• 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!

Should Batman Returned and if so what would you like to see

What makes BB and TDK head and shoulders above the rest of the Batman franchise and most other superhero movies is that Bruce is a developing character and he has a strong through-line in each movie.

See, I didn't think Bruce really had a character arc in TDK. He really seemed like a side character with more emphasis on what the Joker and Harvey Dent were up to. The only change the character went through was the out-of-nowhere decision to take the fall for all the murders Harvey did.

The villain that rises for him to deal with is Rupert Thorne, a true corrupt, corporate monster, more subtle than any mobster, with deep ties into the city and state, even federal government, and Wayne's equal socially, financially and in terms of intelligence. The kind of guy who works entirely through fronts (so you can have whichever of the traditional villains you want - Riddler, Deadshot, Catwoman, Poison Ivy, whatever, and only reveal him as the ultimate villain in the second half) and who, when Batman confronts him with a list of his crimes can merely smile and say, "Oh yeah? Prove it."

If they do Thorne, I say keep him as a congressman like in the comics. The way you describe him there makes him sound too much like Lex Luthor. Also, I am pretty sure Bats (at least this version of him) would come at him with the proof.

Actually having him as a congressman would work great since Bats is on the run. A politician would totally take advantage of that.

I still think Penguin could be worked in there as the new Mob boss, but not nearly as bad as the previous mob bosses. My favorite bits in the comics is when Batman pumps Penguin for info in exchange for looking the other way on things.

[...] now that Lucious has cut himself off from aiding him because of the actions with the cell [...]

No, they are still on good terms. Lucius didn't like the device and swore to not work at Wayne enterprises as long as that thing is there, which is why Bruce made Lucius the only one to operate it (and subsequently destroy it after he typed his name into it). I think their relationship is just fine.

That being said, what completely ridiculous device should a third Batman movie have? The first two had them, so we need one for the third movie! :p
 
The villain that rises for him to deal with is Rupert Thorne, a true corrupt, corporate monster, more subtle than any mobster, with deep ties into the city and state, even federal government, and Wayne's equal socially, financially and in terms of intelligence. The kind of guy who works entirely through fronts (so you can have whichever of the traditional villains you want - Riddler, Deadshot, Catwoman, Poison Ivy, whatever, and only reveal him as the ultimate villain in the second half) and who, when Batman confronts him with a list of his crimes can merely smile and say, "Oh yeah? Prove it."

If they do Thorne, I say keep him as a congressman like in the comics. The way you describe him there makes him sound too much like Lex Luthor. Also, I am pretty sure Bats (at least this version of him) would come at him with the proof.

I'm all for a corrupt politician as the villain. Batman works best in a world that's gone to hell - if any of the power structure around him is honest, there's not much point in him doing what he does.

No offense, but comics fans tend to assume that the heroes can do anything and everything. That they are geniuses of such order that ordinary limits mean nothing. That's fine for comics, with their byzantine storylines, but it's awfully boring in a movie. This Bruce Wayne has not been shown to be anything like that. He hasn't framed anyone ever by gathering proof that could convict them in a court of law.

Actually having him as a congressman would work great since Bats is on the run. A politician would totally take advantage of that.

Absolutely. And in this universe there's no doubt about the fact that Bruce Wayne is a criminal in the eyes of the law. But the law is corrupt, thus why you need a vigilante.
 
I know that Bruce and Lucious are on good terms but I got the impression that Fox was just done helping him as Batman. Anyways I'm using that as a plot device.
 
If the GCPD are seriously going to hunt down Batman next time, their task has been easier now that the Tumbler has been destroyed. Batman blew it up but left the debris behind. Forensic analysis of the twisted, burnt parts would still reveal much about the manufactuer. It should be rather easy to trace the vehicle back to Wayne's company and identify Bruce Wayne as Batman.

In the book, Batman was very confident that the explosion left no traces back to Lucius or Bruce and also nothing for the Joker to salvage

I'll fire up my scanner and post the page tonight
 
This Bruce Wayne has not been shown to be anything like that. He hasn't framed anyone ever by gathering proof that could convict them in a court of law.

