Which Batman villains deserve to get a push or a chance as the Big Bad?

[TheNewFiftyForum]

Two Face is due for a resurgence.

Quite literally then, as he's currently dead in New 52 continuity. Then again, I'm sure there are ways to write him back into action, but "The Big Burn" worked pretty well as a type of "last story" for Harvey Dent. I honestly wouldn't mind if he stayed dead for a while, with some acknowledgment of what it meant to Bruce Wayne to finally have to give up on his old friend.

Otherwise, I don't think there's been a good Batman v.s Hugo Strange story since way back in Gotham Knights. Bring him back into the comics, and focus on his obsession with replacing Batman rather than messing with Bruce Wayne. From the more obscure ones, there are a lot of Grant/Breyfogle villains that have been quiet for way too long. Kadaver, Ratcatcher, Cornelius Stirk, Ventriloquist & Scarface... All names that would work great in smaller, more intimate stories than the stuff Snyder and Capullo are doing in Batman.

[JBatmanFan05]

I think what has to happen more is that the big name writers/teams have to embrace the non-Joker rogues more.

I don't like Zero Year much at all, but Snyder went big with Riddler, which was what fans wanted. Snyder & Capullo are the main event as far as Batman now.

It's not enough often for lesser Bat titles & teams to play with the villains, because it's not really center stage and stories end up subpar and forgettable.

Two-Face, for example, has only seen the center stage lately in lesser secondary Bat titles like Detective, Nightwing (pre-FP), etc. And frankly, they're mostly forgotten.

We just have to hope the Loebs, Snyders, Morrisons, etc start embracing these non-Joker rogues more and are willing to forego creating their own new villains some.

Big creative teams have to embrace the challenge of a big Two-Face or Ivy or Scarecrow story. And not every big story with them has to try to outdo a Joker story in the stakes dept.

[Vakanai]

Dude yes. Mr Freeze. I really want the next batman films to do some of the more dark a Sci fi side of batman. Mr freeze and/or Huge Strange and the monster men would be a perfect place to stop

I'd rather a film take more from Prey than Monster Men.

Mr Freeze could do with being bigger again.

I'd also love to see some of the smaller ones get elevated, like Rat Catcher, Calender Man, Anarky. Those kind of level villains could do with their turn in the sun.

Anarky was in Beware the Batman a lot...but I didn't like him in it.

I think what has to happen more is that the big name writers/teams have to embrace the non-Joker rogues more.

I don't like Zero Year much at all, but Snyder went big with Riddler, which was what fans wanted. Snyder & Capullo are the main event as far as Batman now.

It's not enough often for lesser Bat titles & teams to play with the villains, because it's not really center stage and stories end up subpar and forgettable.

Two-Face, for example, has only seen the center stage lately in lesser secondary Bat titles like Detective, Nightwing (pre-FP), etc. And frankly, they're mostly forgotten.

We just have to hope the Loebs, Snyders, Morrisons, etc start embracing these non-Joker rogues more and are willing to forego creating their own new villains some.

Big creative teams have to embrace the challenge of a big Two-Face or Ivy or Scarecrow story. And not every big story with them has to try to outdo a Joker story in the stakes dept.

I think another problem today is a lot of people think a 'big' story means all of Gotham City is in trouble or something, and a big story doesn't have to push it to that limit. Of the stories I've read or seen animated, Year One focused more on Gordon and the peril wasn't city wide, Jason Todd/Red Hood wanted to become a crime boss and replace Batman, Prey had Hugo Strange create a vigilante to attack Batman amongst other craziness. All big stories, but they were more personal and small scale in peril, mostly affecting Batman himself.

I'd like more Mr. Freeze.

[MajorHoy]

. . . It's not enough often for lesser Bat titles & teams to play with the villains, because it's not really center stage and stories end up subpar and forgettable.

Two-Face, for example, has only seen the center stage lately in lesser secondary Bat titles like Detective, Nightwing (pre-FP), etc. And frankly, they're mostly forgotten.

