Young Ra's Al Ghul Cast in Dark Knight Rises

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Young Ra's Al Ghul Cast in Dark Knight Rises

image

A new villain has been confirmed for Dark Knight Rises, though he was already featured in Batman Begins.

Christopher Nolan's upcoming Dark Knight Rises has already added Bane and Catwoman's alter-ego as potential villains, in addition to Inception's Joseph Gordon-Levitt as a rumored "Holiday Killer," and now a newly revealed cast member stacks Ra's Al Ghul on the pile. However, this won't be the same Ra's Al Ghul we saw in Batman Begins.

The Hollywood Reporter writes that Social Network co-star Josh Pence will play a "young" Ra's Al Ghul in Rises. Unconfirmed sources say that he'll appear in flashback scenes from 30 years prior to the events of the film.

In the Batman comic books, Ra's Al Ghul is one of Batman's greatest foes as an international terrorist able to constantly rejuvenate his life in pools called the Lazarus Pits. His daughter, Talia Al Ghul, is often introduced as a love interest for Bruce Wayne. Pence's role furthers rumors that Marion Cotillard, confirmed for an unknown role in Rises, will be playing Talia Al Ghul.

In Batman Begins, Ra's Al Ghul (played by Liam Neeson) is the head of the League of Shadows, an organization dedicated to protecting the world through any means necessary (even mass killing). He's believed dead from the events in Batman Begins, but when a guy like Ra's Al Ghul is "believed dead" you know he's got to be alive. Whether or not a young Al Ghul in Rises confirms the return of the older Al Ghul is unsure.

Dark Knight Rises is planned for release in 2012.

Source: Hollywood Reporter

Permalink

I'll echo what was going around the GameFAQs boards in this case:

"Another villain? This is going to end up being another Spider-Man 3!"

Although I don't really believe that. The movie will be good, just not Dark Knight good. Another other casting announcements will not change that prediction.

I'm thinking successor, maybe?

Bane, Catwoman, Holiday Killer, and Ra's Al Ghul

I can't take this seriously.

Bassman_2:
Bane, Catwoman, Holiday Killer, and Ra's Al Ghul

I can't take this seriously.

and a rumored Talia makes 5!

Seriously, this is a new record, isn't it?

Christ, this film is getting big. Still, Nolan has yet to make a film I can pick any real faults in (Batman Begins is probably my least favourite, if only because it was finding a place between comic-Batman and realist-Batman).

Jamiemitsu:
I'm thinking successor, maybe?

Naw. Ra's is pretty hard to kill, his silly fountain of youth keeps him going for years. One of my favourite Batman villains really but sadly his portrayal in Batman Begins was not as good, hell even the brief appearance in Under the Red Hood was so much better. Maybe new actor will squeeze more out of the character...

Sill, that's a loads of villains for one script and i'm not sure i like it. I prefer when it's more focused on batsie vs specific villain rather than spreading the attention thin between, now, 4 of them.

FungiGamer:

Bassman_2:
Bane, Catwoman, Holiday Killer, and Ra's Al Ghul

I can't take this seriously.

and a rumored Talia makes 5!

Seriously, this is a new record, isn't it?

Not only the fact that villains are being piled on, but they all seemed so mismatched - even when it was just Catwoman and Bane.

o....kay? How would this come into play? At this point I think this film is going to be about three hours long!

Bassman_2:
Bane, Catwoman, Holiday Killer, and Ra's Al Ghul

I can't take this seriously.

Don't forget Scarecrow is still around.

Also: as much as I love Liam Neeson, there is no way in hell his character is still alive. If Ra's comes back in his old self, the excuse better pretty damn amazing. I mean, we all saw Batman Begins and know how it ends.

FungiGamer:

Bassman_2:
Bane, Catwoman, Holiday Killer, and Ra's Al Ghul

I can't take this seriously.

and a rumored Talia makes 5!

Seriously, this is a new record, isn't it?

You forgot the Joker flashbacks.

Seriously...I have a bad feeling about this. I smell a Spiderman 3 on the horizon...and we all know how bad that was.

Seriously, it seems Nolan is just cramming as much shit as he can in order to leave his final mark in his trilogy. Which is what Raimi did.

JESUS LEARN FROM THE MISTAKES OF THE PAST!

The Rascal King:

Bassman_2:
Bane, Catwoman, Holiday Killer, and Ra's Al Ghul

I can't take this seriously.

Don't forget Scarecrow is still around.

Also: as much as I love Liam Neeson, there is no way in hell his character is still alive. If Ra's comes back in his old self, the excuse better pretty damn amazing. I mean, we all saw Batman Begins and know how it ends.

Didja read the actual post? This is a new actor, playing a young Ra's, in flashbacks

WrongSprite:

The Rascal King:

Bassman_2:
Bane, Catwoman, Holiday Killer, and Ra's Al Ghul

I can't take this seriously.

Don't forget Scarecrow is still around.

Also: as much as I love Liam Neeson, there is no way in hell his character is still alive. If Ra's comes back in his old self, the excuse better pretty damn amazing. I mean, we all saw Batman Begins and know how it ends.

Didja read the actual post? This is a new actor, playing a young Ra's, in flashbacks

Yes I did good sir. I probably should have added more detail in my post. What I meant is if Ra's comes back in the present time that DKR takes place in, it would be pretty ridiculous, given Christopher Nolan's realistic approach on the franchise. It seems to me that the Ra's flashback will serve as a plot device to bring back Liam Neeson's character.

Edit: I feel it in mah bones

The Rascal King:

Yes I did good sir. I probably should have added more detail in my post. What I meant is if Ra's comes back in the present time that DKR takes place in, it would be pretty ridiculous, given Christopher Nolan's realistic approach on the franchise. It seems to me that the Ra's flashback will serve as a plot device to bring back Liam Neeson's character.

Edit: I feel it in mah bones

I think that the flash back will serve as a plot device to bring in Talia.

If Bane is a villain, we must keep in mind that Bane's tactics in the comics were to unleash the inhabitants of Arkham Asylum upon Batman all at once to wear him down and leave him vulnerable for when Bane himself went after him.

So if Bane is indeed a villain, that could explain the large villain cast they're throwing at us this movie.

Hmmm... I'm curious as to what part he will serve to the story this time...

kman123:
Seriously...I have a bad feeling about this. I smell a Spiderman 3 on the horizon...and we all know how bad that was.

Seriously, it seems Nolan is just cramming as much shit as he can in order to leave his final mark in his trilogy. Which is what Raimi did.

JESUS LEARN FROM THE MISTAKES OF THE PAST!

Not quite what happened in Spiderman 3. Raimi was forced to put in Venom, and he was not intending to end the series there, even though that is what ended up happening. Point taken, however.

cjb909:

The Rascal King:

Yes I did good sir. I probably should have added more detail in my post. What I meant is if Ra's comes back in the present time that DKR takes place in, it would be pretty ridiculous, given Christopher Nolan's realistic approach on the franchise. It seems to me that the Ra's flashback will serve as a plot device to bring back Liam Neeson's character.

Edit: I feel it in mah bones

I think that the flash back will serve as a plot device to bring in Talia.

That's my read into this as well.

also, people keep forgetting that Catwoman has never really been a Batman "villain". so please, for the love of God, stop counting Selina Kyle toward that "villain limit". she's going to be distraction and potential love interest, just like always.

kman123:

Seriously, it seems Nolan is just cramming as much shit as he can in order to leave his final mark in his trilogy. Which is what Raimi did.

Actually chances are that's not what really happened. Spider-man 3 was never supposed to be the final entry in Raimi's Spider-man movies, and Raimi only wanted Sandman and Vulture in Spider-man 3 for the story he wanted to say.

The studios forced him to enter Venom due to his popularity, and cram in a few other things as well. A number of elements Raimi didn't even want to include in the movie, he had his hand forced to do so.

Woodsey:
(Batman Begins is probably my least favourite, if only because it was finding a place between comic-Batman and realist-Batman).

See, that's why I prefer Begins to The Dark Knight. I enjoyed the comic-book Batman and Gotham a lot more than the realistic and gritty versions of Nolan's second film.

OT: I'm not sure what to think about this. If anything, I hope they bring Liam Neeson back.

Eh, if they want they can layer two-three more villains in it. But better making sure this will be an 8-hour epic *g*.

JUMBO PALACE:

Woodsey:
(Batman Begins is probably my least favourite, if only because it was finding a place between comic-Batman and realist-Batman).

See, that's why I prefer Begins to The Dark Knight. I enjoyed the comic-book Batman and Gotham a lot more than the realistic and gritty versions of Nolan's second film.

Meh, the difference isn't really that big, but you can see that he's straddling the line more in the first film. I think the major difference comes with the Narrows, which I don't think they show in TDK since they're completely destroyed almost.

I really wish character casting news shouldn't be in headlines. It's going to be like the Dark Knight, where many of the movie's twists were put into headlines.

Too many villians my arse.
Catwoman's alter ego is confirmed. That's not the same as "She'll be in it as Catwoman/A VILLAIN".
Ok, Bane's pretty obivous: Main bad guy.
Ra's is in flashbacks, Talia is only rumoured, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the 'holiday killer' isn't even a confirmed villain yet. I read somewhere that his character even kills mob guys. You know, MOB. As in, enemies of Batman. Meaning, the Holiday Killer may even be helping Bats.

All I'm saying is, give it a chance guys. Don't give up all hope yet.
I've got great faith in this movie, and I'll only lose a part of that if we get 3 or more confirmed main villains. By that I mean villains that take up a good chunk of the film, like Joker did. If they're like Scarecrow, or Two-face, I think 3 could just fit in.

