Rumor commentary: Joseph Gordon-Levitt may be playing Batman in the Justice League movie.

HitFix broke the story late last night and while I generally try to avoid commenting on rumors, McWeeny is a pretty trustworthy source for this kind of thing.  Anyway, long story short, Joseph Gordon-Levitt is allegedly in talks to reprise his role as John Blake (cough-Tim Drake-cough) in Warner Bros.' upcoming Justice League film.  Said superhero team-up is set to open in summer 2015 (July 17th, I'd presume), where it will square off against The Avengers 2 and Star Wars Episode VII.  So if the rumor comes to pass, it looks like John Blake will be the man in the cowl, as opposed to a new actor playing a new Bruce Wayne.  Also of note, John Blake (as Batman?) will allegedly make a post-production cameo in Zack Snyder's Man of Steel, which comes off of Snyder's comments stating that Man of Steel won't be as closed-world as he had previously indicated.  So presuming this is all true and not just a rumor or a gambit to drum up interest in next week's DVD/Blu Ray release of The Dark Knight Rises, what do I think?  Well, it's both not terribly surprising and incredibly shocking.  

Don't leave us hanging... If you want us to see a sequel, you might want to *finish* the first film.

Corey Atad wrote a great 'wish I had gotten around to writing it first' piece on Friday.  It's about well, it's called "Prometheus; or Stop Trying to Set Up Sequels!".  I've whined about this in brief or in the context of something else from time to time, but the whole 'everything's a trilogy' mindset has been quite harmful to any number of pictures over the last decade.  When you go back and look at the films that spawned successful franchises, they generally began with mostly close-ended installments.  Star Wars stands on its own, as does The Matrix, Pirates of the Caribbean, and Batman Begins (heck, over the last four years I've come to admire how The Dark Knight begins and finishes its Harvey Dent business within its own 152 minute running time).  Even the first Back to the Future ended its specific narrative before offering a comedic cliffhanger that didn't necessarily need to be revolved (the producers always say they sure as hell wouldn't have had a flying car at the epilogue if they knew they were going to have to do expensive FX for a flying car all throughout a sequel).  Even Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone had a relatively self-contained story that didn't necessarily require a sequel to complete its narrative.

Midnight Box Office (03/23/12): Hunger Games scores $19.75m at 12:01am.

First and foremost, The Hunger Games earned a robust $19.75 million at midnight screenings alone, besting a record for a non-sequel and the seventh-biggest midnight haul of all-time.  It earned more than the $18 million midnight gross of The Dark Knight back in 2008 and the $17 million midnight haul of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith back in 2005. It is the biggest midnight gross for any movie not called Harry Potter or Twilight (Harry Potter 6: $22m, Harry Potter 7.1: $24m, Twilight: New Moon: $26m, Twilight: Eclipse and Breaking Dawn I: $30m, Harry Potter 7.2: $43m).  If this film were like any normal picture (between 4.5% and 6.5% of its weekend at midnight), we'd be looking at a $300-$400million+ opening weekend.  So let's presume that it's a bit front-loaded, but the question is how much so?  The last two Paranormal Activity films earned about 15% of their respective opening weekends at midnight ($6.3m and $8m respectively), while The Dark Knight earned just 11% of its then-record $158 million opening at 12:01am.  The difference between those two figures is the difference between a massive $132 million debut and a record $179 million opening weekend.  On the other hand, if the film really does play like a Harry Potter or Twilight sequel (which would seem to be the likely case), then we should compare it to those openings.

Read it and weep! The Phantom Menace is about to out-gross The Dark Knight! Or: What the onslaught on 3D reissues means for the all-time grossers list.

