Tuesday, July 22, 2008


We in The Middle Room are not psychic, nor do we place our trust in those who claim such talents (exempting, of course, the honorable Professor Charles Xavier, Jean Grey, and the late Martian Manhunter). While we do have a time machine at our disposal, it hasn't been working well recently. There are logic problems with arranging to fix such a device last week, so we may hold off.

Still, there come times when we become curious as to what the future may hold. For instance, the other day we were pondering who might be the villain of the next Batman movie. Seeing as The Dark Knight has already made more money than the net worth of several small nations, it seems another sequel is inevitable. While we weren't as thrilled with the film as some, we'd certainly welcome another installment.

But who should be the antagonist? It is a question which vexed us, at least until we approached the problem logically. We considered the source of many of the film's ideas, and we considered that the writers weren't interested in obvious choices such as The Penguin or Catwoman.

Then we thought about the ending of The Dark Knight. The last few minutes were our least favorite of the movie, so we were initially reluctant to revisit them. However, we thought of a way they might redeem The Dark Knight's ending in a sequel.

We have now a theory of who the villain of the next film could be. We've heard no rumors to this effect, nor have we seen the future through any means supernatural or scientific. While we've no reason to actually believe we could be right, the idea strikes us as surprisingly rational in a twisted sort of way. A concluding chapter to this trilogy which could build on what's happened, pay tribute to the movies' roots, and truly take the franchise in a new direction.

Who is this antagonist? Scroll down for our theory.

This is, obviously, nothing but a theory for now. But if Superman does wind up acting as the antagonist in the third part of Nolen's Batman franchise, just remember one thing: you heard it here first.

No comments: