Nolan...add Robin!!!!!!

[Triadkd]

Look face it robin is as important to batman as alfred. Everyone blames robin for ruining the last two bat films but that couldnt be farther from the truth. The only problem with robin in BF and BR was that he was to old. This is supposed to be a comic book movie, so make it like comic book and add the boy wonder. He doesent have to be robin, I would settle for dick grayson, as long as he is living with bruce by the end of the film.

[Mr_Mortis]

Oh dear me.... there are far too many threads on this topic.

Nolan's already suggested it is highly unlikely that Robin will make an appearance in the films, while he is directing...

[Boom]

:dry:

[DorkyFresh]

dejavu


in a bad way.

[The Kid]

No more super kids please. Stick to batman's story.

[Two-Face]

Freddie is back!!!!!!!! OH NO!!!!!!!

[Darknightnomis]

I always thought Robin Leech would be a good Alfred! :oldrazz:

http://www.ujnews.com/images/leech.jpg

[Excel]

Bwahahahhahahahahaha~!~!~!~!~!~!~!!!!!!!!!!!

[batmaluco]

http://www.collectmad.com/collectibles/541060494.jpg

[Catman]

Spiderfreddie is back! And, to think everyone thought he was gone for good :(

[L0ngsh0t]

Isn't Bruce Wayne Supposed to be like 32 in the movies or something like that? I think we got at least 8 years to go before robin can make an apperance

[Two-Face]

Isn't Bruce Wayne Supposed to be like 32 in the movies or something like that? I think we got at least 8 years to go before robin can make an apperance


No in the film Bruce turned 30. in real life bale is 31.

[afan]

No more super kids please. Stick to batman's story.

Robin is an integral part of Batman's story.

Problem with Robin in the film franchise is the time between the film productions and the unstoppable aging process, an authentically aged Robin(13 or so) in one film would be closer to NightWing age in a following film.

[L0ngsh0t]

No in the film Bruce turned 30. in real life bale is 31.

Legistics my friend I used the words "like 30" cause I wasn't to sure, but thanks for the clairification:cwink:

[Kebab gud]

Nolan....... ignore Triadkd!

[L0ngsh0t]

Nolan....... ignore Triadkd!

Lol

[CConn]

Isn't Bruce Wayne Supposed to be like 32 in the movies or something like that? I think we got at least 8 years to go before robin can make an apperanceWhy? In the comics, Robin came into the picture when Batman was like 27.

[saint sinner x]

Robin will not work in Nolan's vision. Like bale said back in the days, "Having robin in the trilogy will make batman campy and not dark". I think that says it all if you want robin you can go accused joel schumacher for messing it up. So take robin out of your dreams....

P.S. No robin, No superman, No nothing just Batman kicking ass and claiming names.

[Saint]

Isn't Bruce Wayne Supposed to be like 32 in the movies or something like that? I think we got at least 8 years to go before robin can make an apperance
You think wrong. Batman took on Robin in his late twenties.

[The Chairman]

While I'm not as anti-Robin as everyone else seems to be, at this point in the game he's not right. Bruce is still in his early stages as Batman, for him (well, Nolan) to bring in Robin at this point would be kind of stupid. He should appear at the earliest in the fourth film, if there is a fourth film, which I somehow doubt.

[Fenrir]

Nolan...add robin!!!!!!

Nolan: "Sorry, does not compute."

[StorminNorman]

Look face it robin is as important to batman as alfred. Everyone blames robin for ruining the last two bat films but that couldnt be farther from the truth. The only problem with robin in BF and BR was that he was to old. This is supposed to be a comic book movie, so make it like comic book and add the boy wonder. He doesent have to be robin, I would settle for dick grayson, as long as he is living with bruce by the end of the film.

The only problem with Robin in the 90's films is that:

A. He was poorly written
B. He was too old
C. They chose the actor that played him by asking kids at a comic convention who would win in a fight Chris O'Donnel or Leo DiCaprio.

So basically, take away everything they did with Robin in the 90's and he was a pretty good character.

I would agree though, Dick Grayson and Robin is important to Batman - just not an early career Batman.

[StorminNorman]

Robin will not work in Nolan's vision. Like bale said back in the days, "Having robin in the trilogy will make batman campy and not dark". I think that says it all if you want robin you can go accused joel schumacher for messing it up. So take robin out of your dreams....

P.S. No robin, No superman, No nothing just Batman kicking ass and claiming names.

I think not including these characters takes away from Batman as a character.

[saint sinner x]

Batman is a one man show Norman, at least in the Batman Begins trilogy.

DARKNESS!!!!!!!!!

[StorminNorman]

Batman is a one man show Norman, at least in the Batman Begins trilogy.

DARKNESS!!!!!!!!!

I see no reason why Dick Grayson can not be added at the end of BB3, if done like it was in Dark Victory.

Robin is an important character to Batman and he can very easily work in the Begins universe because it works in The Animated Series and Current Comics (both very similar to Begins as far as feeling goes).

[Nepenthes]

After B3 they'll need to wait a while before starting a new trilogy. Any new movies will have to be in a different tone to Nolans stuff, a new approach, an extension. So why not age Batman and introduce Robin? Make a 'Robins Begins' of sorts, and by trilogies end he is Nightwing.

Agree Robin is integral to Batman lore. But you don't have to a be genius to see why Nolan won't use him.

[Katsuro]

TDK is far too early for Batman to take on an apprentice. Give him some experience on his own before you have him training someone else.

That said, I am a fan of the Robin character, and would love to see him done on screen, in due time. Robin's a character who has this terrible image in the eyes of most people, and a movie would do well to show them that he's not the same campy little kid he was in the 60's. Of course, dont cast a 20-something actor either.

[COMPO]

Oh dear me.... there are far too many threads on this topic.

Nolan's already suggested it is highly unlikely that Robin will make an appearance in the films, while he is directing...

No he said that the idea 4 or 5 films away.

[COMPO]

actually, i think Batman 4 would be a good way to bring robin in. I mean if our theories are true and thej oker kills rachael and scars dent. Then, Batman will start becoming brooding and becoming too dark. Now, when he see dick alone it reminds him of himself. He adopts him but, because at this point he is that obsessed he doesn't have time for him.

Dick finds out who Bruce is and wants to join. Be his partner. Bruce says he works alone. He doesn't want a partner.

1) because he's a loner.

and

2) because he's trying to protect dick.

Alfred knows that dick could try and get revenge and loose himself. He takes him under his wing and mentors him. A sort of pre-batman.

unknown to Bruce, dick gets the gear from Fox pretending taht Bruce is taking him spelunking and base-jumping. Fox is sceptical but, gives it to him. And robin is born. He follows batman and tries to persuad him to train him and let him be his partner. Batman won't budge which results in arguments with the two. Bruce only look out for Dick's well-being.

In an attempt to prove himself. Dick goes out into the night to fight crime. He stumbles on a drug deal. And by shear beginners luck, he defeats the drug dealers. And makes the papers. Batman sees that Robin has potential and agrees to train him as long as he understands that he listnes to batman and if batman feels taht something is too dangerous for dick, he'll back off.

[batmaluco]

No in the film Bruce turned 30. in real life bale is 31.
He is actually 32, almost 33. He was born in January 30, 1974.

[El Payaso]

The problem is big.

The solution, simple: No Robin.

[Warhammer]

This is early Bats.

Hell no to Robin.

[raybia]

Ok.

I am a Robin fan, especially of Tim Drake's Robin.

However, I think that Robin is somewhat problematic of a character for Nolan's series.

First of all, in Nolan's World, which is very close to our world, if you are using a teenager under the age of 18 that is child endangerment and regardless of how "skilled" he may be, its just irresponsible for Bruce to even put himself in that position. This isn't a game. Even Batman himself faces the possibility that he won't make it home alive on any given night.

Second, Batman is a grown man who has been preparing for his one man "war on crime" for a big portion of his life. (In Nolan's movie I think Bruce has been training for at least 10 years at the time of BB.)

It seems like an complete insult that the audience is suppose to buy in to the belief that some 13-15 yrs kid can come in an be on par with Batman, just because he has some acrobatic skills.

Its also an insult to Nolan's Bruce Wayne.

What Batman is able to do as the Dark Knight Detective should be near impossible to duplicate by anyone else, especially by a kid who has been trained even by Batman for only a year or two.

I know it works in the comics, but movies are a different medium.

Is it impossible for it to work?

No, I don't think so.

Is it worth the box office risk to try to make it worth?

Well, after the laughfest of Batman Forever and the complete and utter embarressment of B&R, I just don't see WB or Nolan taking the chance.

I highly doubt we will never see Robin in a NOLAN movie.

Is it possible that Nolan could do a little foreshadowing in the 2nd sequel by adding Dick Grayson to the cast?

Yes, possible, but highly unlikely based on previous comments about the character.

I think we will see Robin back in this series when WB runs out of ideas of stories for Batman. That is traditionally, what Hollywood does when a T.V. show or movie franchise begins to run out of steam. If you have to do that, its just time to shut it down.

In other words, adding kids to a storyline that didn't really have a place for them originally, is the beginning of the end.

So lets hope that the Batman series can remain strong to where producers don't even feel a need to resort to a comic book character that just doesn't fit into the world that Nolan created.

I'm sure by the time when Robin is added, Nolan's vision will be dead anyway.


Plus, I still think there are countless movie that can be made with just Batman that would still remain Box office gold if the commitment is there.

Bond is still going strong after 21 movies...and they didn't even have to resort to giving him a Junior Partner!!

[Kebab gud]

the problem with Robin (all of them) is that there too campy..
the only sidekick of any DC hero that can come off as an good Movie character is Mia Dearden aka Speedy II the new Side kick of Green Arrow..

http://braveandthebold.net/characters/8091_art.jpg

if they are going to add some supporting Heroes in the next Batman movies then i think its better for them to add HEROES not sidekicks..
There are alot of heroes that have history in gotham othen then Batman.
Black canary, Huntress, etc

I belive that Nolan takes alot of inspiration from DKR so maybe adding Green Arrow issent a bad idea..
But I dont belive that Nolan is going to add any sidekick or hero into his Batman movies,

[COMPO]

hey, what did you think of my idea for robin?

[saint sinner x]

Robin cannot work well into the Nolan universe. Robin is just straight up campy he won't make it dark. I think they dick grayson should just have a cameo in the third one without him being robin just for the audience to acknowledge that robin exist in the Batman universe. Remember guys, Batman Begins is a movie based on a comic book it's not a comic book movie.

[Keyser Sushi]

What? Two pages?

THIS THREAD NEEDS AN ENEMA!

FWOOT!

[COMPO]

No! Not Another Emema!

[COMPO]

Do you think that his RObin would fit in Nolan's universe:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/35/Red_robin.gif/100px-Red_robin.gif (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Red_robin.gif)
http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Red_robin.gif)
Red Robin of Kingdom Come (1996). Art by Alex Ross (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Ross).