With just $1 million separating the two films, today or tomorrow is likely the day when one of the more reviled films in geek-ville, Star Wars Episode One: The Phantom Menace, will surpass one of the more openly worshipped geek film in recent years, The Dark Knight, at the global box office.  As of Wednesday, Star Wars Episode One: The Phantom Menace crossed $1 billion, becoming the eleventh film to do so and the first Star Wars film to cross said benchmark.  Obviously there is inflation and 3D price-bumps to figure, but just remember that The Phantom Menace's adjusted-for-inflation grosses from 1999 would equal about $664 million in domestic grosses alone (it earned $431 million in the summer of 1999, the second-largest grossing first-run film behind Titanic at that point).  And don't forget that a number of major fantasy films, chiefly the first three Star Wars films, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and E.T.: The Extra Terrestrial, have had several theatrical releases since their initial respective debuts.  In the days before VHS became mainstream, it was not uncommon for popular films to show up repeatedly at a theater near you.  With the apparent consumer appeal of 3D-converted re-releases, we are seeing a return to what may be a revolving door atop the list of all-time box office champions.

Feast your eyes on Benjamin Andrew Moore's awesome 'History of the Bat-Suit'.

This chart of Batman's various batsuits from 1939 to today is beyond impressive.  The artist's name is Benjamin Andrew Moore.  HERE is his site and HERE is his Twitter handle.  Click on the picture to 'embiggen'.  No more commentary, other than that I'm enough of a Batman nerd to confirm the accuracy of nearly every quote he uses, and in some case can tell you what story they came from.

Scott Mendelson

Midnight Box Office (11/18/11): Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn part I scores another $30 million at 12:01am. Opening weekend between $118 million and $163 million.

Yup, Team Bella/Edward/Jacob did it again, as the fourth Twilight picture scored another massive midnight gross, which should lead the way to another massive single-day and a massive and hilariously front-loaded opening weekend.  Breaking Dawn part I earned $30.25 million at midnight, putting it just above the $30 million earned at 12:01am by Twilight Saga: Eclipse and comfortably ahead of the $26 million earned by Twilight Saga: New Moon.  The second film's numbers are better comparison points, since the first sequel opened on the exact same weekend two years ago (and the third film opened on a Wednesday, which negates any reasonable comparison).  This is also the weekend where Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I earned $24 million in 12:01am showings last year, which amounted to a $62 million opening day and a $125 million weekend.  The Harry Potter and Twilight films have both the biggest midnight grosses around and the most heavily-front-loaded opening weekends in the business.  As you no doubt recall, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II scored an eye-popping $43 million in midnight shows just four months ago, which led to a $92 million opening day and a $169 million opening weekend (records, all three).  Long story short, here's how Breaking Dawn part I will measure up if its opening weekend trajectory follows its most obvious comparisons...  Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II (3.9x its midnight number) - $118 million, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I (5.2x  its midnight number) - $157 million, Twilight Saga: New Moon (5.4x  its midnight number) - $163 million.  So there you have it, the 3-day opening weekend record is not in any plausible danger, but The Dark Knight may find itself as merely the third-biggest debut by Sunday evening.  Most impressively, Breaking Dawn part I is achieving these massive grosses without any IMAX or 3D price-bump.  Let's split the difference between $119 million and $165 million and call a $140 million opening weekend for Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn part I.  We'll know more when the Friday numbers roll in, although I will likely be otherwise occupied (family birthday party).

Scott Mendelson

First official photo of Anne Hathaway as Catwoman in The Dark Knight Rises. Not even Hathaway in black leather can make the Bat Pod look good...

Back in my day, we had to wait for the first trailer to see what the new Bat-villains actually looked like!  There are other unofficial photos out there that basically show the same image from a sideways angle (with Hathaway's stunt woman), but I think I'll still with the legit stuff.  Anyway, today is day two of Warner Bros. tries to beat the paparazzi to the punch.  The costume is obviously a hybrid of the Dwayne Cooke/Ed Brubaker outfit (the tactical aspects, the goggles) along with a bit from the 1960s Batman show (the free-flowing hair which reaches just below the shoulders ala Julie Newmar).  I have no real commentary on the outfit.  It looks fine and it's obvious that Nolan and company were going for something that would actually make sense in battle than something that would make a pinup poster.  I will say that not even Anne Hathaway wrapped in tight black leather can make that Bat-Pod any less ridiculous looking.  I'm sorry, I've felt this way for three years, but that is an absolutely silly looking vehicle.  The fact that it was a central part of the ad campaign last time around is a near-joke.  Like the main theatrical one-sheet for The Dark Knight, the center of attention in this image is not the character being highlighted but a giant wheel.

