• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

A thought about Nolan-verse Ra's Al Ghul

Nerroth

Nerroth

Commodore
Commodore
Hi.


I didn't want to hijack the pre-existing Joker thread, so...


I was thinking about the nature - and age - of the League of Shadows in the Nolanverse Batman series, and what it might mean regarding the fate of Ra's Al Ghul.

As you may know, in the comics, Ra's had Lazarus Pits he used to keep himself gong for centuries, but I susspect that going for this kind of option probably won't fly in a Nolanverse piece.

However, perhaps a clue as to what this version of the League is like might be found in the name that the Ra's we know went by... Henri Ducard.

What if that was his real name, which he cast aside when the League had him inherit a 'Ra's Al Ghul' title as their current leader?

That could mean that there would have been previous holders of the title going back to the foundation of the League - or, at least, a branch in a country which spoke Arabic at one point or another - and therefore, could be a name resurrected for a new actor, portraying the inheritor of the title, and set to lead the League on a renewed campaign?


(Hell, it could even be Talia - who might have a different surname before inheriting the title.)


Does that sound like it might work for either a future movie, or a tie-in story akin to Batman: Gotham Knight?
 
I don't have a problem with the Lazarus Pit existing in the Nolan universe. What was smart about Batman Begins was that the issue wasn't dealt with. It might exist or it might not.
 
A lazarus pit would be a great way to bring him back, wouldn't it? For the next movie, that is...
 
I think in Begins, rather than being an immortal a la Connor McLeod, the name Ra's Al Ghul was immortal, a title being passed on from holder to holder down the decades. Like a villainous The Phantom.

Although he could have escaped the train crash in the end, I think we were meant to believe that Ra's had perished. As I understand, the novelisation refers to his body being taken from the wreckage (though this wouldn't be binding on any future movie). Besides, even if he was immortal being immortal isn't the same as being invulnerable - he might be long-lived, but can still be killed.

As the OP says, I don't think things like a Lazarus Pit or immortality belong in a Nolanverse Batmovie, but it's possible that a new Ra's or Talia could return to haunt the Batman. Having said that, with so many other potential villains in the Batverse to be used, I'd be surprised if this angle was used in any future movie.
 
I thought the movie clearly implied he was immortal and using Lazarus Pits. When he first reappears at Wayne Manor didn't he say something like "or is Ra'sh Al Ghul immortal?".
 
^To which Bruce replied: "Or merely cheap parlor tricks to conceal your identity"

There's no assumption the Ras Al Ghul is immortal. The whole "is he immortal line" was a bit of sarcasm on Ducard/Ras's part. Things like Lazarus Pits and immortals clearly have no place in the more realistic Nolanverse. I do like the idea of Ras Al Ghul being a moniker passed down from one person to another giving the illison of immortality. It's an idea that's been used before to great effect.
 
Only problem I had was them using an incorrect pronunciation of the name. Denny O'Neil said in many a letter column over the years that Ra's sounds like "Raysh" and not "Roz". I'd grown so accustomed to using the creator of the character's version of the name that it made me wince slightly every time they said "Roz". :lol:
 
Yep, they got it right in the Animated series. Mainly because O'Neil himself wrote the first major Ra's story (which was a combination of several Ghul stories O'Neil wrote back in the 70s).
 
Well, one thing that could be worth considering is that the League might not be above abetting the activities of certain criminals still active in Gotham, if only to further their ideology of showing ow corrupt and irredeemable the place is.

I remember an old comic, Resurrection Night I think it was (that I have a really hard time finding references to...) in which Ra's had the doors of both the main prison and Arkham flung open, and concocted a scheme to involve certain villains... only for the whole thing to be an elaborate way of trying to get Bruce to break his pre-existing code and take the step of actually killing the villains.

It may not be quite so elaborate in Nolanverse, but a new Ra's seeking to chip away at Batman's principles - especially now that Batman is wanted for those Dent killings - could be waiting in the wings...


...and there can always be comics, new animated shorts, novels and so forth set in the same 'verse - it doesn't have to be in a new movie that we see a resurgent League.
 
The novel certainly makes it sound like Ra's in Batman Begins is immortal and that the Lazarus Pit exists. I too was bothered by their misprounciation of his name in the movie. David Warner is my Ra's lol.
 
It still makes me wonder what people mean when they say they want superhero movies to be "realistic". A realistic movie would not have a man dressed up as a flying rodent going around beating up people and fighting a monster clown who has mary sue planning skills.
 
Anwar said:
It still makes me wonder what people mean when they say they want superhero movies to be "realistic". A realistic movie would not have a man dressed up as a flying rodent going around beating up people and fighting a monster clown who has mary sue planning skills.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying, but, bats are mammals, not rodents.
 
I'm thinking that people want superhero movies to be based in some kind of realistic world that follows the regular laws of physics, etc. The trouble with that theory is that most superheroes DEFY the laws of physics and reality as we know it, that is the point of having them in the first place. I always think of the films as being in their own alternate realities with their own set of rules, different from ours, so that it works out.
 
So, is the idea that there will be no super powered characters in the Nolanverse? No supernatural happenings? No physical science that stretches too far beyond real life?

Is this something Nolan has said, or is it something fans are suspecting from the style of the films so far?
 
LaxScrutiny said:
So, is the idea that there will be no super powered characters in the Nolanverse? No supernatural happenings? No physical science that stretches too far beyond real life?

Is this something Nolan has said, or is it something fans are suspecting from the style of the films so far?
Click to expand...


I think it's what we people have worked out from the tone of the films - I mean we *could* go and see the third film and he could be fighting Darkseid but I doubt that....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top