The sheer villainy of Ra's al Ghul would be better suited to Matt Reeves's The Batman franchise than he was to Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight trilogy. Given the hugely successful reception of Reeves's take on the Caped Crusader, curiosity continues to build as to which foe among Batman's rogues' gallery the hero will face in The Batman 2 and beyond. With the first movie already debuting the likes of the Riddler, the Penguin, Catwoman, and most surprisingly, the Joker, Reeves still has a plethora of unused Batman villains at his disposal to let loose within his sequels.
One character Reeves could opt to introduce in his franchise is Ra's al Ghul. First appearing in Batman #232 in 1971, the popular foe has become a mainstay within DC Comics lore ever since. Armed with an abundance of knowledge acquired over hundreds of years due to his utilization of the life-extending Lazarus Pits, Ra's al Ghul is also unique for his familiarity with Batman’s true identity. He is a master of both psychological and physical warfare and considers Batman his perfect adversarial counterpart, impressed by the hero's intelligence yet also acutely aware of his weaknesses.
While Ra's al Ghul was previously portrayed favorably by Liam Neeson (and Josh Pence) in Nolan's Dark Knight films, the character would be an even better fit in Reeves's franchise. Pattinson's Bruce Wayne lacks family, friends, and a general ability to maintain relationships — even Bruce and Alfred's relationship in The Batman is fractured at best — making his Caped Crusader ultimately the loneliest screen iteration of the superhero yet. With the death of his parents looming over his head and the majority of his upbringing spent as an orphan, Bruce lacks proper social cues and constraints. His childhood trauma has evolved into self-torture in his adulthood, while his insecurities and fears lead him to fend for himself. Having no one to turn to, Pattinson's Batman could be easily manipulated by Ra's al Ghul, as the villain's father figure facade could trick a broken Bruce into lowering his guard and facing his own inner demons.
With the Riddler exposing the deep-rooted corruption of Gotham at the end of The Batman, there is no better villain to continue the storyline than Ra’s al Ghul. As The Batman fixes a Dark Knight trilogy mistake by turning Gotham into a central character, this sets up the ideal utopia of chaos for Ra's al Ghul to conquer. Neeson’s iteration of Ra's al Ghul in Batman Begins was also hellbent on Gotham’s destruction due to its corrupt infrastructure, yet the character would have an even greater impact within Reeves’s franchise due to the sheer level of corruption depicted and uncovered in The Batman coupled with the character's desire to secure societal balance. Batman turned down an offer to leave the city with Selina Kyle, and now Ra’s al Ghul could inevitably corner the Caped Crusader, forcing him to put back the pieces of a shattered Gotham and further force the hero to decide whether the city and its people are more valuable than his own life.
Pattinson's Batman is radically different than previous incarnations, as Reeves’s vision opts for a younger and more emotional vigilante figure. Ra’s al Ghul’s immense knowledge and wealth of experience would give him a greater advantage over this Caped Crusader, whose naive nature led to a multitude of mistakes for the hero in the first movie. His inability to balance his rage with restraint makes him susceptible to a villain of Ra's al Ghul's stature. And with his young age comes emotional vulnerabilities. Such instability, shown through his erratic decisions and aggressive tactics, would allow the villain to push the hero into matters of life or death. Ultimately, he would force Bruce to think with his mind as opposed to his fists, a trait that Pattinson's version of the Dark Knight in The Batman movies has yet to learn, which makes Ra's al Ghul absolutely well-suited for Reeves's trilogy.