Why I'm not as excited for The Dark Knight Rises as you are...

While the rest of movie fandom hyperventilates over every bit of rumor and every bit of random casting ("Wow! The dad from Make It Or Break It will be in The Dark Knight Rises!"), I just can't quite find the passion that everyone else seems to be feeling.  Yes, I know I dealt with this a little back in December, but I don't think it's the whole 'getting old and cynical' thing this time around.  I have little doubt that The Dark Knight Rises will be a rock-solid Batman film and that it will contain fine acting, top-notch production values, and hopefully a dollop of social relevance.  I am even heartened by hints that seem to imply that it will indeed be a Bruce Wayne-centric story that will perhaps confront that whole 'Bruce Wayne acts like a selfish idiot so no one suspects he's Batman' shtick that the comics have forced on us for decades.  But, as good as it may be, The Dark Knight Rises will just be another Batman film.  Its predecessor was the culmination of pretty much everything I wanted to see in a Batman movie.  With The Dark Knight, Chris Nolan gave us exactly what we craved in a near-perfect concoction.  The Dark Knight was THE Batman film.

Actual Batman 3 news! James Pence cast as... (spoilers). Will The Dark Knight Rises even acknowledge The Dark Knight?

According to The Hollywood Reporter, James Pence has been apparently been cast as a young Ra's Al Ghul in Chris Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises. Spence, currently best known as the unlucky soul who had his face digitally replaced by Arnie Hammer in The Social Network, will apparently play a young Liam Neeson in a flashback sequence taking place thirty years before the events of Batman Begins. The only thing I have to offer about this is the following: Marion Cotillard is allegedly playing Talia Al Ghul (Ra's Al Ghul's daughter in the comics). Gary Oldman and others have claimed that it ties-in pretty directly to Batman Begins, with the League of Shadows returning and the trilogy wrapping up in a 'full circle' kind of way. So, the question is, will this be yet another part 3 that more-or-less ignores the events of the second film? Will The Dark Knight Rises be another second sequel that operates purely as a sequel to the first film rather than a third part in a continuing story?

Tron: Legacy nets $3.6 million in midnight sneaks. Could open with as little as $19 million, as much as $80 million for the weekend.

Tron: Legacy has grossed $3.5 million in midnight showings. That slightly exceeds the $3.6 million earned by Avatar's midnight sneaks last year on this weekend and actually exceeds the $3 million earned by respective late-night Inception screenings. The film grossed 25% of its midnight numbers in IMAX screens, which is a record for the large-screen format. What does this mean for the opening weekend? Well, generally speaking, recent midnight screenings have accounted for about 5-6% of a film's overall weekend take, which would put a weekend estimate between and $58 million and $70 million. Think Iron Man 2 ($7.5m/$128m), Jackass 3D ($2.5m/$50m), and Inception ($3m/$62m). But more front-loaded films have seen their midnight takes make up 11-19% of their total. Examples: The Dark Knight ($18m/$158m), Paranormal Activity 2 ($6.3m/$41m), Twilight Saga: New Moon ($26m/$142m) and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I ($24m/$125m).

For one last second, I was 12 years old again. The Dark Knight teaser debuted three years ago yesterday. A moment of reflection as life changes...

