Christopher Nolan's 3rd Batman movie comes out July 20, 2012. What villain or villains should it feature?

The original Batman movie from 1989 featured The Joker, and it was incredible. Then, as he was cementing his reboot of the series, Christopher Nolan brought the Joker back, and this was even more awesome. I think The Joker has been dealt with, I think it's time to move on to something new.

Nolan is a filmmaker who is all about doing things in new ways and pushing creative boundaries. I think a smart thing for him to do might be to simply ignore the villains that were chosen in the previous Batman movies. I think that he should just go ahead and create a BRAND NEW VILLAIN.

We're well into the 21st century, and movies that are accurately based on the comic books from the 60s, 70s & 80s have been happening for awhile. They're great, but they aren't always innovative. Film is now the more dominant medium for the sharing of the idea of a comic book hero.It reaches more people and it's more intense.

In order to further the revolutionary work he's done so far with the Batman story, Nolan should look into creating a cutting-edge and modern original villain.

I think its too early to do Bane but that would be cool. The Mad Hatter is my favorite underrated Batman villain. This would be cool.

First off, I was glad to hear this news pop up. I think that Penguin should at least make a cameo appearance. I'm not sure if Riddler should be the main villain, but he could be a great counter to Joker's mad villainy.

I think we need a more calculated, devious planner like Riddler for Nolan's "real" version of Gotham. I would also like to see Catwoman, because her status as an anti-hero/love interest will be great for both the character of Batman and Bruce Wayne. One criticism of these Batman films is that Batman's main love interests aren't up to snuff.

Speaking of love interests, maybe Talia Al Ghul could show up, which would bring the series full circle. We could also see the resurrection of Ra's Al Ghul.

Okay, I’m with a lot of people who say that The Riddler (with Depp) and Talia Al Ghul (with Jolie) would be worth watching, if for no other reason than the scenery chewing. Depp, in particular, might be the only actor whose performance as a Batman universe character is almost guaranteed to be positive when compared to Ledger’s Joker. Not the only actor, of course, but a sure bet.(Having seen Depp’s work in helping finish Ledger’s work in “The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus, I feel comfortable betting on him.) All that said, though, I’d like to see Nolan go in another – or perhaps additional – direction in the 3rd film.

(Main villain/antagonist, secondary, etc. ) I’d like to see Black Mask featured in third installment of Nolan’s “Batman. € Black Mask, a.k.a. Roman Sionis, would fit well into Nolan’s universe.

Bruce and Roman were childhood “friends,” both having come from the upper-class elite – their relationship was forced upon Roman by his parents, who associated with the Waynes (despite disliking them), and this offers a psychological depth to their relationship that Nolan likes to emphasize. Further, Roman’s backstory in becoming Black Mask makes sense within Nolan’s film series. Roman takes over the family business, Janus Cosmetics, and destroys it by releasing a new cosmetic that disfigures women.

Bruce Wayne bails him out and forces him out of the company, furthering the resentment Roman feels. From there – and I’m skipping over a lot – Roman becomes Black Mask, a crime lord in the Gotham underworld. Roman and his alter ego Black Mask, then, fit within the heavy emphasis in the films (and the comics) about Gotham being run both by corporations and organized crime – with very little, if any distinction between them.

Black Mask also fits with the themes about masks and hypocrisy, again common concerns in the series across media. The past relationship between Bruce and Roman raises questions about doubling, and how fine the line between good and evil is. It would continue to put Bruce/Batman where the last movie in the series leaves the two – at the edge of society, on the outside looking in, and at the cusp of being both a good guy embracing evil and a dark man seeking to find the light And there are many connections between Black Mask and the rest of the Batman universe that Nolan has already realized in his film.

Black Mask does a stint in the Arkham Asylum, for instance, and has some tasty interactions with Commissioner Gordon (there’s the possibility for a great interrogation scene). And for those looking for Catwoman to make an appearance, Black Mask has a history with her that could a strong, unsettling scene or two (and develop her character as a more sympathetic one). By the way, I understand the impulse to have a strong female character.

Catwoman would make a strong anti-hero/secondary villain.(In my version of what would be an overly ambitious film, Batman/Catwoman, Bruce/Selina, and Roman/Circe all offer parallel relationships that extended the films’ and comics’ heavy use of parallels.) I’m not sure I’m interested in her being the primary villain. So for all those reasons: adding psychological depth to the characters, as well as to Batman’s backstory; offering a villain who is grounded in dark realism; developing the themes of corporate corruption, doubling, wearing “masks”/hypocrisy; and continuing to challenge easy dichotomies of good vs. evil. As it turns out, when I was looking around for an image or video clip to illustrate the point, I found a lot of online fan support for Black Mask for the 3rd film.

That’s cool, as I hope the buzz for Black Mask gets some notice from the Nolan and the rest of the “Batman” filmmakers. Check out the YouTube fan clip I attached!

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.