Villain Cameos in Batman Begins sequel! Who do you want to see?

[Gpoliceman]

Hello,

From what I've read of interviews with David Goyer (writer) and Chris Nolan (director) of Batman Begins, the sequels will feature the Joker and Two-Face as the major villains.

Check out www.Batman-on-Film.com for more information. I go to that site all the time to get the latest scoops.

Anyhow, let's assume that once a script is written and a new Batman trilogy is complete that the Joker and Two-Face are INDEED the major villains.

My question is: What other villains would you like cameos of?

For example, in Spiderman 1 & 2, the villains were Green Goblin and Doctor Octopus. However, Eddie Brock is mentioned in Spiderman 1, Harry Osborne (the Hobgoblin) is promenently featured, and Doctor Connors (Peter's professor), as we all know, is destined to become the Lizard.

I hope the Batman Begins sequels feature other major Batman villains even if they only appear as cameos.

Here are my picks:

-Harliene Quinzelle should most definitely be a psychiatrist in Arkham.
-I definitely wouldn't mind Bruce Wayne running into Oswald Cobblepot, a well known freak-of-nature. Like TNAB or "The Batman" cartoon, he could either be a business man or the heir of a wealthy family, who Bruce could easily encounter.
-Though it would be too similar to Batman Forever, either Edward Nygma or Jervis Tetch could be working for Wayne Enterprises.
-I really hope Nolan includes more Gotham Police Officers that we known from the comics.
-There's many different "Clayfaces" in the comic books, but if they decided to follow the animated Batman route, actor Matt Hagan could be seen in a movie poster on the street somewhere.

I can't see any other villains, like Catwoman or Mr. Freeze, making credible cameos without stealing the show. Perhaps if Bruce met Selina Kyle it could work, but you can't have Bruce meet Selina without having them get involved. The villains I mentioned above I think are the only ones that could show up and then disappear without distraction.

On a side note, I've heard that in Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns" a photo of a cape crusader and a headline reading something about Batman is going to show up briefly on a newspaper in the movie.

Do you think any Batman Begins sequels should reference any other superheroes in the DCU?

I don't think so. Nolan's version tried so hard to make Batman realistic and plausible that any mention of a Man of Steel in Metropolis or Green Lantern Corps would wreck that vision.

However, I wouldn't mind at all if cities, like Metropolis, Central City, etc. were mentioned. Gotham itself is a fabricated city in the DCU, so I don't think Nolan's "realistic" vision would be violated by mentioning another fake city like Metropolis, thus implying Superman without directly mentioning "hey, there's a guy that can fly and deflect bullets" in Batman's world.

Greg

[Russkafin]

GP - All your picks are on the money. I especially agree that it would be great to see Dr. Quinzelle involved in Arkham somehow if the Joker does take center stage next film. Have you heard anything about how they are planning to introduce Two-Face? I would hope that we'd get a lot of Harvey Dent in the second movie, and they would take their time in establishing him as a character before turning him into Two-Face in a third film.

Maybe villains that would be hard to include as actual cameos could at least get a verbal mention... I could see Alfred telling Bruce that there was "another call from that Selina Kyle, seeking a donation to the wildlife preserve" or something, but Bruce not taking the time to meet with her... Something along those lines.

Where did you hear that news about a possibly Bat-mention in the Superman film? That would be a very cool fanboy moment! Think we'll ever get a Worlds Finest movie someday? (Or... dare I even dream... a Justice League movie??)

[Terminatah]

The title of this thread is grossly misleading. There should be a question mark and bracketed disclaimer. Like this:

Villain Cameos in Batman Begins sequel? You [Pretend] Decide!

Let's get on this, mods!

-Terminatah

[The Penguin]

While I don't like being ordered around ;) but I think you make a good point, Terminatah. How's that for ya?

[Gpoliceman]

Sorry about my thread title being misleading. If the fans actually got to pick the villain for the next Batman movie, I think every Bat Fan in the world would be sending Warner Bros letters suggesting the villain they want.

Anyhow,

Russkafin --- the Batman Begins sequel is soooo early in development (for example, Nolan, the director, is working on another film, the Prestige, before he even starts working on the Bat sequel). Because it's too early to tell, I'm sure all information on the Batman sequels is only temporary. There's no script yet.

