Hugo Weaving should be The Riddler in the next Batman movie

>The videos my opponent has requested we watch are currently not working on my computer, so I will look for a summary of them (please). >I agree with my opponent's summary of the Riddler, except I would like to replace the word "crazy" with the phrase "slightly mentally unstable. " >I shall assume that my opponent has given a clip from V for Vendetta. To counter, I will cite the role of Johnny Depp (. http://www.johnnydepp.com...) in the Pirates of the Caribbean (. http://disney.go.com...). I admit this is not nearly as similar to the role of the Riddler as is the role of V in V for Vendetta, but a few moments are similar. Mr. Depp, in his role as Jack Sparrow, has a few intriguing moments (when talking directly to an enemy), in which he possesses the unique qualities that make the Riddler. The distinct, almost questioning voice of Mr. Depp fits flawlessly into the role of the Riddler. As goes Hugo Weaving, he indeed possesses a Riddler-like voice, but he lacks the ability to sound deranged. The Riddler (so says even my opponent) is, at times, not quite right in the head. Johnny Depp has the ability to fit into this role as well, which we can see from his role in Sweeney Todd: the Demon Barber of Fleet Street (. http://www.sweeneytoddmovie.com...). Hugo Weaving has not yet proved to us that he can play such a role; hence I believe that Johnny Depp is clearly the better actor as voice goes. Again, I would provide examples from the respective movies, but YouTube is currently not functioning correctly on my computer. I apologize for the inconvenience. >My opponent next moves on to describe why he believes that Hugo Weaving fits best into the role of the Riddler. The Riddler does not have a defined face; his face is covered partially by a mask (. http://chaosandoldnight.files.wordpress.com...). The Riddler's look has never been quite consistent throughout history. Some comparisons to the first picture I provided (. http://www.geocities.com...), (. http://thefaust.files.wordpress.com...). Due to this evidence, my opponent's claim about the look of Hugo Weaving is null. >I must confess that I have never personally seen any of the three movies in the Matrix trilogy. This is irrelevant because my opponent's point is null. Johnny Depp's entire role in the Pirates of the Caribbean was as a criminal, vigilante, etc. He was portrayed as a man fighting against authority and a higher government/other party (depending on the specific movie). As far as playing the role of the Riddler goes, when the Riddler is not telling a riddle, etc. he is usually quiet. Johnny Depp (above any other actor) has shown that he can play the role of a quiet person when he played the role of Edward in Edward Scissorhands (. http://www.sadlerswells.com...). Edward was an invention, and had no interaction with the outside world (he was living in a large house by his lonesome) until he was an adult. Even after he left his home, he was uneasy around other people. Mr. Depp flourished in this role, and has shown that no matter how verbally involved he is in his role, he can make do with it. >The next argument presented by my opponent was on the topic of awards won by Hugo Weaving. Johnny Depp has won far more awards than Mr. Weaving. Hugo Weaving has won and been nominated for a grand total of 23 awards (. http://www.imdb.com...). Mr. Depp has won and been nominated for a grand total of 84 awards (. http://www.imdb.com...). Johnny Depp's total is more than three times that of Mr. Weaving. >My opponent moves on to say that Hugo Weaving has proved that he is capable of playing a role that involves negative childhood influence. I am whole-heartedly certain that the acting done by Johnny Depp in Edward Scissorhands (see above) trumps that of Hugo Weaving in Proof. This is evident due to the popularity and reception of Edward Scissorhands as opposed to Proof. Edward Scissorhands is known today as one of the greatest films of all time with Johnny Depp as the lead actor, while Proof is hardly even remembered. >Moving on to my opponent's second contention, he claims that Hugo Weaving is a better fit for the Nolan verse than Johnny Depp. He claims that because Mr. Depp is primarily a Hollywood actor, he will not fit into Batman. Hollywood is, as my opponent himself claims, extremely high profile in terms of movies. But is this bad? The last Christopher Nolan movie, the Dark Knight currently has a gross revenue of almost $1,000,000,000 worldwide (. http://www.boxofficemojo.com...). This ranks forth all time. If this is not fitting the Hollywood scene, what is? The previous movie by Mr. Nolan, Batman Begins, has a gross revenue of over $371,000,000 (. http://www.boxofficemojo.com...). Mr. Weaving, in fact, would be a worse fit into the Batman scene. >My opponent's next argument is completely false. He makes the claim that Johnny Depp's acting is too little out of his own personal character, but Mr. Depp has proved that he can fit into two entirely opposing roles. While he played an over-the-top role in the Pirates of the Caribbean (see above), he played a calm and shy role in Edward Scissorhands (above). Given that these two roles are opposing, my opponent clearly has not seen enough of Johnny Depp to make this conjecture. >My opponent's third contention poses the question of who can play a better villain between Hugo Weaving and Johnny Depp. Mr. Depp has played Sweeney Todd in one of the best movies of 2007, Sweeney Todd: the Demon Barber of Fleet Street (see above). He played a "demon barber," as the title of the movie suggests, meaning that he can clearly play a villain. Given that Mr. Depp won and been nominated for awards as an actor (. http://www.imdb.com...) in this very movie, it can be said that he can play the role of a villain exquisitely. >My opponent's next question is answered in my previous statement. >With all due respect, though my opponent claims otherwise, Johnny Depp's role in Sweeney Todd: the Demon barber of Fleet Street was that of a villain. He was, after all, the "demon barber" (as I have stated above). >My opponent's next statement claiming that Hugo Weaving would, in fact, be a better actor as the Riddler than Johnny Depp is negated by my above arguments and rebuttals. He clearly has the experience to flourish in this role, contrary to my opponent's remarks. >"Should we trust Johnny Depp in such a role? " I believe so, reader. >On account of "some other notes" supplied by my opponent, none of them adversely effect Johnny Depp. The first note brought up by my opponent is the lack of time for Johnny Depp to perform this role. Granted, Mr. Depp's future looks packed. However, this debate, as stated by my opponent in R1, "will be a [one] on [one] actor debate in which we[,] the debaters[,] will try to prove that our actor would be a superior Riddler. " Note my opponent's language. The debate that both of us agreed to partake in was over who WOULD be a better Riddler, it is clearly hypothetical. Thus, my opponent's point is negated. >Both actors have proven themselves excellent athletically and in duels. I do not see this as a point for debate. >My opponent's final point has been discussed above. >I have proven: Johnny Depp is superior as a Riddler Hugo Weaving is not superior as a Riddler >I would like to thank all who read my response. >Thanks to my opponent in advance.