What about in Batman Begins when he tracked Falcone to the warehouse, beat-up his goons, strapped him to the spotlight next to his drug shipment (giving the cops their first, uncorrupted proof) and then giving evidence to Rachel proving a judge was on Falcone's payroll?

So, yeah. This version of Bruce Wayne has done stuff like that. ;)
 
Last edited:
oh my version of Batman 3 would also feature Matches Malone as a low level mob informer/thug as Bruce needs to resort to other means in order to avoid being spotted as Batman. The GCPD manhunt has got so out of control (despite Gordon's efforts to slow it down) that they have shoot to kill orders from the Mayor's office.
 
This Bruce Wayne has not been shown to be anything like that. He hasn't framed anyone ever by gathering proof that could convict them in a court of law.

What about in Batman Begins when he tracked Falcone to the warehouse, beat-up his goons, strapped him to the spotlight next to his drug shipment (giving the cops their first, uncorrupted proof) and then giving evidence to Rachel proving a judge was on Falcone's payroll?

So, yeah. This version of Bruce Wayne has done stuff like that. ;)

Eh, fair enough. Actually, now that I think about it, the whole nailing half the mob in TDK was a similar frame up by Batman - delivering Lao, tracking the mob money with marked bills, etc. Only Joker killing Lao kept it from working. I guess what I'm saying is it would be interesting to see this Batman go up against someone who could wiggle out from under even those kinds of situations - who could sacrifice underlings, push forward psychos, or pay off politicians so that even when the evidence was there, he could get around it. It would be a kind of flip side of TDK where the psycho out-thought the mob and used them to his own purposes. I'm thinking of a villain who could use criminals, psychopaths and the law to protect himself.
 
I think the Riddler's the only one who can really match the Joker while being different enough, and contributing to a different-enough film, that there wouldn't be a feel of trying and failing to up the ante. I like Poison Ivy, Freeze and Catwoman but doubt they could be done realistically; otoh, I don't really like the Penguin (what's distinct or interesting?) and think a movie with him as a mob boss would be too much of a letdown after two more comic bookish villains. Riddler could be as strange and colorful as Joker while not going into fantasy.
 
I think the Riddler's the only one who can really match the Joker while being different enough, and contributing to a different-enough film, that there wouldn't be a feel of trying and failing to up the ante. I like Poison Ivy, Freeze and Catwoman but doubt they could be done realistically; otoh, I don't really like the Penguin (what's distinct or interesting?) and think a movie with him as a mob boss would be too much of a letdown after two more comic bookish villains. Riddler could be as strange and colorful as Joker while not going into fantasy.

Penguin is unique among Batman's main foes because he is the only (or at least one of the select few) that is completely sane nor is psychologically messed up.

If Penguin is ever used in the Nolanverse, I would keep him as a side villain the way Falcone or Scarecrow were used in Batman Begins.

I think Catwoman could work if they keep her a socialite-by-day/cat-burglar-by-night, as she was depicted on B:TAS.

Again, I suppose the villains will really depend on what the theme of the movie would be. The characters would need to fit that theme (although, you can make the argument that you can decide what characters you want to use and devise a theme from there).
 
I'm on the fence about it. I loved the first two films, so I'd love to see more. But at the same time, I think there's too much potential for the third to fall flat after TDK. I'd rather keep fond memories and avoid the normal DC universe BS. Let's not have The Penguin, Catwoman or any of the other villains ... please let's not!
 
Regarding villains for future films, I hope Nolan has a better idea than reimagining Catwoman, Penguin and/or Riddler. Is Batman's rogues gallery really that small?

No, but these are (thanks to the TV series) big names. Now as Batman Begins showed, you can get away without a famous villain, but the viewing public will always be curious about how the well known ones would be portrayed.

Just an idea to bandy about: If Catwoman is in the next film, how about no Selina Kyle? I don't mean a new character calling herself Catwoman, but rather Bruce Wayne never meets the civilian alter-ego.

Catwoman could be a burglar hired by the main baddie to steal something important. She trades blows with Batman, but the fight is interrupted before she is caught. She gets away, possibly returning for a more substantial role in a sequel.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top