But just after Batman Begins came out, Nolan, Goyer, some actors, did interviews, and the ideas that were tossed around were Harvey Dent being introduced in the sequel. The Joker would be the villain. Then in the third movie, Dent would become Two-Face and be the villain.

Both Nolan and Goyer are huge fans of Leob's "The Long Halloween".

Take everything with a grain of salt.

It'll be years before Batman Begins 2.

Greg

[TimTwoFace]

It'll be years before Batman Begins 2.

Not really...it's due out in 2008, meaning that a script will need to be completed in a year or so.

As for the cameos, besides the Joker and Two-Face, I would like...

-Harleen Quinzel, as already stated, would be terribly easy to slip into a role at Arkham Asylum - but not in a role that stands out. A very background role would be nice.

-The Penguin - if we go the crime-lord route (which is apparently everyone's favourite interpretation), it would be easy to slip him into the movie in a smaller role, too.

-Catwoman - There's still the rumour that she could be in a major role in either of the upcoming films.

-Matt Hagan - This is the only Clayface I ever really want to see. There are far too many versions out there already, and I thought BTAS did the best at throwing aspects of many of them into one. He'd be a great background character, or more likely, be featured on a movie poster somewhere.

And, of course, The Scarecrow and Mr. Zsasz are both alive and could still be featured in the sequels in some capacity.

-Tim

[Toonlover]

There´s a lot of rumors on that site that the Penguin will be in that movie as a principal villain.

They can do him as a realistic lord of crime with a lot of influences in the police and government.

I wonder if the Joker will have white make-up or not, afterall they´re trying to it "realistic".

[Patrick Bateman]

Harleen Quinzell/Harley Quinn has NO place in these films. She's a ridiculous character that was bad enough in the animated series, and plain and simple ruined The Joker in the comics. Keep that animated crap out of these films, please.

For villain cameos, I'd like to see some that would never be considered to be the actual villain of a film.

- Kirk Langstrom. He could work for Wayne Enterprises, and be the guy who hooks Bruce up with his sonar bat devices.

- Oswald Cobblepot. A NON-freak, please. I just want a short, little, round aristocrat. He could play the Earl role this time around - the side villain of the business world.

[CyborgRex]

The Penguin would be cool to see as a mob boss type instead of a circus freak like in Returns.

Batman On Film had a story about the Batman reference in Superman Returns. It is just in the Daily Planet set because of their attention to detail and might not even be seen on film.

[Ordinary Guy]

I'd like to see someone like Harvey Bullock either introduced or have a breif appearance in the next one.

[James]

I'm not for villain cameos unless they are relevant to the story. I think as soon as films go down this route, the more they become a "product", built to appease rather than to be a solid film. I think focus should go on the tale.

If there is need, for instance, I could see Bullock being a relevant cop inclusion, then cool. But I have no interest in seeing characters pop up as fan appeasement. I shuddered at the Joker card at the end of BB. It was just so unneccessary. There is a difference between respecting resource material and milking it to make it more 'Batman", be it an easy fix to make it seem more bat authentic, or just to make fans happy.

I don't want the sequel to turn into a showcase for enthuastic fan desires. I want a good film which respects the Batman myth without cameos and excessive references. I'm glad that Batman Returns made no references to the Joker (although I know there was intent to do so). For me, it's when films start to indulge in passing "myth" cameos, visual or in dialogue, that it started becoming farcical. No thanks.

A simple story with a good villain and a good hero. We don't need the rest of Bat history crammed into a film. It won't make it better. In fact, quite likely, it will be made worse.

[BatKid]

But I have no interest in seeing characters pop up as fan appeasement. I shuddered at the Joker card at the end of BB. It was just so unneccessary. There is a difference between respecting resource material and milking it to make it more 'Batman", be it an easy fix to make it seem more bat authentic, or just to make fans happy.Wow that's the first time I've heard anyone make that complaint about the ending. :confused:

I understand it was a cameo to appease the fans, but can you explain how you feel that short scene was "milking" the character? I mean it was taken directly from the end of Y1, so I take it more as a homage if anything. Plus it leads to the next film and creates anticipation in the fanbase (and from my 3 viewing experiences, the general audience loved it too), none of which I think is particularly bad.

[Tanooki]

I'm not for villain cameos unless they are relevant to the story. I think as soon as films go down this route, the more they become a "product", built to appease rather than to be a solid film. I think focus should go on the tale.

If there is need, for instance, I could see Bullock being a relevant cop inclusion, then cool. But I have no interest in seeing characters pop up as fan appeasement. I shuddered at the Joker card at the end of BB. It was just so unneccessary. There is a difference between respecting resource material and milking it to make it more 'Batman", be it an easy fix to make it seem more bat authentic, or just to make fans happy.

I don't want the sequel to turn into a showcase for enthuastic fan desires. I want a good film which respects the Batman myth without cameos and excessive references. I'm glad that Batman Returns made no references to the Joker (although I know there was intent to do so). For me, it's when films start to indulge in passing "myth" cameos, visual or in dialogue, that it started becoming farcical. No thanks.

A simple story with a good villain and a good hero. We don't need the rest of Bat history crammed into a film. It won't make it better. In fact, quite likely, it will be made worse.i can understand where you're coming from with respect to the joker card, sjj. it is true that the sequel could be outstanding even without that tie-in/homage to the joker. but i still think it was a cool feature because it DID tie the two movies together.

i'm not a fan of movies that are sequels, but have no direct links to each other. for instance, spider-man 1 and 2. ok, both movies have spider-man and the love plot between peter and mary jane, but how do the actual main stories link up? i don't see it

with batman on the other hand, we get to see that the joker was a convict on the narrows and escaped to cause mayhem and destruction because of the events caused in batman begins, thus batman begins can truly lead into the bat-sequel, where as spider-man 1 and 2 wouldn't necessarily have to be placed back to back, in my opinion (aside from the peter/mary jane love plot)

[James]

I understand it was a cameo to appease the fans, but can you explain how you feel that short scene was "milking" the character? I mean it was taken directly from the end of Y1, so I take it more as a homage if anything. Plus it leads to the next film and creates anticipation in the fanbase (and from my 3 viewing experiences, the general audience loved it too), none of which I think is particularly bad.

It reminded me of a fan film. It just struck me as offering a similar form of subtlety.

Problem with tie in films, is that often the source material disrupts what makes a good movie. What makes a good edit for a film runs on different rules to an original movie. I don't find such scenes respect the source, the source is used to score simple brownie points.

Regardless of whether Joker is confirmed for the sequel or not, I can't see any benefit this scene has to the end of this movie. Does it sufficently tease for movie two? Not really. It doesn't offer anything to the Joker, accept give him a run of the mill rap sheet and a calling card. Does it add anything to the scene itself? No, aside from fan gasps. Granted, one could argue that it underlines Gordon's point about escalation, but I'm not certain that needed to be underlined with so little subtlety. Comic books are a different medium to films. What works in one doesn't always work in another.

I tire of the need to appease fanbases taking priority in hero movies. What benefit to the character Zsaz - did it do him justice? Did he do anything worthy of his name? No, he was just another offering to fans.

Fans shouldn't be indulged like this. It's lazy. If you can't win over fans with relevant characters portrayed accurately told in a good solid story then maybe you should give up on those fans. ;)

Batman Begins was not the worst. In fact, on the whole it was very good with characters. Most characters used were relevant. Even potential character cameos like Fox and Falcone were used properly and deployed int the story with care, so I'm not bashing Batman Begins, just using a couple of minor incidences as an example.

What I'm griping about is this constant fan pressure to which the industry plays up to, knowing a good fan reaction will help the pressure to get film approval. Fan's know this, and pressure for cameos puts priority on the sweetners rather than what's relevant.

If these cameos actually offered anything decent to the characters they used, that's when they become relevant. But cameo implies a non relevant role and I'm tired of seeing potential characters used to fill up and appease fans. Especially when it becomes an expecation prior to a film rather than a gentle surprise to the watcher.

I want superhero films to be taken seriously as decent film projects and not subject to crass uses of source material so fans can have spasms. IMO it weakens the genre considerably, in it's creation as much as it's audience reaction. Batman Begins almost made it. I guess after such a solid film which dealt with focus on relevant characters, the last 20 minutes with Zsaz and the Joker card felt like crass, indulgent references.

[BatKid]

Ah ok, I understand where you're coming from then.

In the case of Zsasz, while some may percieve it as a wasted character, on the flipside you have to think about if the character was going to be fully utilized in the future anyway. I guess in this scenario it's a matter of whether you'd have something, everything, or nothing at all.