[batman7289]

im thinking that the closest thing to robin will be a hint at the end of batman begins 3 and/or bruce going to the circus meeting dick. that's about it.

[Keyser Sushi]

This is the Edsel of threads.

If Satan had the runs, it would be this thread.

The rule should be you can only post in this thread while wearing boxing gloves.

paewpl;fvzdpo[ewqop[er
'awzfmdvb';az
FRPalsbfgo';dsaovgl,l;o'wsgpF
ZSvlrzges5opkalp
fg[po;wkl[s'
g

[El Payaso]

Do you think that his RObin would fit in Nolan's universe:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/35/Red_robin.gif/100px-Red_robin.gif (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Red_robin.gif)
http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Red_robin.gif)
Red Robin of Kingdom Come (1996). Art by Alex Ross (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Ross).

That didn't even fit Kingdom Come.

A future realistic Space Ghost flick maybe?

[batmaluco]

lol

[Saint]

the problem with Robin (all of them) is that there too campy..
Try reading a modern Batman comic before saying stupid stuff like this.

[Keyser Sushi]

Try reading a modern Batman comic before saying stupid stuff like this.

Amen. :up:

[Katsuro]

The problem is big.

The solution, simple: No Robin.

See, this is why these Robin debates are always lame. No matter what argument is given for him, nearly every anti-Robin comment is no more than a couple of sentences. "Robin is lame!" "no Robin" "Robin sucks!". Yeah, we get it, you dont like him. Try saying something else for once, perhaps try to explain yourself.

[El Payaso]

Most of us have grown tired of explaining the many reasons why Robin sucks once and again. You sure you wanna hear them yet again?

[Katsuro]

Most of us have grown tired of explaining the many reasons why Robin sucks once and again. You sure you wanna hear them yet again?

I asked, didn't I?

[drunkhomer]

people who want robin are prolly people who still havent gone through puperty yet

[Keyser Sushi]

I am not anti-Robin. In fact I have no real problem with Robin.

HOWEVER... there is at least one good reason I can think of not to include him in this series, and it's very simple: it divides the fanbase. Everybody who likes Batman is fine with him solo. Some people also like him with Robin, and some people hate Robin. Some people like Robin but only if he bears no resemblance to Robin; and that's just dumb. People who want Kingdom Come Robin or Robin to be grown and wear all black... you people sicken me.

Let me ask you. People think that Batman having a young boy with him is "gay." (Despite the obvious point that, biology aside, it's actually a father-son relationship). But if Robin is grown, then... well... now THAT would much more likely raise questions of homosexuality, wouldn't it?

Again, dividing the friggen fanbase. I am so sick of this argument.

And there it is. A movie is designed to reach a wide audience, so Robin won't be near it, I think.

With that said, there is no absolute as to whether Robin is a good thing or a bad thing; the only absolute is that if he's done poorly, he is very very crappy. If he is done well, he's a good character.

Period. End of discussion.

[Keyser Sushi]

people who want robin are prolly people who still havent gone through puperty yet

I have not found that to be a rule of thumb... and I've had 30 years to observe this.

1.) Of course young children like Robin
2.) Teenagers do not like Robin
3.) Adults, such as myself, are often open-minded about Robin, on the condition that he is done well and not poorly.
4.) Robin won't be in the series.

END OF FRIGGEN DISCUSSION.

[batboy99]

i totally agree with you keyser,i like robin too,i wouldnt mind him being in a film but at the same time i dont want him in one.I hate that people say that batman and robin are gay,its clearly a father-son relationship,he took in robin after his parents were murdered and raised him like a son,you dont see batman getting all cozy with him or something.lol you know what i mean?anyway what im trying to say is that i wouldnt mind seeing robin but i doubt nolan will introduce him any time soon

[StorminNorman]

DrunkHomer, you are an idiot - period.

Robin is an important character to Batman, Robin represents the change Batman makes in Gotham. Robin is a lighter character because Batman has made the enviroment in Gotham lighter than it was when it had no hope in the world, when it had no Batman.

Robin would make a good character in a movie because it allows us to see Bruce deal with himself as a child, since Dick Grayson and a young Bruce Wayne are very similar. Also this character is a big reason why Batman does not become a bitter, twisted, paranoid man - which, despite what modern-pre infinite crisis Batman showed, is a good thing.

Now Robin can WORK in a movie by first establishing him as Dick Grayson. We should see Dick hurting, he feels alone, Bruce can not get close to him because of his duty as Batman and because he is not willing to share his secret to his new ward. Dick should have his mind set on revenge and Batman should have to save him from while Dick runs off to avenge his parents. Seeing that his boy is dead-set on revenge, Bruce should train him to make sure he does not get hurt and allow him to help him take down the boy's killers, with no intention of having him as a side kick. Bruce does see promise in him and eventually decides to use him as a scout, doing tasks that he can not do (never being in actual physical confrontations) until eventually Dick is old enough to fight.

Or atleast that is how I would do it...

[Keyser Sushi]

^I'm 19, and I don't know if you consider me a teen but I have no prob with Robin, if done right. Same goes for my friends, at least the ones who like comics, movies, and comic movies.

By 19 I was fine with Robin. When I was in high school I had my doubts about him. Well, publicly, I did. Because I had to seem cool. Privately I was glad Tim Drake showed up.

No. It would be just like if a single adoptive father raised an orphan.

Yes, as long as Robin is a CHILD. If Robin is grown, he does not need a FOSTER HOME, does he?

[StorminNorman]

Drake's my fave.
Before I graduated 2 years ago, there wasn't really any comicwars. People were more interested in technology and rap/hip hop music

He does till he's at least 18 according to the law.:o

Cant you become emancipated at 16?

[El Payaso]

I asked, didn't I?

You can ask applepie and a cup of tea for what I care, no one has to give you what you ask. But since there are some interesting post here, not from you naturally, I'll reply to those.


Let me ask you. People think that Batman having a young boy with him is "gay." (Despite the obvious point that, biology aside, it's actually a father-son relationship). But if Robin is grown, then... well... now THAT would much more likely raise questions of homosexuality, wouldn't it?

I don't think adult Batman and kid Robin is homo. It's more like pedo.

Again, dividing the friggen fanbase. I am so sick of this argument.

Me too. But can you believe some people still ask for detailed reasons they have read thousands of times before?

Robin is an important character to Batman, Robin represents the change Batman makes in Gotham. Robin is a lighter character because Batman has made the enviroment in Gotham lighter than it was when it had no hope in the world, when it had no Batman.

I try to make a sense out of this: Robin is lighter because Batman made Gotham a lighter city.

One would say a lighter city represents a lighter city better than a colorful 15 y.o. character since we're talking about darkness and Batman.

Robin would make a good character in a movie because it allows us to see Bruce deal with himself as a child, since Dick Grayson and a young Bruce Wayne are very similar. Also this character is a big reason why Batman does not become a bitter, twisted, paranoid man - which, despite what modern-pre infinite crisis Batman showed, is a good thing.

This is probably the ponly good reason that can justify Robin. Or at least a younger character in the story.

Now Robin can WORK in a movie by first establishing him as Dick Grayson. We should see Dick hurting, he feels alone, Bruce can not get close to him because of his duty as Batman and because he is not willing to share his secret to his new ward. Dick should have his mind set on revenge and Batman should have to save him from while Dick runs off to avenge his parents. Seeing that his boy is dead-set on revenge, Bruce should train him to make sure he does not get hurt and allow him to help him take down the boy's killers, with no intention of having him as a side kick. Bruce does see promise in him and eventually decides to use him as a scout, doing tasks that he can not do (never being in actual physical confrontations) until eventually Dick is old enough to fight.

What you say here is what I saw in B Forever. Forever handled Robin better than I thought they could.

What won't work for me is Bruce trying to be a full time father (is there any other kind?) for years and at the same time to have a secret alter ego that can be unmasked or shot to death any night.

Not to mention no judge in the world would give a 8 or 9 y.o. kid to a 30 something womanizer rich bachelor that happens to burn his own house.

[StorminNorman]

I try to make a sense out of this: Robin is lighter because Batman made Gotham a lighter city.

One would say a lighter city represents a lighter city better than a colorful 15 y.o. character since we're talking about darkness and Batman.

Compare Dick Grayson to Bruce Wayne. Bruce Wayne lost his parents and then decided to, instead of enjoying the fortune he had been given, to dedicate himself to fighting crime. He grew up training instead of having a childhood and grew up to be a dark man, until he met Robin - and even then he is still haunted.

Dick Grayson lost his parents and then was adopted into a life of luxury. However instead of deciding to use this to live an easy life, he vowed to get revenge. He grew up training instead of having a true child hood. However he had more hope for the future and grew up to be a much lighter character than Bruce. I credit that to Batman.

What you say here is what I saw in B Forever. Forever handled Robin better than I thought they could.

What won't work for me is Bruce trying to be a full time father (is there any other kind?) for years and at the same time to have a secret alter ego that can be unmasked or shot to death any night.

Not to mention no judge in the world would give a 8 or 9 y.o. kid to a 30 something womanizer rich bachelor that happens to burn his own house.

But Batman Forever made Robin come off as a jerk, and he was too old for my liking. Also there was never a good Bruce Wayne that could make that relationship work.

As far as your last comment goes, I do agree - Robin could not be done right after Batman Begins. Bruce Wayne must change his public image to make Dick Grayson feasable.

[Keyser Sushi]

I don't think adult Batman and kid Robin is homo. It's more like pedo.

Is a single man raising a son a pedophile? I didn't know that. :o

Me too. But can you believe some people still ask for detailed reasons they have read thousands of times before?

LOL. I think the reasons and corresonding details are fewer than advertised, but you do make some good points in this post. I'll be addressing them shortly:

What won't work for me is Bruce trying to be a full time father (is there any other kind?) for years and at the same time to have a secret alter ego that can be unmasked or shot to death any night.

I actually have no response to that. Good job.

Not to mention no judge in the world would give a 8 or 9 y.o. kid to a 30 something womanizer rich bachelor that happens to burn his own house.

That's true, but I don't think a judge has to be involved. We've had this discussion before but it doesn't really have to be a LEGAL adoption. If Dick's a circus kid he has no tax record and does not really exist on file in any city or state or country. So no judge is likely to ever have to decide where the kid will life, as the kid (and the circus) will likely have their own opinions on that matter and nobody to tell them otherwise.

[Catman]

This thread is still active? Geez, no wonder Spiderfreddie always returns. You guys add fuel to the fire.

[El Payaso]

Is a single man raising a son a pedophile? I didn't know that. :o

Son? Didn't know that. We're talking of a 10 y.o. kid and a guy that he never saw before. Sounds Michael Jackson pedo.

That's true, but I don't think a judge has to be involved. We've had this discussion before but it doesn't really have to be a LEGAL adoption. If Dick's a circus kid he has no tax record and does not really exist on file in any city or state or country. So no judge is likely to ever have to decide where the kid will life, as the kid (and the circus) will likely have their own opinions on that matter and nobody to tell them otherwise.

