With those breasts they sport in the comics, I don’t think they qualify as “minor” characters. 
In any event, the Catwoman in the new Halle Berry movie is not the same character from the Michelle Pfeiffer movie. I hear the plot’s got some hand-wave about “nine mystical catwomen”, though whether or not the new movie will tie into the Batman movie is anyone’s guess at this point.
Easy. Just say that the building and the FF member were named after “the famous scientist” who was the FF member’s grandfather. You could even tie in with some of John Byrne’s backstory from the mainstream Marvel universe.
Other than Batman and Robin, I cannot think of any direct movie tie-ins, but one thing I loved about the TV series The Flash was that they often referenced names from other DC franchises. They would send lab samples off to be tested at S.T.A.R. Labs, or they would send a fax to Carter Hall at the Midway City Museum, or some other reference that casual viewers would miss, but we fanboys would drool over.
Yes, nearly all characters owned by DC or Marvel are considered to be “created by and owned by” the company itself, the corporate entity.
There are some exceptions; DC’s Vertigo line allows for some ownership by the actual creators, as did Marvel’s defunct Epic line… but the creators of Superman and Batman are all dead, and while they did have some lucrative deals, they signed over their ownership of the characters before I was born.
There is another reason for the lack of crossovers, though: sheer money.
…then putting both of them in the same movie is going to dent the hell out of the salary requirement, yes? Particularly if we’re hiring even more name actors for support roles (Ed Asner as Perry White, Teri Hatcher as Lois Lane, Burt Reynolds as Alfred the Butler, Patrick Stewart as Lex Luthor, Debbie Lee Carrington as Catwoman…)
Then we release “BATMAN ETERNAL,” starring Flex Buffly, and it makes a hundred million dollars.
And then we release “SUPERMAN AND BATMAN,” with both of them. Theoretically, it should make two hundred million dollars. If it does not, it will automatically be considered a failure.
Crossovers are old news in comics, but they’re death in the movies. When you see established characters appearing all together in one film, where they’d previously appeared separately, this is a sign that the owners of the trademark are getting desperate, and squeezing the franchises together to milk a few million dollars more out of what is percieved as a dry well (Freddy Vs. Jason, and a dozen old Universal Monsters horror movies, for example).
Under such circumstances, continuity in any meaningful sense between comic characters is totally irrelevant. Any glimpses of it that we get will be stuck in there by the writers as in-jokes and fanboy bait.
i.e. Predator vs. Alien and Freddy vs. Jason?
This strikes me as just common sense. Wilson Fisk has been a “Daredevil villain” for the last 20 years. I haven’t read a Spider-Man title in a long time, but does Kingpin even appear in Spidey’s books at all anymore?
(BTW, unless they recast Affleck, a DD sequel doesn’t appear too likely.)
The only Spidey title I read these days is Ultimate, in which Fisk did appear. a while back, IIRC. Otherwise, your guess is as good as mine.
Well, there was that guy in Hulk, Spider-man & Daredevil that looked a lot like Stan Lee 
That would kick ass.
Universal recently did something comparable with “Van Helsing.” Despite it’s failings, I somehow don’t think that will deter anyone.
(Sigh, and I’m still hoping a Certain Phrase will eventually stop being used on the SDMB.)
Well, as others have noted, it’s unlikely that the Marvel movies will be ever explicitly connected to the same continuity, if for no other reason than that they’re being licenced by different movie companies.
However, I will add that the new CGI Spider-Man TV series, which is apparently based on the Spider-Man movie, they did use the Kingpin as a villain, once…and he did seem to be based on Michael Clark Duncan.
Wait a minute…according to my research, it actually WAS Michael Clark Duncan guest starring as the Kingpin in the series. So, there’s a loose connection for ya’ right there. (Not to mention all the other Marvel villains who’ve shown up on the series, and an offhand reference to the X-Men or two.)
That’s true. You can thank the fact that television and movie licenses are entirely different entities, for that one, I’d wager. Unfortunately the upcoming Spider-Man sequel will almost undoubtedly retroactively place the nifty animated series out of the continuity of the Spider-Man movie franchise, even if it was lined up with the first movie - I don’t think Dr. Connors has become the Lizard by the time Spidey 2 opens, and I’d wager there will be some surprises in the film that prevent one from placing the animated series after it.
Batman & Robin may have been bad, but it wasn’t THAT bad!
Superman IV- We desperately need a pukey smiley!