Not at all bothered by this. The main reason being that 1.) I have a strong feeling that many of these "leaks" about casting are deliberate misinformation. And 2.) this is supposed to be the final film establishing the character of Batman. So far, we have a very limited view of what comics Batman's universe/Gotham looks like. Its only fitting to have the a wider picture of the Rogue's Gallery to give us perspective about why a city like Gotham would need a constant hero in Batman.

People are going crazy over the amount of villains in this Movie and I agree it could be shit but Christopher Nolan managed to give us Dark knight which was even better than batman begins which is very impressive considering most sequels are really crap so I'm still hopeful that he'll pull it off.

Too many villains? Look guys, Dark Knight had three, and not just the small-fry throwaway type. No, you had Joker, Scarecrow, and Two-Face. And how did that turn out? Besides, the Spiderman3 argument assumes that the movie was bad because of the number of villains (3, like in Dark Knight), and not because of shit like this:


I'll spare you the even worse dance scene...

thethingthatlurks:
Too many villains? Look guys, Dark Knight had three, and not just the small-fry throwaway type. No, you had Joker, Scarecrow, and Two-Face. And how did that turn out? Besides, the Spiderman3 argument assumes that the movie was bad because of the number of villains (3, like in Dark Knight), and not because of shit like this:


I'll spare you the even worse dance scene...

Yuck. Definitely a point, but you can't just ignore the problem too many villains caused. It felt like 2 different movies had been mashed together.

Marter:
I'll echo what was going around the GameFAQs boards in this case:

"Another villain? This is going to end up being another Spider-Man 3!"

Although I don't really believe that. The movie will be good, just not Dark Knight good. Another other casting announcements will not change that prediction.

That's what I was thinking too. You already got Bane and Catwoman apparently sharing the spotlight, plus this "holiday killer" character. They did a horrible job with Two-face in Dark Knight representation-wise, just to "kill" him off within 15 minutes.

And now we got flashbacks and his daughter. So... 5 villains possibly. Dark Knight felt drawn out as it was, so now we're either dealing with a movie 2-2.5hrs long so convoluted by villainy that technically the Villains do succeed in destroying Batman...
Or you got a 3-4hr bloody movie no one will want to sit through unless they Grindhouse it and separate it into "Dark Knight Rises" and "Dark Knight Falls" for a double release in theaters, thus becoming a cash-grab.

Spiderman 3 wasn't that bad, then again you only dealt with 2 major villains, and 5 minutes of one villain going from bad guy to good guy.

And thinkingman, really? 3 villains in Dark Knight? You know how stupid that makes you look right? Scarecrow was nothing in the Dark Knight, just a 2 minute cameo. He wasn't a villain, just a pathetic attempt at making batman suddenly look clunky, and thus obligatory suit upgrade time.

Sooooo, is Dark Knight Rises trying to be like the Arkham Asylum game?

The fact that the last movie lost its focus between Two Face and the Joker was bad enough, and that was only two villains. Now they're going with four? They must be yanking our chain, because if Nolan thinks this is a good idea, he's officially gone batshit.

My first thought was, "Young Ra's al Ghul? Lazarus Pit, duhhhhhh" Haha

Not sure how they're gonna frame him into flashbacks, though. It's the only way that would really work in the setting of Nolan's timeline. Plus we have Gordon-Levitt playing Alberto Falcone from The Long Halloween and Carmine Falcone hinted at secretly knowing who he was really working for through Scarecrow, so I guess it's possible that the Falcone family had more contact with the League of Shadows in the past.

What I was never really clear on in Batman Begins was if Ra's al Ghul was Liam Neeson's character the whole time or if Ken Watanabe was actually Ra's as it seemed and Neeson "became" Ra's after his death- kind of fits into the classic DC comics sense that Ra's al Ghul is immortal so to speak.

Avatar Roku:

thethingthatlurks:
Too many villains? Look guys, Dark Knight had three, and not just the small-fry throwaway type. No, you had Joker, Scarecrow, and Two-Face. And how did that turn out? Besides, the Spiderman3 argument assumes that the movie was bad because of the number of villains (3, like in Dark Knight), and not because of shit like this:


I'll spare you the even worse dance scene...

Yuck. Definitely a point, but you can't just ignore the problem too many villains caused. It felt like 2 different movies had been mashed together.

Well, the idea is that the way Christopher Nolan handles "many villains" is different than the way Spiderman was handled. Spiderman was basically "We want as many cool CGI effects thrown in as possible.", Batman works like "We want to tie these characters together in the coolest way ever for an epic finale."

Shit, Christopher hasn't made a bad movie in a while... so hes earned some faith from his fans, I think.

Well, i have to say this doesn't really change the fact that I'll be seeing it anyways.
But i do hope this doesn't make the movie worse.
Also, the funny thing is, i wouldn't know any of the other villains, Ra's included, if i hadn't played Batman Arkham Asylum. That game really made me interested in all the Batman stuff, and taught me a lot about them.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here