Bruce Wayne, Batman, doing straight ILLEGAL stuff? To dedicate your whole life to fight corruption just to use it for yourself?

You say if Robin's parents die, suddenly the world would ignore he exists at all because of the legal papers? Judges and institutions will appear and if not, it would be Bruce's duty to take the kid to justice or it would be stealing a human being.

[Keyser Sushi]

Son? Didn't know that. We're talking of a 10 y.o. kid and a guy that he never saw before. Sounds Michael Jackson pedo.

So people who adopt children are pedophiles?

Bruce Wayne, Batman, doing straight ILLEGAL stuff? To dedicate your whole life to fight corruption just to use it for yourself?

I think that's kind of a grey area. If it's illegal to take a person into your home and feed them, give them shelter and clothing, then hell, it's illegal to be a good Christian.

You say if Robin's parents die, suddenly the world would ignore he exists at all because of the legal papers? Judges and institutions will appear and if not, it would be Bruce's duty to take the kid to justice or it would be stealing a human being.

I'm saying the Graysons are basically gypsies. The world doesn't know he exists to begin with, unless he has a police record.

[El Payaso]

So people who adopt children are pedophiles?

30 y.o. womanizer playboys with no wife and no life probably are. Anyway I said it 'sounded' pedo.

I think that's kind of a grey area. If it's illegal to take a person into your home and feed them, give them shelter and clothing, then hell, it's illegal to be a good Christian.

If this includes to train the kid for dangerous fighting and keeping him forever, I'd doubt if it's good christianity or whatever. Anyway, there is a legal system for important reasons.

I'm saying the Graysons are basically gypsies. The world doesn't know he exists to begin with, unless he has a police record.

So the circus is made up of just the Graysons. Because if it's there any other human being in the circus I'm sure they'll take a basic care for little Dick.

[Katsuro]

I'm saying the Graysons are basically gypsies. The world doesn't know he exists to begin with, unless he has a police record.

To play devil's advocate for a bit, in all fairness I think he'd be noticed following his parents death. His parents die in front of a crowd, I find it hard to imagine someone woujldn't look into the kid. This is why I think it should be given more time, like until the fourth movie, to really change Wayne's public image. He has to recover from the house-burning incident so he'll be allowed to take him in.

Also, I'd like it if Bruce didn't adopt Dick straight away. Instead of just on the spot taking the kid in, what if he went to an orphanage, and sought revenge on his own? He encounters Batman later (who was perhaps keeping an eye on him just in case) and that's when he decides to help him.

[Kritish]

Look face it robin is as important to batman as alfred. Everyone blames robin for ruining the last two bat films but that couldnt be farther from the truth. The only problem with robin in BF and BR was that he was to old. This is supposed to be a comic book movie, so make it like comic book and add the boy wonder. He doesent have to be robin, I would settle for dick grayson, as long as he is living with bruce by the end of the film.

Robin shouldn't even be allowed inside of a comic page might as less the silver screen. What makes you think any child service agency in the world would let some boy live alone in a mansion with a Billionare?

Stop making threads like this.

[COMPO]

Robin shouldn't even be allowed inside of a comic page might as less the silver screen. What makes you think any child service agency in the world would let some boy live alone in a mansion with a Billionare?

Stop making threads like this.

Hye, there's Alfred.

[El Payaso]

And I don't blame Robin for ruining 2 movies but the Batman concept.

[COMPO]

I don't think adult Batman and kid Robin is homo. It's more like pedo.

Mate, you have the mentallity of a retarded glove puppet. Have you ever watched Goodnight Mr. Tom? Or read that book? It's good heart-warming sotry. Are you calling that sixty year old man who comes to love that poor orphan who is beaten by his mum as son a pedo.

Though, if they do bring Robin in they should do that. Dick Grayson, being forced on Bruce Wayne because social services can't be bothered with him. Bruce wants to help the boy and is so consumed with being batman that he sometimes ignores him and Robin sort of reminds batman of what it was like to be a child. And they form a bond.

Bruce sees him as the brother and son he's never had.

[Mito88]

Look face it robin is as important to batman as alfred. Everyone blames robin for ruining the last two bat films but that couldnt be farther from the truth. The only problem with robin in BF and BR was that he was to old. This is supposed to be a comic book movie, so make it like comic book and add the boy wonder. He doesent have to be robin, I would settle for dick grayson, as long as he is living with bruce by the end of the film.

Ban.

[El Payaso]

You're the Robin of SHH

[Saint]

Bruce Wayne, Batman, doing straight ILLEGAL stuff? To dedicate your whole life to fight corruption just to use it for yourself?
Everything Batman does is illegal, genius. He's a vigilante. He's guilty of property destruction, resisting arrest, breaking and entering, theft, speeding, reckless driving, and about 40,000 counts of assault, among other things.

Batman breaks the law to do what is right, and if adopting Grayson had to be done illegally, that's what he would do.

[COMPO]

Ban.

http://media.nelonen.fi/w_airplane_150.jpg

Surely, you can't be serious.
http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/images/airplane7.jpg

I am serious. And don't call me shirley.

[El Payaso]

Batman breaks the law to do what is right, and if adopting Grayson had to be done illegally, that's what he would do.

Not in this franchise. :woot:

[metkalfe]

He can get his own franchise.

[Darko]

If RObin is anywhere near this franchise I will kill Nolan.

[El Payaso]

He can get his own franchise.

Excellent. So I know exactly what movies not to see.

[El Payaso]

Bale will kill Nolan if he was thinking of Robin for this franchise.

[Darko]

Bale would kill you before you get a chance.:o

Won't happen. I'd go Metal gear solid on his ass. :ninja:

[Max Shrek]

I like Robin in the comics, but on film, it just wouldn't work. There's no way a man serious about fighting crime would endanger the life of a 14 year old every night. It's just silly and in a lot of ways, disturbing on Batman's part.

[Ronny Shade]

Robin is very doable.

But I don't want Nolan doing Robin if he doesn't want to. It'll feel forced.

I'd also like a Superman cross-over.

[Keyser Sushi]

30 y.o. womanizer playboys with no wife and no life probably are. Anyway I said it 'sounded' pedo.

I think if he's a womanizer it's probably a given that he's straight and likes them well-grown. :D


If this includes to train the kid for dangerous fighting and keeping him forever, I'd doubt if it's good christianity or whatever. Anyway, there is a legal system for important reasons.


You're right, of course. But I never claimed that the fighting part was good Christianity. Just that helping a down-on-his-look person is. And of course there's a legal system for important reasons. But people slip through the cracks every day. Just ask the guy on the median strip holding a cardboard sign. :o

So the circus is made up of just the Graysons. Because if it's there any other human being in the circus I'm sure they'll take a basic care for little Dick.

Absolutely. I'm sure there are circumstances under which the circus folk could be persuaded to believe that Bruce was good for Dick. Or circumstances under which Dick might actually run away from the circus to pursue vengeance. But whatever the case, you are, of course, basically right. I'm just pointing out ways in which your scenario could be violated by creative writing. :D

[TheShadow]

Nolan U Fool Dont Listen To This....fool?

[Katsuro]

Not in this franchise. :woot:

Yeah, Batman would never do anything illegal, like... you know... vigilanteeism. The cops were totally just chasing Batman cuz they wanted to ask him where he got his sweet car.

[Anjow1060]

SpiderFreddie is back! My good great bestest friend. Me and him get along so well. Oh and look! He made ANOTHER robin thread. Wow, that one actually caught me off gaurd this time. [sarcasm/]

[Eros]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/79/GRRRR_.jpg/150px-GRRRR_.jpghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d4/Burt_ward.jpg/150px-Burt_ward.jpg

[Katsuro]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/79/GRRRR_.jpg/150px-GRRRR_.jpghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d4/Burt_ward.jpg/150px-Burt_ward.jpg

http://www.autogramm.com/img/batman.jpghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b2/Batman1966_1.gif

Look, Batman looks lame too! No Batman in the Nolan films either!!!

[Kritish]

Everything Batman does is illegal, genius. He's a vigilante. He's guilty of property destruction, resisting arrest, breaking and entering, theft, speeding, reckless driving, and about 40,000 counts of assault, among other things.

Batman breaks the law to do what is right, and if adopting Grayson had to be done illegally, that's what he would do.

Bruce can't even take care of himself well enough, he hardly needs another human being to watch out for.

[Triadkd]

First of all batman didnt train all over the world in BB like the comics. He stole a few boxes and then met Ra's. So it's not like it would make batman look weak by comparison. There's no reason a master like bruce shouldnt be able to teach a star athlete who is in better shape than the average adult male.
Unfortunatley nolan has made it nearly impossible to add robin to the film. IMO nolan has the same problem as singer. He thinks he's to good for a comic film and try's to base it in "reality". I wish he would have based gothams atmosphere more on the burton films. In burtons films gotham feels like another charachter. You could believe that somewhere out there was a guy dressed as clown, a thief wearing a catsuit, rumors about a reptile man in the sewer, and a young acrobat who looked up to batman.

[El Payaso]

Yeah, Batman would never do anything illegal, like... you know... vigilanteeism. The cops were totally just chasing Batman cuz they wanted to ask him where he got his sweet car.

No Robin in this franchise. :woot:

[James Bond 007]

Robin simply HAS to appear in this franchise at some point in some form. He's been in the comics since Batman's 12th appearance in 1940. He's ESSENTIAL. There HAS to be some way of going about introducing him without going down the Burt Ward/Chris O'Donnell route. Or, God help us, the Douglas Croft/Johnny Duncan route. By the way, Johnny Duncan's still alive. He turned 83 on Thursday and the last movie he made was Spartacus back in 1960. He played "Beheaded man". Wow, give that man a Lifetime Achievement Award. Or, better yet, do him a favour and log on to his official website, http://www.originalrobin1949.com/ , God knows nobody else has.

[ultimatefan]

I believe it was Goyer who said Robin is a very problematic character for a realistic take on the character. It´s not just the legal issue, but the ethical issue of Batman allowing a teenager to put his life at risk. Plus the presence of Robin with Batman and Grayson with Bruce raises even more the suspicion that Bruce is Batman. And Robin´s costume is one of the hardest ones to translate to film.

[ultimatefan]

Robin simply HAS to appear in this franchise at some point in some form. He's been in the comics since Batman's 12th appearance in 1940. He's ESSENTIAL. There HAS to be some way of going about introducing him without going down the Burt Ward/Chris O'Donnell route.
Robin is far from being an unanimous character, he´s loved by some fans and hated by others.

[Angry Sentinel]

Just posting so that I can watch the deterioration of this thread.