Yesterday marked the third anniversary of the theatrical release of I Am Legend. While the film was a surprisingly compelling science-fiction drama that worked primarily as a character-study, its release date is not by itself noteworthy. But the day also marked the debut of the first real teaser for The Dark Knight. As I've written elsewhere, we all knew about the bank-robbery prologue that was attached to IMAX prints of I Am Legend, but absolutely nobody knew about the traditional trailer that was premiering with the regular prints. In this age where everyone knows everything ahead of time, it was perhaps one last studio sneak attack. Warner shipped the trailer without anyone jotting down a description, and they kept the thing offline for the whole weekend. Except for a mediocre bootleg of course. I was home that day, tending to my three-month old daughter. By god, I must have watched that crummy bootleg two dozen times that day.

Friday Box Office (11/19/10): Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I scores $61.2 million on first day.

It's a $61.2 million Friday for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I. That's the fifth-biggest single day of all time, behind the opening days of Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen ($62 million), The Dark Knight ($67 million), Twilight Saga: Eclipse ($68 million), and Twilight Saga: New Moon ($72 million). It's the third biggest Friday of all, as Transformers 2 and Twilight Saga: Eclipse both opened on a Wednesday. The number surpasses the $58 million that Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince earned on its first day (a Wednesday), and it clobbers the $40 million that Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire earned on its first Friday in November 2005 (the last time one of these films opened on a Friday). For a bit of perspective, nine years ago this weekend, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone broke the record for a single day gross with $32 million on its first Friday (it would break that record again with $33 million the next day). Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I nearly doubled that.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I scores $24 million in midnight showings.

It looks like when it comes to midnight fan frenzy, there's Harry Potter and the Twilight Saga, and then there's everyone else. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I scored $24 million in midnight shows last night, which puts it number three on the all-time midnight list. Ahead of it for 12:01am screenings sits only the last two Twilight films. New Moon pulled in $26 million for a $72 million day (still a record for a single day) while Eclipse scored $30 million towards an eventual $68 million first day (still number two for single days). Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince previously scored $22 million in its midnight showings, which means Deathly Hallows part I set a record for the series. It does appear likely that the seventh Harry Potter film (and, yes, the best one so far) will surpass the $58 million that Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince grossed in its first and biggest single day. We'll know in twelve hours whether or not Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I can surpass Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen and its respective $62 million single-day mark (likely) or even The Dark Knight's $67 million opening day tally (quite possibly). More as we get the word...

Scott Mendelson

The best comic book villains in film history...

Just for fun, here is a rundown of the best performances by an actor/actress playing a comic book villain in the short, 30-year history of the modern comic book film. Some will be obvious, some where obvious but were forgotten to time, some are my personal favorites that didn't get the love they deserved. Here we go:

5. Timothy Dalton as Neville Sinclair in The Rocketeer (1991)

The film bombed back in 1991 and it frankly hasn't aged well. There's very little rocket-action to justify the $50 million budget, and only the actors make it watchable (see Terry O'Quinn as the noble Howard Hughes!). But the one timeless ingredient is the deliciously fun work by then-Bond actor Timothy Dalton as the devious Neville Sinclair. While he got a few good notices, he was overshadowed that summer by fellow film-stealing villains Robert Patrick (the T-1000 in Terminator 2) and Alan Rickman (The Sheriff Of Nottingham in Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves).

Part swashbuckling hear-throb movie-star, part covert Nazi-spy, all bad ass. An obvious riff on the false rumors of Errol Flynn's alleged association with the Nazi party, Dalton has a blast basically playing a tongue-in-cheek version of his uber-tough James Bond characterization. It's a shame that Dalton couldn't play more heavies, as he certainly was too menacing and roguish to be a stereotypical hero. Whether it's 'accidentally' stabbing his costar during a staged fight scene, or effortlessly stealing 21-year old Jennifer Connolly away from bland hero Billy Campbell, Dalton makes villainy seem like the most romantic job around.

4. Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor in Superman (1978)

Gene Hackman was the first modern comic book super villain. Hackman's work was an odd combination of the deranged mad scientist of pre-Crisis Superman, with the eventual post-Crisis Lex Luthor who was a suave narcissistic gentleman with the will to wreak chaos to achieve his glory and respect. You can get away with a lot of ham when you're introduced pushing a federal agent into a moving train. Yes Luthor was hammy and comical, but he was still absolutely homicidal, with a truly creative and logical scheme. Plus he was genuine threat to the Man Of Steel. The conversation that the two of them conduct is still a lovely scene, and the idea of super hero and super villain just talking shop has been used all-too infrequently (see The Shadow for an even better example of this). Come what may, Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor has my favorite super villain line of all time:

Superman: "Is that how a diseased maniac like you gets his kicks, Luthor? By plotting the deaths of innocent people?"

Luthor: "Why no. By causing the deaths of innocent people."

3. Willem Dafoe as Norman Osborn/Green Goblin in Spider-Man (2002)

Say what you will about the Power Rangers outfit, but Willem Dafoe still gives one of the most three-dimensional performances in any comic book adventure to date. Even as Osborn descends into madness as The Green Goblin, the sympathetic and surprisingly good-hearted Norman Osborn stays in our good graces. By maintaining this fully formed character of Norman Osborn for the duration of the film, Dafoe makes everyone step up their game, as well as put the audience in an odd position. Sure we know The Green Goblin is a homicidal lunatic, but we still like Norman Osborn and are moved when his Green Goblin personality conflicts with Osborn's genuine desire to be a good person. He truly anguishes over having to kill Peter Parker, and he genuinely apologizes to his son for not being a better father (he may have ulterior motives, but he means every word of it). And Parker and Osborn's final smack down is still one of the best, most vicious brawls in super hero cinema.

His scene conversing with himself in front of a mirror is astonishing, and his appearance at the Parker's Thanksgiving dinner is priceless. Not only does he manage to flirt with Mary Jane and Aunt May at the same time, but he also calls out Mary Jane for the emotionally insecure train wreck that she is (see Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3 for proof). Plus, he's the only character to openly acknowledge that Mary Jane as presented is purely a piece of meat, which is how the film treats her. Norman Osborn may be the villain, but as performed by Willem Dafoe, he is the most honest and most three-dimensional character in the whole Spider-Man series.

2. Jack Nicholson, Mark Hamill, and Health Ledger as The Joker in Batman (1989), Batman: Mask Of The Phantasm (1993), Batman Beyond: Return Of The Joker (2002), and The Dark Knight (2008)
Pick your favorite, drag one down to prop one up, I prefer to savor them all. Given the chance to portray the most important villain in comic literature, if not all literature for the last seventy-years, all three actors gave us definitive versions of The Clown Prince Of Crime.

Jack Nicholson broke the mold in Tim Burton's Batman. Some may carp that it was just Jack being Jack in makeup, but we forgot how shocking this performance really was. There had never been a true comic book villain that was this over-the-top in cinema before. The nonstop cackling, the completely random and wholesale slaughter, and the genuinely perverse pathology, this was all new terrain for cinema. While his campier moments recall The Shining or The Witches of Eastwick, his quieter subtler scenes actually resemble the work he did as Eugene O'Neil in Warren Beatty's Reds. Unlike Heath Ledger's deliberate, proselytizing anarchist, Jack Nicholson's Joker just committed mass murder purely for the hell of it.

Mark Hamill's Joker didn't have much of a motive either. While the cartoon's kid-friendly format reined in the character's more sadistic behavior, the actor and the writers found places to insert the diseased mania and homicidal compulsion where they could (it was inferred that The Joker was bumping off people left and right in capers that we weren't privy to). Mark Hamill's Joker was scary because he was genuinely funny, and the kind of guy who you'd enjoy hanging out with until you realized he had poisoned you with Joker venom thirty-minutes ago. Aside from the lack of onscreen bloodshed, this was the most accurate representation of the character to date. When people read a Batman comic book featuring The Joker, it is Hamill's voice they hear in the dialogue bubbles.