We just have to hope the Loebs, Snyders, Morrisons, etc start embracing these non-Joker rogues more and are willing to forego creating their own new villains some . . .

Big creative teams have to embrace the challenge of a big Two-Face or Ivy or Scarecrow story. And not every big story with them has to try to outdo a Joker story in the stakes dept.

Disagree entirely with your last part. We need to add some new blood to Batman's villains, otherwise we get the over-reliance on those other villains who get repeatedly used / mis-used in the non-Snyder Bat-books. I am so f#@&in' sick of Mad Hatter popping up so frequently while there are other past villains that could be resurrected and maybe made cool if handled correctly, and I want some new villains to be created and become memorable in the future.

[scary harpy]

Disagree entirely with your last part. We need to add some new blood to Batman's villains, otherwise we get the over-reliance on those other villains who get repeatedly used / mis-used in the non-Snyder Bat-books. I am so f#@&in' sick of Mad Hatter popping up so frequently while there are other past villains that could be resurrected and maybe made cool if handled correctly, and I want some new villains to be created and become memorable in the future.

One tiny little problem: Batman has around 500 villains.

Being around for 7 and ½ decades in a variety of media, he has managed to accumulate a number of distinct foes. Creating new villains just adds more dolls to the corporate toybox.

[RubberLotus]

Disagree entirely with your last part. We need to add some new blood to Batman's villains, otherwise we get the over-reliance on those other villains who get repeatedly used / mis-used in the non-Snyder Bat-books. I am so f#@&in' sick of Mad Hatter popping up so frequently while there are other past villains that could be resurrected and maybe made cool if handled correctly, and I want some new villains to be created and become memorable in the future.

I'd usually argue with you on this, but quite frankly, the current crops of writers have been treating the Classic Rogues so shoddily that it could only be to their benefit if they were all killed off en masse.

But to be honest, writers have never really been shy about flooding Gotham with new villains. And guess what? The second they step off the Bat-books, the next writers who come in kick all those new villains to the curb to make room for their new creations. It's an extraordinarily vicious cycle.

Anyone remember Zeiss? Samsara? The Mortician? Orca? The Banner? Colonel Blimp? Preston Payne and Shondra Fuller? The Tally Man? Gunhawk? Brutale? Narcosis?

[JBatmanFan05]

But to be honest, writers have never really been shy about flooding Gotham with new villains. And guess what? The second they step off the Bat-books, the next writers who come in kick all those new villains to the curb to make room for their new creations. It's an extraordinarily vicious cycle.

Anyone remember Zeiss? Samsara? The Mortician? Orca? The Banner? Colonel Blimp? Preston Payne and Shondra Fuller? The Tally Man? Gunhawk? Brutale? Narcosis?

I agree, that happens a ton. Or the foe is used again but in horribly diluted subpar fashion.

and I want some new villains to be created and become memorable in the future.

This desire (for them to be used well or much once the creator leaves (i.e become memorable)) seems to be a pipe dream, because I've hardly seen it. Aside from maybe (grudingly) Hush.

[scary harpy]

I'd usually argue with you on this, but quite frankly, the current crops of writers have been treating the Classic Rogues so shoddily that it could only be to their benefit if they were all killed off en masse.

But to be honest, writers have never really been shy about flooding Gotham with new villains. And guess what? The second they step off the Bat-books, the next writers who come in kick all those new villains to the curb to make room for their new creations. It's an extraordinarily vicious cycle.

Anyone remember Zeiss? Samsara? The Mortician? Orca? The Banner? Colonel Blimp? Preston Payne and Shondra Fuller? The Tally Man? Gunhawk? Brutale? Narcosis?

I remember. (Please stop...this is depressing.)

You're right; this is a vicious cycle...and wasteful.

If we really look, I suspect some of these new ideas look a lot like older forgotten villains. Sad, don't you think?

[Mutant God]

They could get some older obscure campy villains and remake them. Magpie and Egghead I think could work.

[Vakanai]

They could get some older obscure ccampy villains and remake them. Magpie and Egghead I think could work.