*pulls up chair, gets popcorn*

[batmaluco]

It is known that Bale doesn't like Robin as well as it is suspected that Nolan also not.
So, why bother if it is probably not going to happen anyway, while Nolan and Bale are in this franchise?
So, to make this thread in "The Dark Knight (Spoilers)" section... :down

[James Bond 007]

I think it's a shame that Bale and Nolan, or, as I like to call them, the two Chrissies, are so against Robin, if it's true that they are of course. I mean, ok, let's face it, both of them are gonna have to move away from the series at some point (Tobey Maguire is already saying that Spider-Man 3 may be his last, Chris Bale may decide the same after he does another 2), but the idea that Robin may appear only after a new actor and director have been hired bears a startling resemblance to an event that happened in the mid 1990's, which is just too distasteful to mention, so I for one hope that the two Chrissies will start talking amongst themselves about ways that maybe at some point Robin can realistically be introduced, cos I just think a Batman who NEVER has Robin, forgive the use of the word has, just is being a tiny bit disrespectful to the character's history.

[Adam West]

I think one of the main problems with Robin is not HIS character, but the fact that Batman letting him operate goes against Batman's character.

Batman would NOT let an adolescent run around in a bright outfit, and fight criminals that are tough for even Batman to handle most of the time.

I don't care how much Robin's tragedy echoes Batmans, Batman just wouldn't go for it.

The only feasible way that Nolan would put Robin in would be that his parents are killed by the Joker in TDK, and he comes up with the robin identity to get the Joker, independent of Batman. Joker would kill Robin in 3, making Bruce realize that the symbol of Batman is more influential than he thought, and that his war on crime will have casualties.

[COMPO]

what if they made it like batman beyond were Bruce is reluctant to allow him to fight crime. But, Robin convinces him to let him. And they should make the relationship like B:TAS, that had to be the best relationship. How they were always arguing. They should do that because Bruce is a loner. And in the films he'll let Robin help out every now and again. But, when he feels its too dangerous he stops him. Causing arguments with Robin feeling the strain of getting Batman's acceptance and respect.

[James Bond 007]

Sorry, should have been a little clearer, by the character's history I meant Batman's history, of which Robin is an integral part.

EDIT: Nah, Robin shouldn't be independent of Batman, he should either be at his side or not there at all. And if they do introduce him in TDK, which I don't think will happen and I don't want to happen either, they sure as hell shouldn't kill him off in number 3. The idea of Robin being a casual sidekick from time to time never appealed to me either. It just smacks of "tonight's special guest star" kinda stuff. Paul Dini (how is that pronounced, is it like linguini?) on the BATMAN special edition DVD says "I think when Bruce looks at Robin, he sees a young man of tremendous potential who can do much to help the common good, but I think also he sees somebody who, left to his own devices, could be a potential threat and somebody he might have to face as an adversary some day, so isn't it better that I take this young man and guide him and teach him how to martial and hone his great skills and use them as a force for good rather than leave an angry bitter young man of great physical power out there on the streets on his own?"

[El Payaso]

So, to make this thread in "The Dark Knight (Spoilers)" section... :down

Because it's spoiling the section?
cos I just think a Batman who NEVER has Robin, forgive the use of the word has, just is being a tiny bit disrespectful to the character's history.

A Batman WITH a Robin is a HUGE disrespect to the chatacter.I think one of the main problems with Robin is not HIS character, but the fact that Batman letting him operate goes against Batman's character.

It is actually both, Mr. West.

[James Bond 007]

I think it all really comes down to which one of Batman's creators liked Robin, and which one you have the most respect for. I for one respect Bill Finger the most. Sure Bob Kane came up with the original concept, but is it fair that he take ALL the credit? I mean, let's face it, Finger even basically designed the costume. And I HATE, absolutely HATE, HATE, how the history of Batman documentary on the BATMAN special edition DVD implies that Kane created him all on his own and hired Finger later, when the success of the character made him realise Batman was more than just a one-man job. JESUS.

[Adam West]

Gordon is the new Robin.

[James Bond 007]

Oh God No

[raybia]

I have to agree with Ronnie.

If Nolan doesn't want Robin then I don't want Robin because it would feel forced.

Dick/Robin can be introduced after the Nolan trilogy and ONLY if they can do it in a rational way (or as rational as giving a Billionaire Playboy who fight crime at night dressed as a Bat who has a teenager as his sidekick can be.)

Right now, it just way too early anyway.

[James Bond 007]

I agree on both counts, it's too early, and it HAS to be done as RATIONALLY and as REALISTICALLY as POSSIBLE. I just think it's a shame Nolan doesn't wanna do it.

[Two-Face]

And he doesn't have to, end of.

[afan]

The only question to ask is.... can a serious film/story be told about a relationship between an adult and a child?

The answer is yes.

Literature and film history are rife with examples. The basic dramatic concept is sound, and has been applied to characters in numerous settings. Why then should a Batman film by it's nature alone be exempt from a proven dramatic device?

[James Bond 007]

I know he doesn't have to, I just want him to, and I'm saying it's a shame he doesn't want to, but, c'est la vie, my last post of the day, I'm a first class newbie, yay me, I'll be back tomorrow to do another 30 posts, and the next day to do another 30 posts, until I get my avatar. I have to do 300 posts. JESUS.

EDIT: Hey, I'm not a first class newbie, I'm a Side-Kick, yay me.

[El Payaso]

Holy jeebus man.

[raybia]

The only question to ask is.... can a serious film/story be told about a relationship between an adult and a child?

The answer is yes.

Literature and film history are rife with examples. The basic dramatic concept is sound, and has been applied to characters in numerous settings. Why then should a Batman film by it's nature alone be exempt from a proven dramatic device?


Well, if its going to be done, then the model for this relationship should be from the movie, "The Road to Perdition.



http://www.impawards.com/2002/posters/road_to_perdition.jpg








Otherwise, forget it.

[Abe Rush]

The only question to ask is.... can a serious film/story be told about a relationship between an adult and a child?

I think that putting it this way is a bit too simplistic... The dynamic between Batman & Robin in the same movie is more than just a simple relationship between an adult and a child. When looked upon this way, it's easy to say that it's more than do-able, but the problem comes when you add the fact that the child in question in the relationship is physically able to follow a grown man on his day to day run to rid the streets of bad guys and is able to do battle against thugs and thiefs of all shapes and sizes. THAT's where it becomes somewhat unbelievable... I don't think it's ever been about "making a relationship between an adult and a child work" on the big screen, but rather managing to add an element like Robin without making the movie somewhat cheesy or corny.

There lies the "real" problem... ( and I'm not saying it's impossible )

[Angry Sentinel]

^I think Raybia gave a great example of the same elements you just described. Road to perdition was excellent btw.

[Saint]

Robin is easy. You make him support for Batman--he's the one doing surveillance, recon, things like that. He's the one coordinating with Batman from the cave, from the car, or somewhere out of danger. He would only enter combat situations against Batman's will, if at all. Also, he should probably be sixteen.

[Abe Rush]

Robin is easy. You make him support for Batman--he's the one doing surveillance, recon, things like that. He's the one coordinating with Batman from the cave, from the car, or somewhere out of danger. He would only enter combat situations against Batman's will, if at all. Also, he should probably be sixteen.

I do think this would be the best way to go...
In my mind, Robin shouldn't be out there fighting crime with Batman ( not at his age ), he should be doing recon work for him. Maybe he could be an expert in computers of some sort...

[afan]

I think that putting it this way is a bit too simplistic... The dynamic between Batman & Robin in the same movie is more than just a simple relationship between an adult and a child. When looked upon this way, it's easy to say that it's more than do-able, but the problem comes when you add the fact that the child in question in the relationship is physically able to follow a grown man on his day to day run to rid the streets of bad guys and is able to do battle against thugs and thiefs of all shapes and sizes. THAT's where it becomes somewhat unbelievable... I don't think it's ever been about "making a relationship between an adult and a child work" on the big screen, but rather managing to add an element like Robin without making the movie somewhat cheesy or corny.

There lies the "real" problem... ( and I'm not saying it's impossible )



Isn't Batman unbelievable already.......the character doesn't guarantee a believable treatment, he can also be successfully put in high camp.
The inclusion of Robin doesn't guarantee camp, just like Batman it depends on the treatment.

Dramatically the inclusion of a child in an adults life usually performs two functions:
Saves the adult from a less than desirable life path
or
The adult saves the child from same.

As we all know the Robin character introduces both these devices; a two-fer-one dramatic bonus.

[raybia]

Isn't Batman unbelievable already.......the character doesn't guarantee a believable treatment, he can also be successfully put in high camp.
The inclusion of Robin doesn't guarantee camp, just like Batman it depends on the treatment.

Dramatically the inclusion of a child in an adults life usually performs two functions:
Saves the adult from a less than desirable life path
or
The adult saves the child from same.

As we all know the Robin character introduces both these devices; a two-fer-one dramatic bonus.

Robin is easy. You make him support for Batman--he's the one doing surveillance, recon, things like that. He's the one coordinating with Batman from the cave, from the car, or somewhere out of danger. He would only enter combat situations against Batman's will, if at all. Also, he should probably be sixteen.


Add both of these to the "Road to Perdition" model and its very doable. I think it would make him a little younger. 14 or 15.

[Ronny Shade]

Robin should be a ******

"I'm Dick Grayson, *****!"

[Kritish]

Robin is simply not realistic it would be like adding Killer Croc.

[maxmccumber]

The amazing thing is that Tim Burton wanted Marlon Wayans to play Robin in BR and before he left the director's chair of BF. Imagine what that would have been like, hmm....Nolan is so reluctant to introduce Robin because he got a lot of credit for reviving the franchise from the embarrassment of B&R and doesn't want to screw it up.

[Katsuro]

The amazing thing is that Tim Burton wanted Marlon Wayans to play Robin in BR and before he left the director's chair of BF. Imagine what that would have been like, hmm....Nolan is so reluctant to introduce Robin because he got a lot of credit for reviving the franchise from the embarrassment of B&R and doesn't want to screw it up.

Now imagne how much credit he'd get for doing a damn good Robin on film.

[El Payaso]

Anyone that can make a good thing out of a crappy character deserves a monument.

[Keyser Sushi]

Anyone that can make a good thing out of a crappy character deserves a monument.

I could write a great Robin origin; something both faithful to the comics and yet serious and dramatic and respectful to Batman's character. I wrote a novel that features a sociopathic protagonist who does wind up, against his will, having to look after a kid, who has latched onto him to be the strong paternal role-model he lacks. It can be done. It can be done well. The kid can be used to give insight into the main character.

It really isn't that complicated.

[StorminNorman]

Anyone that can make a good thing out of a crappy character deserves a monument.

I have been saying Jeff Loeb has needed one for years...or atleast since I saw Heroes for the first time.

[Walks Unseen]

Robin is an integral part of Batman's story.

Problem with Robin in the film franchise is the time between the film productions and the unstoppable aging process, an authentically aged Robin(13 or so) in one film would be closer to NightWing age in a following film.

No. The problem with Robin is that he just dosen't work in a Batman film. He works very well in the comic books but he just dosen't work in the Batman films.

[El Payaso]

Yeah man. I mean, no.