Personally I like it when the director throws in little nods to the fans. It shows (at least to me) that he actually reads the source material, and he/she cares about the miniscule of details. Also, it's not like cameos would necessarily mean the end of that character's appearance. Who knows, we might very well see Zsasz again as more of a ruthless killer like in the comics. Same goes for Scarecrow and Falcone. In the very least, Nolan's established these characters in film world and I for one don't see anything wrong with it.

But I guess like always, we'll just agree to disagree. :)

[James]

In the case of Zsasz, while some may percieve it as a wasted character, on the flipside you have to think about if the character was going to be fully utilized in the future anyway. I guess in this scenario it's a matter of whether you'd have something, everything, or nothing at all.


I think I'd rather not have them visualised at all on those odds. Characters not rendered have far more power than those partially so. IMHO.



Personally I like it when the director throws in little nods to the fans. It shows (at least to me) that he actually reads the source material, and he/she cares about the miniscule of details. Also, it's not like cameos would necessarily mean the end of that character's appearance. Who knows, we might very well see Zsasz again as more of a ruthless killer like in the comics. Same goes for Scarecrow and Falcone. In the very least, Nolan's established these characters in film world and I for one don't see anything wrong with it.


Because the character is instantly weakened by having a cameo. There is no doubt about that. That's the essence of cameo; to have little to no relevance. As soon as a character is cameoed with a set function it can potentially hinder any future work. His simplistic use in this film and the fact he's been rendered, will weaken future casting for the character, ability to use him properly. In the end he suffers like Bane suffered in B&R - window dressing with no strength accept to make a fan go "whoop", hardly shows a director is using the character wisely or with any integrity to the comics. It just shows a creative team who are picking minor characters to cameo to win over fans with greater ease. If fan's worried less about cameos and more about the stories, maybe superhero films would be envisioned with more integrity.

As I said, I think as you put it Nolan's team on the whole has made sure characters are used with full roles rather than for window dressing and other directors should take note. As I commented earlier, it's perhaps that tenacity which makes Zsaz stand out as such a poor call.



But I guess like always, we'll just agree to disagree. :)

I think we both got used to that a long time ago. ;)

[Master Moron]

Ummm...who the hell is Zsaz? Seriously, I've seen Batman Begins and I've watched most of Batman:The Animated series, and I have no idea what you guys are arguing about.

[Stu]

Ummm...who the hell is Zsaz? Seriously, I've seen Batman Begins and I've watched most of Batman:The Animated series, and I have no idea what you guys are arguing about.
Zsaz is a comic book villain, a serial killer who killed and then cuts himself. Each kill he gains leaves a mark on him, and the character is now literally covered in stitches, momentos of those he's killed.

In Batman Begins, he was the first thug that Jonathan Crane had admitted to Arkham so Carmine Falconie's thugs wouldn't be forced to serve prison sentances.

He never appeared in Batman: The Animated Series, as he was too violent to translate for younger audiences. He's not really that popular a rogue to begin with, C list at best...

[KCJ506]

I would like to see Harley Quinn have bigger role in the sequel as Joker's henchwoman instead of just a cameo.

There are rumors that Harvey Dent will be in the sequel and at the end he gets sprayed with the acid that turns him into Two Face.

Off-topic here: In the first post in says that Harry Osbourne was the Hobgoblin. Harry was NEVER the Hobgoblin. He became Green Goblin 2 after his father died.

[Simpler Simon]

I mean it was taken directly from the end of Y1, so I take it more as a homage if anything.
Year 1 was actually more blatant about the cameo, as Gordon already had the Joker pegged specifically by name. You can argue that the comic book medium is vastly different from film as the characters are pre-established on a different level, but as a single work it amounts to the same thing (and I won't even start on Selina Kyle's appearance in Y1, which amounted to a Zasaz from BB).

What I did like about the card was it was drawn more traditionally (and even somewhat creepier) than the established Joker card that was used in the first film and the animated series.

As for cameos:
- not a big fan of Harley Quinn. I don't think you can cameo a character like Harley without fan expectations of her taking center stage in a later film, which I would not like. And if you cameo her without some psychological manipulation on the Joker's part, it becames a name and nothing else.

-would mostly like to see c-list/d-list villains, as they're disposable enough without interrupting the main plot. I could see someone obscure like the ratcatcher being born from that crazy nerve gas at the end of the first film.

[Jay]

They havent done anything with the clock king or killer croc.

[Silly McGooses]

I want to see one villain, because the last movie was really tarnished by having a serious lack of villain development, what with fifty of them being in the movie...