason, and then when I defended myself he accused me of thinking I'm a hardman. It's not just ad hominems.

Also the fact that he has previous for this. So yeah, it was a rant, but one that he needed to hear because he seems to get away with belittling people.

Hahaha, lordy. Someone takes their dislike for JT super seriously.

I don't know what's going on here, but I just hope Riddler isn't gay in the new movie if he's used. Its rather obvious Jim Carrey's Riddler was a flaming homosexual.

Actually, I rarely if ever see Riddler fawning over any chicks, so he actually could be a decent character to "out", but I doubt WB wants to use their billion-dollar Superman/Batman film franchise as a way to push the envelope.

I could entirely see Riddler being gay, but he wouldn't be openly gay in a new movie, anyway. I think it's fairly obvious Carrey's Riddler had an extreme man crush on Bruce Wayne, though, and the fact he was basically mincing about in gowns near the end of the movie didn't help. My interpretation has always been that *that* version of Riddler was gay but didn't need to expressively say so. And it could'a been toned down a bit.

As for people hating on Timberlake or any other pop star, so what? So it's not "original", who cares if that's how a person really feels? A good number of people who don't want to sleep with Justin Timberlake feel he's obnoxious, narcissistic, lacking any talent beyond whispering "yeah baby" into a microphone over music someone else made, and gets way too much attention, and it annoys some people. That's their/our right. Do we have to bitch about it? No, but if someone hates pop stars or pop music they have the right to say so without getting snark'ed. If it's such an "unoriginal" opinion, it probably has some merit, since so many people seem to feel the same way.

Some people are sheep, yeah, but it's really, really easy to dislike pop music and pop stars based on how manufactured and phony it all is. That's their prerogative, if someone wants to hate on Timberlake or Bieber, oh well. People shouldn't have to stifle opinions because too many people feel the same way, that's silly.

Are you a narcissist or just lonely?Between this thread and the disabilities one all I've really gathered from you is that you think you "best" everyone on the internet. So I'm left to wonder if you a narcissist who thinks he's smarter than everyone else or very lonely and this is how you think you make friends by being the white knight of the internet.

Don't you know? Hating Timberlake is serious business.
I personally have nothing against the guy and think he'd do a decent job if given the opportunity. The only thing I hated him in was the Love Guru and everything in that movie was terrible.

Neither Batman Forever or Batman & Robin are even worth the calories burned it would take to discuss or acknowledge them in any capacity.

^^ I guess you hate those two movies with a fiery passion of a thousand suns huh?
I liked forever. Its not a masterpiece by any means. There were things i disliked (OCD Two Face, super flamboyant Riddler, SO MUCH NEON) and things I liked (Nicole Kidman, Pre obese Val Kilmer kicking ass).
Either way if people are complaining about a cast call, it's usually a good thing (because Michael Keaton is a comedy actor and Heath Ledger plays the handsome gay guy)

Casting had very precious little to do with the laundry list of things wrong with those two "films."