[Eros]

If Batman can work a teenger in a bird outfit can work. They just need to make moviegoers understand why bruce would endanger the life of a kid.

[Riven]

Why can't some people seem to understand we want BATMAN's story, not that of Batman AND ROBIN ?

There is SOOOOOO much to do with Batman's character before any Robin should show up, so let's do that FIRST, shall we?

[afan]

No. The problem with Robin is that he just dosen't work in a Batman film. He works very well in the comic books but he just dosen't work in the Batman films.


It worked in Temple of Doom.........that is if you can accept the comparison(Batman and Robin/ Indie and Short Round), which I believe is valid.

[Angry Sentinel]

If Batman can work a teenger in a bird outfit can work. They just need to make moviegoers understand why bruce would endanger the life of a kid. I had an idea about Robin that I think the audience would love, but comicheads would hate it. :o

[Myrddin_Emrys]

Why can't some people seem to understand we want BATMAN's story, not that of Batman AND ROBIN ?

There is SOOOOOO much to do with Batman's character before any Robin should show up, so let's do that FIRST, shall we?

Hey thanks for speaking up for me.. no wait.. you mean YOU want Batmans story, believe it or not some people want both Batmans and Robins story.
If done correctly, Robin could be a very good move on Nolans part.

[Kebab gud]

like it was for Schumacher?

[Myrddin_Emrys]

like it was for Schumacher?

Difference being, that wasnt a Robin done correctly. And dont try to troll of my posts :)

[Two-Face]

Why can't some people seem to understand we want BATMAN's story, not that of Batman AND ROBIN ?

There is SOOOOOO much to do with Batman's character before any Robin should show up, so let's do that FIRST, shall we?



I agree, not I hate Robin I want Batman solo in Nolan's Films.

[Superman4ever]

I could write a great Robin origin; something both faithful to the comics and yet serious and dramatic and respectful to Batman's character. I wrote a novel that features a sociopathic protagonist who does wind up, against his will, having to look after a kid, who has latched onto him to be the strong paternal role-model he lacks. It can be done. It can be done well. The kid can be used to give insight into the main character.

It really isn't that complicated.

yet you're not published...:ninja: :o

[Triadkd]

I want robin and so do alot of other people. Using the S word as an excuse is stupid. Unless you like how batman,riddler,two face, freeze,ivy,bane,and batgirl were portrayed. It's all in the execution, the only question is if nolan can do it.

[COMPO]

In Nolan We Trust!

[COMPO]

hey, where was Bruce's parents killed in the film. Crime alley or in the heart of Gotham.

[Kebab gud]

Crime alley ..

[Triadkd]

We have his origin and he is commited. He told gordon he would never need a thank you and would always be around. So unless nolan pulls a complete singer on us and batmam leaves gotham because of some rumor he heard there's no more that needs to be said. So bring on robin.

[StorminNorman]

Why can't some people seem to understand we want BATMAN's story, not that of Batman AND ROBIN ?

There is SOOOOOO much to do with Batman's character before any Robin should show up, so let's do that FIRST, shall we?

Adding Robin would only add on to the story of Batman. In fact the only way to use Robin, IMO, is to make him a side character - not a main character. Keep the story about Batman, just have Robin included.

[L0ngsh0t]

Adding Robin would only add on to the story of Batman. In fact the only way to use Robin, IMO, is to make him a side character - not a main character. Keep the story about Batman, just have Robin included.

Robin does show the humanity in Bruce, taking him in as an orphan, it shows a compassionate side of him towards the fact that they are the same. I just don't think we are that far into Batman's story yet

[Abe Rush]

Would Robin fans be willing to exclude the "crimefighting" aspect of Robin out of the movie, in order to let's say... "favor" his addition to the movie? Because honestly, we don't see 13 yrs old kids kicking the rear ends of gangsters everyday.

[L0ngsh0t]

Yeah, I think if he where introduced in pt 3 as like a 15 year old kid, and then by like pt 4 (if it where to happen) Dick Grayson at lik 18 could join Batman

not saying it has to, I am just saying how it could go down

[Katsuro]

Yeah, I think if he where introduced in pt 3 as like a 15 year old kid, and then by like pt 4 (if it where to happen) Dick Grayson at lik 18 could join Batman

not saying it has to, I am just saying how it could go down

That could work, although i'd maybe subtract a year or two from both ends (adopted at 13, Robin at 16). I mean, Batman cant just take this kid in and the next day he's ready to kick ass on the streets. Batman needed years of training, Robin will need years of training. Also, this would allow Dick to be young at the time of his parents deaths, which is very important, and it would allow him to be older and more believable as a crimefighter when he actually dons the costume.

Why can't some people seem to understand we want BATMAN's story, not that of Batman AND ROBIN ?

There is SOOOOOO much to do with Batman's character before any Robin should show up, so let's do that FIRST, shall we?

I think most people here can agree that the second film is too early for Robin. Batman's just starting out, it shouldn't be until his character takes a dark turn and starts losing his humanity that he needs Robin. He should also be much more experienced, as it'd be kinda lame if he ended up needing a partner after less than a year of being Batman.

[L0ngsh0t]

Yeah, I am not anti robin, I just do not see how in any way Bruce Wayne is ready to take in a kid, nor is there any need in the movie for a second hero.

[grimlock]

To be realistic if I remember correctly didnt they say they will develop a background for the Joker too?
How can we ignore Bruce,Batman,Alfred and Gordon if some fans want to include Robin and a young Selina Kyle.
It will be a copout on the important core characters,the plot and convoluted. We wont care about these characters if many of them start popping right and left.
There's also a possibility of Harley appearing so Im for no Robin and Selina Kyle.

[Saint]

You'd rather have Harley than Robin or Selina? You're demented. I'm sorry, but Robin and Selina are important characters.

[Keyser Sushi]

yet you're not published...:ninja: :o

And what do you do for a living?

[Keyser Sushi]

Would Robin fans be willing to exclude the "crimefighting" aspect of Robin out of the movie, in order to let's say... "favor" his addition to the movie? Because honestly, we don't see 13 yrs old kids kicking the rear ends of gangsters everyday.

If they are, they aren't Robin fans.

Let me make this perfectly clear: I'm just as happy NOT to have Robin in these movies. But it's not because I don't like him. I like him fine. I just prefer Batman solo.

That said, if Robin is going to be done, he ought to be done right, or not at all. So no, I would not think it prudent to give up the crimefighting aspect of Robin just to have him in the movie.

That'd be like making a Batman movie where Batman was dressed as an iguana and fought crime by shooting baseballs out of his sphincter at terminal velocity. Would you be willing to give up the things that make the character who he is, just to have him onscreen?

I'd have to say no.

[Kid.]

What about casting suggestions, if the character actually did make it into the movies?

[El Payaso]

Talking about casting Robin makes me feel like it's going to happen. *shudders*

[Katsuro]

What about casting suggestions, if the character actually did make it into the movies?

It's too early. Anyone who'd wind up playing Robin by the time he's introduced would be far too young now, probably not even acting yet.

[Eros]

I think people would not have a problem with Dick Grayson being in one of the movies, just you don't need him to become Robin.

[Kid.]

It's too early. Anyone who'd wind up playing Robin by the time he's introduced would be far too young now, probably not even acting yet.

Excellent point.

[Taiwarriorz21]

I would be nice if Nolan could just introduce him. I know the kid in the Narrows had to be his cameo.

[Freedom77]

Nolans already said NO ROBIN!! There is no need for a robin. IMO a robin would destroy everything.

Robins just camp, theres no way round that.

[Saint]

For stupid writers, maybe. Talented writers have been using Robin camp free for thirty years.

[El Payaso]

Talented directors have been not using Robin for 20.

[Saint]

I suppose that's because they're cowards. Either that our they're stupid enough to believe the "ROBIN IS ONLY TEH CAMPY" rhetoric spewed by the unimaginative and ignorant people on these boards.

[COMPO]

come on, Nolan always does something different to the characters. He'll do it with Robin. He'll make him accessible to today's standards.

[El Payaso]

I suppose that's because they're cowards. Either that our they're stupid enough to believe the "ROBIN IS ONLY TEH CAMPY" rhetoric spewed by the unimaginative and ignorant people on these boards.

Or decades of coimic books showed them what a bad idea is to have a teenie colorful sidekick ruining a dark and ambiguous character.

come on, Nolan always does something different to the characters. He'll do it with Robin. He'll make him accessible to today's standards.

According to Nolan himself, he won't.

[COMPO]

That's Been Your Argument For Ten Years!!

[El Payaso]

Still works.

[COMPO]

No It Doesn't. It Just Shows How Idiotic You Are That You Can't Even Come Up With An Argument That Has Facts Quotes And An Explanation! How The **** You Got Out Of School I Do Not Know?

[El Payaso]

Easy pal. One would say that capitalizing every word and being a Robin fan would make you a happy boy. :hyper:

[Saint]

Or decades of coimic books showed them what a bad idea is to have a teenie colorful sidekick ruining a dark and ambiguous character.

I'm not going to bother arguing with someone who chooses to ignore the past twenty years of Robin stories, and who wants to cut out an integral part of the Batman mythos. You obviously don't care about the truth of the matter--if you did, you would pick up any modern Batman comic and see how Robin can be done well by talented writers who understand the character and his importance to Batman. No, you'd rather be ignorant and bleat "OMG TEH ROBIN IS TEH CAMPY!" as if "Batman & Robin" is the definitive version of Dick Grayson.

Furthermore, you must think the Nolans to be pretty incompetent writers, if you think they can't concoct a workable version of Robin, as lowly comic book writers have been doing for years.

[BH/HHH]

No need for Robin, not a big fan of the character at all.

[Saint]

What stellar reasoning. What's next, "No need for Alfred or Gordon or Joker, not a big fan of them at all."

[raybia]

Would Robin fans be willing to exclude the "crimefighting" aspect of Robin out of the movie, in order to let's say... "favor" his addition to the movie? Because honestly, we don't see 13 yrs old kids kicking the rear ends of gangsters everyday.

No that would be robbing the fans. Robin should not be engaging criminals in hand to hand combat but it should inadvertenly happen.

I see Robin being like Harry Potter from the 1st book. Very green but full of potential and occassionally exhibits flashs of brilliance. Then he grows greatly in his ability with each movie. Robin begins more as a liability for Batman but after 2 or 3 movies, he really comes into his own.

Actually, the growth and progression of Luke Skywalker from Esp. 4 to Esp. 6 would be the model to use.

[raybia]

Green? :confused:

inexperienced.

[Abe Rush]

Saint, I know you're getting tired of hearing that Robin isn't a good character and that he shouldn't be done on film, but I'm starting to feel a aweful lot of anger and frustration coming from your part that doesn't seem quite healthy.

I have absolutely no quarrel with Robin, but the reason why I don't want to see him in a movie is because I have difficulty believing that a 13 years old can beat grown adults... that's all. If you see Robin as being somewhat older than that ( 18-22 ) then maybe, but come on...