Beware the Batman had a decent Magpie.

[JBatmanFan05]

They could get some older obscure ccampy villains and remake them. Magpie and Egghead I think could work.

I myself don't mostly care for that. Batman needs campy villains.

[Vakanai]

I myself don't mostly care for that. Batman needs campy villains.

There's a difference between campy and not a threat. I can see remaking campy villains working if it stays true to the fun or humor of the characters, but doesn't keep them as ineffectual jokes either. If you could keep some of the camp, but update them into real threats, that'd be interesting. But campy villains as are without a little remake? No writer just about will want to use them, and the execs would dissuade them if they did.

[PretenderNX01]

how much have they done with any of the Clayfaces? In movies, I think we now have the CGI to make one a viable enemy and in comics they could expand on the Animated series themes about a person trying to achieve better looks and fix their career, if anything our society is even more that way.

Have a Lady Clay be like a Kardashian type constantly trying to get better looks and then going too far (like those bad plastic surgery actresses), maybe failing and then being offered a fix that ends up turning her into clay. Batman can punch at monster forms

[JBatmanFan05]

There's a difference between campy and not a threat. I can see remaking campy villains working if it stays true to the fun or humor of the characters, but doesn't keep them as ineffectual jokes either. If you could keep some of the camp, but update them into real threats, that'd be interesting. But campy villains as are without a little remake? No writer just about will want to use them, and the execs would dissuade them if they did.

I think some campy villains are just best kept for one-shots and flashbacks and brief encounters. I definitely don't want what was done to King Tut in Batman Confid for every similarly campy villain. For some villains, the extent of their real threat shouldn't be too much more.

I'd be fine with an Egghead story where he (costume and all) tries to rob a bank that Bruce happens to be attending as Bruce, maybe he even pulls a gun on Robin and is a real threat in that moment....maybe even hurts and bleeds Robin with a pistol whip to the nose and kick to the gut, but then he loses and is carted off to jail. I could be fine with that, Crazy Quilt was a minor threat like that in the Bronze Age. I don't want Egghead reimagined as a heroin-addicted jazz critic who hates eggs (i.e some edgy grimdark update where he is now a genius black hat hacker who was abused by his overbearing dad and who leaves "eggs" which are actually computer viruses and still retains his egg puns).

I love how Cavalier was used in Knightfall. His accurately ridiculous costume and character, a brief but earnest fight, and he's finished.

Some villains should remain camp/joke villains and should only be allowed to be a threat only so far IMHO.

[Vakanai]

I think some campy villains are just best kept for one-shots and flashbacks and brief encounters.

I agree with that, actually (to an extent), but this is a thread for villains getting to be a big bad. None of the campy villains could be a big bad (or even hold a whole issue unless it's '66) without getting a remake. But not all villains need to be a big bad or have a whole issue true.

I definitely don't want what was done to King Tut in Batman Confid for every similarly campy villain.

What was done to Tut?

For some villains, the extent of their real threat shouldn't be too much more.

I'd be fine with an Egghead story where he (costume and all) tries to rob a bank that Bruce happens to be attending as Bruce, maybe he even pulls a gun on Robin and is a real threat in that moment....maybe even hurts and bleeds Robin with a pistol whip to the nose, but then he loses and is carted off to jail. I could be fine with that, Crazy Quilt was a minor threat like that in the Bronze Age. I don't want Egghead reimagined as a heroin-addicted jazz critic who hates eggs (i.e some edgy grimdark update where he is now a genius black hat hacker who leaves "eggs" which are actually computer viruses).

See, here's where I disagree to an extent. I'd kind of be interested to see what sort of re-imagined, dark and edgy or otherwise, versions could be come up with. I mean, on the one hand, no remake will erase the original appearances, so no real harm done, and some of it might be good and could stick. If done right, hacker Egghead could be a hoot and a half. You never know until it's tried, and if it sucks just skip it. I'd like to see what crazy things would be come up with trying to update some of these guys. Most of it would be terrible, but would probably create some great dumb moments to make fun of. And again, some of it could be great.