But, in Batman Beyond: Return Of The Joker, the gloves came off (and then on again due to censorship, then off again in an unrated DVD release... long story). Technically a story of future Bruce Wayne with his young apprentice Batman, it concerned the apparent resurrection of The Joker about forty-years after his apparent demise. But the heart of the film is a ten-minute flashback sequence, Batman's final battle with The Joker, where The Joker launches his final scheme against Batman, a decisive strike intended to shatter Batman in the most personal way possible. Of all the films featuring The Joker, live-action or otherwise, this is the only one where The Joker's actions truly sting and shock and almost shame us for enjoying his murderous antics for all these years.

Ah yes, the new kid on the block. While countless words have been written about Heath Ledger's work, it should be said that he portrays a very specific version of The Joker. His Joker is almost sane, seemingly reasonable in his thinking, however we disagree with his intentions. He is not a wanton mass murderer, but a calculating and cunning killer who attempts to bring about maximum chaos with minimum carnage (note that he does not explicitly kill a single innocent civilian, targeting only cops, criminals, vigilantes, and officers of the court). As I've mentioned elsewhere, his Joker comes closest to the one written by Ed Brubaker, be it Gotham Cental's Soft Targets or The Man Who Laughs. This Joker is a plausible real-world demon, the kind of anarchist who could very well exist in our actual reality. He is not funny, his methods of death are ordinary (no Joker Venom, no acid-squirting flowers) and he doesn't take all that much joy in his actions. To this Joker, dealing death and inspiring paranoia is a duty, a holy quest to expose the fragile nature of so-called civilized behavior and society.

1. Al Pacino as Big Boy Caprice in Dick Tracy (1990)

What the hell? "Is he crazy?", you're thinking. Watch Dick Tracy again. You'll notice something: It's an incredibly sorrowful and sad motion picture, an adult drama about three people who excel at doing the thing that makes them miserable and can't find a way to break free. Dick Tracy is the best cop in the city, but he anguishes because he knows he's not making a dent in crime, and he knows that he's giving up any chance for happiness and a traditional family life with Tess Trueheart. When he stumbles upon The Kid, he immediate realizes that this could be the gateway to the family life he's wanted. Breathless Mahoney excels only at being a piece of ass. Sure she can sing, but no one would care if she didn't look like Madonna. She knows that she's doomed to either wither away alone as the conquest of one lowlife after another, or die at the hands of some random thug who thought her singing was just for him. Dick Tracy is the only man to be remotely kind and respectful to her, and she instantly falls for him, hoping that he may be her ticket out of her sordid life.

At the center of this hell, perhaps the cause, is Al Pacino's Big Boy Caprice. He is a criminal by trade. He may enjoy the riches that crime brings, but he takes no joy in the misery he creates. He yearns for respectability but knows that it cannot be attained. When he smacks his singers, abuses Breathless, and murders rivals like Lips Manlis, he knows full well what a bastard he is. He feels only guilt and shame in it. When he accidentally finds himself kidnapping Tess Trueheart at the end of the picture, he finds himself in the company of a woman who is beautiful on the inside and the outside. In a different time, in a better world, she could be his ticket out of his life of crime and depravity. But he knows that is not to be. Of all the villains and monsters and murderers that have graced the comic-book inspired silver screen, Big Boy Caprice is the only one dares to invite pity as well as scorn and/or a twisted idealization. The Joker may make being an amoral monster look like fun. Neville Sinclair makes it look dashing and romantic. But Al Pacino dares to play Big Boy Caprice as a real-world villain in a four-color world. When he looks in the mirror, he only sees shame, despair, and the unforgiving gears of justice that will bring his story to its inevitable end. For him there is no escape, and he damn well knows it.

Scott Mendelson