[raybia]

I figured that much, but why call inexperience green? :confused:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Inexperienced

Just an old expression. A figure of speech.

[Saint]

I have absolutely no quarrel with Robin, but the reason why I don't want to see him in a movie is because I have difficulty believing that a 13 years old can beat grown adults... that's all. If you see Robin as being somewhat older than that ( 18-22 ) then maybe, but come on...
Perhaps you recall responding to a post of mine where I addressed this very point, on page five. Go back and read it. Perhaps you should write it down, so you don't forget about it a second time.

[Abe Rush]

Perhaps you recall responding to a post of mine where I addressed this very point, on page five. Go back and read it. Perhaps you should write it down, so you don't forget about it a second time.

I didn't forget someone had said that, I just didn't think it was you... you seem so utterly frustrated right now that I thought you cared too much about Robin to have him have somewhat of a different "use" in the story. No need to get your panties in a bunch.

[Saint]

I'm not frustrated at all. I'm just rude. Learn to deal.

[Abe Rush]

I'm dealing just fine... it's just... sad :oldrazz:

[Saint]

Whatever you say, champ.

[Abe Rush]

Glad to hear you're okay with it Capt'n.

[raybia]

Awww, the Hype is such a happy loving place!

[The Last Meatbag]

A 14 year old Robin would work, helping out with detective work, forensics, recon work, maybe even the batmobile for a get away...There's tons of uses for Robin...You see a fourteen year old kid, you don't think of a threat, wait until he kicks your knee in and his mentor floats down to finish the job..

[El Payaso]

I'm not going to bother arguing with someone who chooses to ignore the past twenty years of Robin stories, and who wants to cut out an integral part of the Batman mythos. You obviously don't care about the truth of the matter--if you did, you would pick up any modern Batman comic and see how Robin can be done well by talented writers who understand the character and his importance to Batman. No, you'd rather be ignorant and bleat "OMG TEH ROBIN IS TEH CAMPY!" as if "Batman & Robin" is the definitive version of Dick Grayson.

Furthermore, you must think the Nolans to be pretty incompetent writers, if you think they can't concoct a workable version of Robin, as lowly comic book writers have been doing for years.

So this is you when you don't bother to argue. :hyper:

Ok, I guess I shouldn't argue with people that ignores that Nolan and Bale are the ones not wanting to work with Robin and still insults people in here like we're guilty for that.

[Saint]

Ok, I guess I shouldn't argue with people that ignores that Nolan and Bale are the ones not wanting to work with Robin and still insults people in here like we're guilty for that.
Actually, what I'm insulting you for is suggesting that Robin "ruins" Batman.

[El Payaso]

I'm not suggesting, I'm denouncing.

[BH/HHH]

Well why don't we just get rid of Alfred and Gordon while we're at it? Batman doesn't really need to get Gordon to give him case files, he can just sneak into the station and get them himself. And Alfred? Batman really has no need for him. Bruce can answer doors, get himself food, etc.



:rolleyes:

what the feck does Robin bring to the batman character?

if anything he makes him look less scary to his opponents. its just cheesy.

[Saint]

Yeah, I wonder if maybe Batman's adopted sonmight be important to Batman? I wonder if the entire surrogate family theme that has been consistent in Batman for over sixty years might be important?

You know, I have to wonder if the people saying things like this even read comics. I can't fathom somebody picking up a Batman or Robin comic today and then saying such stupid, baseless things. Robin is the most important supporting character Batman has, period.

[raybia]

Yeah, I wonder if maybe Batman's adopted sonmight be important to Batman? I wonder if the entire surrogate family theme that has been consistent in Batman for over sixty years might be important?

You know, I have to wonder if the people saying things like this even read comics. I can't fathom somebody picking up a Batman or Robin comic today and then saying such stupid, baseless things. Robin is the most important supporting character Batman has, period.



I agree with your comments. To simply exorcise Robin from Batman on film forever is not respecting the 60+ years of source material. A source material that Nolan is known to have respect for.

Does this means that Nolan is obligated to bring Dick Grayson or Robin into his series?

No.

Does it mean that he shouldn't do anything that would prevent the addition to the character in the future?

Yes

Does it mean that WB is obligated to bring Robin to the series in the future?

No. However they are obligated to try and make it work within the framework established in the new series.

With all of that said, I'm still not an avocate for Robin in this series...at least no time soon. Even though I do like the character. We all know that Batman did have a career for a time without Robin so I don't see the big deal having 3 or 4 movies with him solo.

I also think that Alfred is the most important supporting character that Batman has, and then Gordon. I would put Robin 3rd on my list.

[Fisher02]

Robin is okay in the comics, but add him into the movies, and you could mess up the whole franchine. Although Robin wasn't the reason bat-movies went downhill after Batman Returns.

It could have worked better, if it wasnt for the fact Batman Forever/ Batman & Robin were aimed for the customers, who want Happy Meal with toys.

If I were to introduce Robin into the franchine, I would skip the Robin part of his side-kickhood, and have a go with his Nightwing persona.

[raybia]

Robin is okay in the comics, but add him into the movies, and you could mess up the whole franchine. Although Robin wasn't the reason bat-movies went downhill after Batman Returns.

It could have worked better, if it wasnt for the fact Batman Forever/ Batman & Robin were aimed for the customers, who want Happy Meal with toys.

If I were to introduce Robin into the franchine, I would skip the Robin part of his side-kickhood, and have a go with his Nightwing persona.


Good points! Welcome to the Hype!

[JStorm]

I'm not frustrated at all. I'm just rude. Learn to deal.


Every member should read this quote before he or she signs up.

[COMPO]

Easy pal. One would say that capitalizing every word and being a Robin fan would make you a happy boy. :hyper:

I'm not a robin fan. I just want to see a different take on the character. And that addy you have. Fits with you like a glove doesn't.

[COMPO]

hey, do you know how batman's cape turns into wings. What if robins turned into sort of bird wings. Like theres teh tail at the back and the wings.

[Saint]

Does this means that Nolan is obligated to bring Dick Grayson or Robin into his series?

No.
Agreed. As I have said in that past, I won't be terribly inconvenienced--annoyed, maybe--if he doesn't appear in Nolan's film. I just really hate this attitude that he's a "horrible character" or "can't be done."

[raybia]

Agreed. As I have said in that past, I won't be terribly inconvenienced--annoyed, maybe--if he doesn't appear in Nolan's film. I just really hate this attitude that he's a "horrible character" or "can't be done."


I hear you.

Previous stories have proven that Robin can be a horrible character depending on how he is written but the same can be said about Batman.

[Mike_D202]

I dont know why everybody is bashing the idea of Dick Grayson. Nolan could do a damn good job with the story if he wanted too. Bruce could see him as himself when he was a kid and try to work with Grayson to turn the anger and sadness into something else.

[JStorm]

I don't quite remember where this rumor orginated; but I do remember a post or thread about the new Batman series being like that of Bond. In other words, three films with one cast and crew, and then three more with another cast and crew. And so on.

With that said, I wouldn't mind a well cast, well written , well acted, well directed Robin. He, Robin, could appear in the last arc of the BB era, or show up in later films. I wouldn't mind the first three films to be a character study of Batman's first years, as it has been. Then have Robin show up at the end of the BB era, or at the beginning of the second triolgy. Hollywood and the WB have a goldmine on their hands. Three films for one cast and crew to say what they want to say, and then three others for another cast and crew to say what they want to say.

In short, I look at it like this: We get story arcs in the comics a la three issues, six issues, and/or twelve issues. The WB could break-up the movies like that idea.

Long story even longer, if done right, the WB could have a few great trilogies on their hands with a great side project cultivating within said trilogies to become a great movie unto itself: Nightwing.

[El Payaso]

I hear you.

Previous stories have proven that Robin can be a horrible character depending on how he is written but the same can be said about Batman.

But even the Adam West Batman was better than the Burt Ward Robin even when they were - IMO - very poorly written/directed.

I dont know why everybody is bashing the idea of Dick Grayson. Nolan could do a damn good job with the story if he wanted too. Bruce could see him as himself when he was a kid and try to work with Grayson to turn the anger and sadness into something else.

The thing is that Nolan stated he doesn't want to work with Robin. SO your first line should be 'I dont know why Nolan doesn't like the idea of Dick Grayson.'

And I surely wouldn't like to see Batman forgetting his inner demon and turning into a loving father and a new sweet sense of life and stuff that Batman is not supposed to be.

[raybia]

But even the Adam West Batman was better than the Burt Ward Robin even when they were - IMO - very poorly written/directed.






I was referring really about the comic book stories.

[El Payaso]

^ Ah, ok, but I took that to the filmic level I guess. Since that's Nolan's field.

[Saint]

And I surely wouldn't like to see Batman forgetting his inner demon and turning into a loving father and a new sweet sense of life and stuff that Batman is not supposed to be.
You clearly do not understand the dynamic between Batman and Robin.

[El Payaso]

I was just replying to a specific statement.

[Saint]

Oh, I didn't notice. Apologies.

[Eros]

You clearly do not understand the dynamic between Batman and Robin.

Whats to understand? Bruce gave a Nine year old orphan a home, and then he trained this said 9 year old to fight dangerous criminals rapists,muggers,drugdealers,ganglords,pedophiles, and lets not forget crazed clowns. Yep whats not to understand, Bruce is a maniac who uses kids on his crusade for justice. Even after his second "Robin" died, he stil decided to train yet another 12 on his crusade. Batman may possible be they dumbiest character in comics, next ot all the othe other heroes with teen sidekicks ofcourse [Green arrow,Flash etc]. No wonder why superman didn't respect him when they first met.

[Keyser Sushi]

Whats to understand? Bruce gave a Nine year old orphan a home, and then he trained this said 9 year old to fight dangerous criminals rapists,muggers,drugdealers,ganglords,pedophiles, and lets not forget crazed clowns. Yep whats not to understand, Bruce is a maniac who uses kids on his crusade for justice. Even after his second "Robin" died, he stil decided to train yet another 12 on his crusade. Batman may possible be they dumbiest character in comics, next ot all the othe other heroes with teen sidekicks ofcourse [Green arrow,Flash etc]. No wonder why superman didn't respect him when they first met.

Each and every one of those characters had to earn the right to be Robin. Batman did not want to have them out there fighting crime with him. But each of them proved their worthiness. Tim Drake's arc, of becoming Robin, was really quite good, because with Jason's death on his conscience, Bruce was dead set against letting Tim join his crusade.

The first time Tim put the Robin suit on, it was the OLD suit, and he STOLE it out of the Batcave. Alfred and Dick helped him, behind Bruce's back. And when Bruce caught him, he was PISSED.

Only when Bruce realized he couldn't stop Tim, did he do the next best thing. He sent Tim to Europe and had him meet one of Bruce's old mentors. If he can't stop him from wanting this lifestyle, then he can at least prepare him for it. That acceptance also came with the new Robin suit (designed by Neal Adams).

"Dick made that suit a symbol. Jason died wearing it. That's a burden you shouldn't have to bear."

[Mike_D202]

And I surely wouldn't like to see Batman forgetting his inner demon and turning into a loving father and a new sweet sense of life and stuff that Batman is not supposed to be.

umm...Bruce is FAR from a loving father figure. In fact he feels sorry for the kid because, in turn, hes seeing himself. So I'll have to agree with the poster above: You definately dont understand the dynamic between Batman and Robin.

[El Payaso]

umm...Bruce is FAR from a loving father figure. In fact he feels sorry for the kid because, in turn, hes seeing himself. So I'll have to agree with the poster above: You definately dont understand the dynamic between Batman and Robin.

You described a relationship where the man sees himself in the kid and tries to make him an improved extension of himself so he could change "the anger and sadness into something else." Loving father qualifies for that.

You definitely don't understand the dynamic of your own.

[COMPO]

The thing is that Nolan stated he doesn't want to work with Robin. SO your first line should be 'I dont know why Nolan doesn't like the idea of Dick Grayson.'

Yeah. I'm sick off that. It's not he doesn't want to use robin it's just:

"The studio wasn't interested in Robin. We weren't either. This is a young Batman, so Robin's a few films....not for a few pictures anyway. Dick Grayson's still in a crib somewhere. I seriously doubt I will even be involved when Robin's in the franchise" says Nolan.

That is the only reason that Nolan wasn't iterested in Robin. Because it was a young batman. Plus, he also said about bring robin in and not making it campy:l

Let me try a philosophical way of asking: Could Robin be introduced without dumbing down the series?

CN: "Possibly, but I can’t really talk about specifics."

[El Payaso]

Of course Nolan doesn't want to be disrespectful and his explanation does make sense.

But if Nolan wanted he could introduce Robin right now. Don't fool ourselves.

[COMPO]

how doesn't it make sense?

[Eros]

Each and every one of those characters had to earn the right to be Robin. Batman did not want to have them out there fighting crime with him. But each of them proved their worthiness. Tim Drake's arc, of becoming Robin, was really quite good, because with Jason's death on his conscience, Bruce was dead set against letting Tim join his crusade.

The first time Tim put the Robin suit on, it was the OLD suit, and he STOLE it out of the Batcave. Alfred and Dick helped him, behind Bruce's back. And when Bruce caught him, he was PISSED.

Only when Bruce realized he couldn't stop Tim, did he do the next best thing. He sent Tim to Europe and had him meet one of Bruce's old mentors. If he can't stop him from wanting this lifestyle, then he can at least prepare him for it. That acceptance also came with the new Robin suit (designed by Neal Adams).

"Dick made that suit a symbol. Jason died wearing it. That's a burden you shouldn't have to bear."

If batman wanted to stop Drake from being robin, im pretty sure he could have done it in a day. I like the Robins, but i damn sure dun understand the mindset of Bruce Wayne. Jason todd died, it effected him, you would think he would never take that chance again. He did, and guess what he allowed another 12 year old to become Robin. It was for laughs in the silver-age of comics, because most silver-age batman stories before the gothic 70s era lacked any kind of sense. Even in a comic book, i find it mind boggling that Wayne would keep getting young teens[or pre-teens] to help him fight crime...its just freaking odd. This guy is suppose to have this code, about not killing his enemies in cold blood, but his "hero code" says nothing about endangering the lives of under-aged kids:huh: .

So it not only makes batman look like a complete idiot,irresponsible guardian, but he also comes off as a hypocrite. He came down hard on Wonderwoman for killing, yet Batmans the one that trains kids to send them to their pontential deaths fighting crime buy his side.

[COMPO]

but, the trained they won't get hurt will they?

[raybia]

but, the trained they won't get hurt will they?

All those Americans dying in Iraq? They were trained by the best Military in the world.

[Eros]

but, the trained they won't get hurt will they?

Your logic is very flawed.

[COMPO]

what i mean is that you know if he's stealthy like batman. He'll knocking a lot of them out and then taking out teh weaker ones not really getting into any harm. Besides, his training with Bruce would be even more harmful, i can't see him going easy on him.

[Eros]

what i mean is that you know if he's stealthy like batman. He'll knocking a lot of them out and then taking out teh weaker ones not really getting into any harm. Besides, his training with Bruce would be even more harmful, i can't see him going easy on him.

your logic is still flawed friend. Bruce trains him, he does not fire automatic weapons at him, he doesn't try and kill or possibly rape him. He doesn't toture he with knives, or tie him up and beat him until someone arrives to save him. .

[Katsuro]

The point is, Robin is more likely to survive trained by Batman and working with him, then not trained by Batman and seeking revenge on his own.

[Tojo]

but, the trained they won't get hurt will they?

Bruce trained for what, 10 years? 15 years?

But now he expects to train 12-15 yr old kid to enter the same battlefield with about a 3rd of his experience. Absolute rubbish, and this is a very big factor why Robin cannot work in a serious live action film.

I don't believe Bruce should ever be so irresponsible.

[Tojo]

The point is, Robin is more likely to survive trained by Batman and working with him, then not trained by Batman and seeking revenge on his own.

Yeah, this is a very good point.

[Tojo]

You think wrong. Batman took on Robin in his late twenties.

I always disliked this, taking on a side kick within 3 years of starting this gig.

I would have had an ageing Batman start looking around for a partner when he realises he may not win this war, that he's getting on and needs an heir to the throne

[Keyser Sushi]

Bruce trained for what, 10 years? 15 years?

But now he expects to train 12-15 yr old kid to enter the same battlefield with about a 3rd of his experience. Absolute rubbish, and this is a very big factor why Robin cannot work in a serious live action film.

I don't believe Bruce should ever be so irresponsible.

The only reason Dick Grayson was ever physically able to be Robin in the first place is because he was a circus acrobat who risked his life every night in the show. He was alread athletic and acrobatic and had nerves of steel.

Jason Todd, pre-crisis, was a Dick Grayson clone. Jason post-crisis was a street-punk who had a lot of tough in him but didn't have a lot of sense, and, well, he ended up dying because he wasn't really ready.

Tim Drake should have trained a lot more than he did in the comics, and that's a fact. In theory if he's hanging out with Batman he's got one mentor who can teach him what it would otherwise take dozens of men to teach. But Tim barely hangs out with Batman, so that doesn't really play, either.

That's called "convenient forgetfulness" on the part of the writers. They're hoping it extends to the readers...

[StorminNorman]

I always disliked this, taking on a side kick within 3 years of starting this gig.

I would have had an ageing Batman start looking around for a partner when he realises he may not win this war, that he's getting on and needs an heir to the throne

That is a horrible idea very uncharacteristic of Batman. He would never want someone else to share his life. It is, after all, his goal of not being a needed hero.

[Eros]

That is a horrible idea very uncharacteristic of Batman. He would never want someone else to share his life. It is, after all, his goal of not being a needed hero.

^Bruce has let each of the Robins "share" his life.

[Tojo]

That is a horrible idea very uncharacteristic of Batman. He would never want someone else to share his life. It is, after all, his goal of not being a needed hero.

umm what? It's not about finding someone to share his life with, how did you get that from what i wrote? Try reading properly before posting, it really really helps.

I said that Batman may come to a point where he realises he will not be able to do this job forever, and that his war on crime is not going to be won anytime soon-therefore he needs to find another person who will help him and eventually take over if the need arises. Like training a padawan.

[Saint]

What StorminNorman means is that Batman doesn't want Dick to have the life he himself has. He doesn't want Dick to become Batman, because that's a terrible burden. No father wishes that sort of pain and suffering on his son.

Dick became Robin against Batman's wishes, but Batman ultimately allowed it because it was necessary. Dick needed an outlet for all the anger and frustration that stemmed from his parents death, otherwise he would have self-destructed. Furthermore, Batman allowed Dick to maintain the brightly coloured, lighter, Robin persona--instead of one more closely aligned to the Batman persona--because, as I said, he didn't want Dick to end up like himself. He didn't want the darkness to swallow Dick up, too. Bruce wanted to lead Dick in such a way that he would still fight for "the mission" but would benefit from Bruce's experience on the matter, and thus not end up the way Bruce did--alone and miserable.

And it worked. That's why when Dick became Nightwing, he wasn't just a "Batman Junior." Bruce didn't build him that way. He let Dick become his own man.

This works fine for the movie--it's just a matter of making Robin a few years older (sixteen, perhaps) and using him as support/recon for Batman, so he would only enter combat situations against Batman's wishes, or not at all.

[Eros]

What StorminNorman means is that Batman doesn't want Dick to have the life he himself has. He doesn't want Dick to become Batman, because that's a terrible burden. No father wishes that sort of pain and suffering on his son.

Dick became Robin against Batman's wishes, but Batman ultimately allowed it because it was necessary. Dick needed an outlet for all the anger and frustration that stemmed from his parents death, otherwise he would have self-destructed. Furthermore, Batman allowed Dick to maintain the brightly coloured, lighter, Robin persona--instead of one more closely aligned to the Batman persona--because, as I said, he didn't want Dick to end up like himself. He didn't want the darkness to swallow Dick up, too. Bruce wanted to lead Dick in such a way that he would still fight for "the mission" but would benefit from Bruce's experience on the matter, and thus not end up the way Bruce did--alone and miserable.

And it worked. That's why when Dick became Nightwing, he wasn't just a "Batman Junior." Bruce didn't build him that way. He let Dick become his own man.

This works fine for the movie--it's just a matter of making Robin a few years older (sixteen, perhaps) and using him as support/recon for Batman, so he would only enter combat situations against Batman's wishes, or not at all.

None of what you said excuse Bruce Wayne from letting kids fight crime.

[Saint]

I don't really care if it excuses him or not. He doesn't need to be excused. He trained a boy who was so exceptionally skilled that he could fight grown men, and that's that. If Robin had not been skilled enough, Batman would not have allowed him to fight crime.

Furthermore, your point is irrelevant because I pointed out rather clearly that--in the film--Batman shouldn't allow Dick to enter combat situations; Dick would only do it against Batman's wishes, or not at all.

[Eros]

I don't really care if it excuses him or not. He doesn't need to be excused. He trained a boy who was so exceptionally skilled that he could fight grown men, and that's that. If Robin had not been skilled enough, Batman would not have allowed him to fight crime.

Furthermore, your point is irrelevant because I pointed out rather clearly that--in the film--Batman shouldn't allow Dick to enter combat situations; Dick would only do it against Batman's wishes, or not at all.

so want Dick to be like he was in Batman forever [which i liked by the way]?

[Saint]

so want Dick to be like he was in Batman forever [which i liked by the way]?
No, I don't want him to be like he was in Batman Forever because Batman Forever was a campy piece of crap. I want him to be like he is in the comics, with the exception that his duties should be support and recon instead of combat.

[Saint]

Tim Drake should have trained a lot more than he did in the comics, and that's a fact. In theory if he's hanging out with Batman he's got one mentor who can teach him what it would otherwise take dozens of men to teach. But Tim barely hangs out with Batman, so that doesn't really play, either.
Not entirely accurate. While we can assume most of Tim's training took place off-screen, so to speak, also notable is that in his earlier days he fulfilled a support role. Tim has always been played as less of a combatant and more of a detective and computer specialist.

More recently, Batman and Tim spent a year abroad retracing the steps he took to become Batman, and Bruce has legally adopted Tim--so they are spending a great deal more time together.

[dude love]

Look face it robin is as important to batman as alfred. Everyone blames robin for ruining the last two bat films but that couldnt be farther from the truth. The only problem with robin in BF and BR was that he was to old. This is supposed to be a comic book movie, so make it like comic book and add the boy wonder. He doesent have to be robin, I would settle for dick grayson, as long as he is living with bruce by the end of the film.

It's not spiderfreddie, it's Michael Jackson.

[COMPO]

what if at first Robin is fighting crime but, to him its all a game a joke, an adventure if you will. He gets hurt (not too badly) and this could provoke batman into shouting at him and saying: "This isn't a game. If you think it is then, you get yourself hurt or killed. This is serious. Start growing up and stop playing around or you can forget being my partner."

This makes Robin become more focused and being more serious.

[SWAT]

I don't like Robin...

[El Payaso]

I don't really care if it excuses him or not. He doesn't need to be excused. He trained a boy who was so exceptionally skilled that he could fight grown men, and that's that. If Robin had not been skilled enough, Batman would not have allowed him to fight crime.

Furthermore, your point is irrelevant because I pointed out rather clearly that--in the film--Batman shouldn't allow Dick to enter combat situations; Dick would only do it against Batman's wishes, or not at all.

So.... Batman trains Robin for "fighting grown men" but he "shouldn't allow Dick to enter combat situations" because it is "against Batman wishes"?????

Excuse the obviousness here, but.... why training a kid for certain situations if you don't want him to get involved in those very situations?

No, I don't want him to be like he was in Batman Forever because Batman Forever was a campy piece of crap.

Still the plotline can be appreciated independently of the results. Forever was the closest I was on buying this Robin thing. A 16 y.o. Robin and Bruce having in his house as a momentary measure to help the kid to go to a worse place. In the process, Bruce discovers the kid is after revenge and tries to tell Dick to forget about it based on his own experience.

I want him to be like he is in the comics, with the exception that his duties should be support and recon instead of combat.

Support and Recon??? No combat Robin? Then why all the training? Then why not just Alfred o Gordon or Fox, or even better, all of them instead Robin?

[StorminNorman]

^Bruce has let each of the Robins "share" his life.

Yes, because he had to in some form or another.

Dick Grayson - He was looking for revenge, the only way to protect him was to train him and prevent him from getting hurt.

Jason Todd - He came from the streets, training him was (again) the best way to protect him.

Tim Drake - He was smart enough to actually connect the dots and piece together that Bruce Wayne is Batman. He went out looking to become Robin.

What I was getting at is that Bruce would never and should never LOOK for a partner. He doesn't want anyone else to live his life. However if he is put in a situation where he needs to, for one reason or another, he will - at the same time hoping they do not make the same mistakes he has in life.

[StorminNorman]

umm what? It's not about finding someone to share his life with, how did you get that from what i wrote? Try reading properly before posting, it really really helps.

I said that Batman may come to a point where he realises he will not be able to do this job forever, and that his war on crime is not going to be won anytime soon-therefore he needs to find another person who will help him and eventually take over if the need arises. Like training a padawan.

Saint basically summed up what I was going to say.

Again, if Batman goes out to actively find an heir to his legacy (as the Dark Knight), then he IS looking for someone to share his life with. He is asking another to live life with the same burdens he has. Batman would not do that.

[Katsuro]

I don't like Robin...

Thanks for sharing.

[StorminNorman]

None of what you said excuse Bruce Wayne from letting kids fight crime.

I don't think Bruce Wayne initially trained Dick Grayson with the idea that he was getting a Kiddy Crime Fighter. He trained him so that he could take care of himself when it came to seeking revenge on his parents killer. Training that not only made him stronger phyiscally, but mentally (preventing him from killing the man when he tracked him down). Dick Grayson kinda forced his way into partnership after that. I, being fairly Machiavellian, see that the ends justified the means here.

[Abe Rush]

I don't think Bruce Wayne initially trained Dick Grayson with the idea that he was getting a Kiddy Crime Fighter. He trained him so that he could take care of himself when it came to seeking revenge on his parents killer. Training that not only made him stronger phyiscally, but mentally (preventing him from killing the man when he tracked him down). Dick Grayson kinda forced his way into partnership after that. I, being fairly Machiavellian, see that the ends justified the means here.

For some reason, this doesn't seem to make sense...

Instead of simply trying to convince Dick that revenge isn't the solution and that it will only lead to more pain ( or whatever ) he decides to show him how to hurt people while at the same time teaching him that it's not right to kill? In other words Batman DID want to see Dick take revenge... he wanted him to physically hurt everyone that did him wrong, but just not go as far as kill them?!?

... something's not right here.

[StorminNorman]

For some reason, this doesn't seem to make sense...

Instead of simply trying to convince Dick that revenge isn't the solution and that it will only lead to more pain ( or whatever ) he decides to show him how to hurt people while at the same time teaching him that it's not right to kill? In other words Batman DID want to see Dick take revenge... he wanted him to physically hurt everyone that did him wrong, but just not go as far as kill them?!?

... something's not right here.

How can Bruce convince Dick that revenge isn't the answer when he can not convince himself that? Is not a part of his drive in his "war on crime" his drive for revenge?

[Abe Rush]

How can Bruce convince Dick that revenge isn't the answer when he can not convince himself that? Is not a part of his drive in his "war on crime" his drive for revenge?

You think he's still convinced that revenge is the way to go?
We're not talking about the same Batman then...

I'm not too familiar with the Robin era, so I'm not aware if that's how he was when he decided to take Robin under his wing, but I would think Batman would consider revenge as not being the answer before deciding to "train" Robin, no?

[Katsuro]

For some reason, this doesn't seem to make sense...

Instead of simply trying to convince Dick that revenge isn't the solution and that it will only lead to more pain ( or whatever ) he decides to show him how to hurt people while at the same time teaching him that it's not right to kill? In other words Batman DID want to see Dick take revenge... he wanted him to physically hurt everyone that did him wrong, but just not go as far as kill them?!?

... something's not right here.

Since when has Batman's mission just been about beating people up? I dont remember Bruce Wayne's vow to his parents being to hurt people but just not kill them.

[Abe Rush]

Since when has Batman's mission just been about beating people up? I dont remember Bruce Wayne's vow to his parents being to hurt people but just not kill them.

That kind of was my point in my previous post(s)...

He trained him so that he could take care of himself when it came to seeking revenge on his parents killer.

StorminNorman said that Batman teached Robin how to "take care of himself", which in other words means beat people up when it came time for him to "seek revenge"... and when you look at what I posted, I did say that I didn't think Batman still believed in the concept of "revenge", which is why I think it would be odd for him to help Robin in his persuit for revenge, by giving him, in a way, the tools to make it happen.

[Saint]

So.... Batman trains Robin for "fighting grown men" but he "shouldn't allow Dick to enter combat situations" because it is "against Batman wishes"????? Excuse the obviousness here, but.... why training a kid for certain situations if you don't want him to get involved in those very situations?
I was speaking of the comics. Please execute your reading comprehension software, and you should be able to tell that at one point in my post--prefaced by the words "in the film"--I switch from the comics to the film.

Still the plotline can be appreciated independently of the results. Forever was the closest I was on buying this Robin thing. A 16 y.o. Robin and Bruce having in his house as a momentary measure to help the kid to go to a worse place. In the process, Bruce discovers the kid is after revenge and tries to tell Dick to forget about it based on his own experience.
If Forever was the "closest" you've gotten to buying the Robin concept, you clearly do not read the correct comics. Fortunately, this does not preclude them from existing.

Support and Recon??? No combat Robin? Then why all the training?
Even though I addressed this above, I would mention that Robin should still receive combat training for safety reasons.

Then why not just Alfred o Gordon or Fox, or even better, all of them instead Robin?
Because those characters are not Robin. Those characters are not Batman's son. The reason I want Robin in the movie is because he is an important character, he is a part of Bruce Wayne. Removing Robin is like removing Thomas Wayne. You're cutting out a part of his family, a person who affects who he is. This is a basic truth of storytelling.

[Katsuro]

That kind of was my point in my previous post(s)...



then if you can accept that Batman's mission isn't to just beat people up, why can't you accept the same about Robin? Batman doesn't train Robin to make bad guys hurt, he trains him to channel his anger and frustration into a force for good. It's about more than just making himself feel good, which is what revenge essentially is.

[Abe Rush]

then if you can accept that Batman's mission isn't to just beat people up, why can't you accept the same about Robin? Batman doesn't train Robin to make bad guys hurt, he trains him to channel his anger and frustration into a force for good. It's about more than just making himself feel good, which is what revenge essentially is.

Katsuro... one again, my comment was based off of StorminNorman's statement about Batman training Robin in order to eventually "seek revenge", which I think wasn't actually the case.

[Eros]

then if you can accept that Batman's mission isn't to just beat people up, why can't you accept the same about Robin? Batman doesn't train Robin to make bad guys hurt, he trains him to channel his anger and frustration into a force for good. It's about more than just making himself feel good, which is what revenge essentially is.

so would does it make it right to allow 9 year old acrobats, and 12 year old street punks to fight crime by your side? where is this Batman code he has, it rather hypocritical on Batmans part. The Gotham Police see batman running around with litte boys and girls in costumes, and they seem to be fine with it as well.:huh: Jason todd died becuase Batman was an idiot, Tim Drake risks his 17 year old life everyday becasue Batman is idiot. Dick Graysons resented Batman for years, and he probbaly has more mental issue then Jason Todd. Batman runs around gotham fighting criminals with kids, and yet nobody seems to find this alittle disturbing?:huh:

[Saint]

Seems to me like you just don't like the comic book version of Batman.

Furthermore, your point that Batman puts these kids in danger is grossly incorrect. Batman allows them to become Robin so he can keep them in a controlled environment under his supervision. Otherwise, they would be out on the street in danger without Batman to watch out for them, without the training they need, and without the tools to keep them alive.

[04nbod]

i like robin and think if nolan had imagination he could work well in his universe

*runs and hides from the flames*

[The Last Meatbag]

Robin would work. The end.

And he doesn't have to be 17 for it to work.

[batboy99]

i want robin
played by zac efron but tim drake not dick,the only dick grayson i want is nightwing(jared padalecki)

[El Payaso]

I was speaking of the comics. Please execute your reading comprehension software, and you should be able to tell that at one point in my post--prefaced by the words "in the film"--I switch from the comics to the film.

Yeah and the thing seems to be that you want to change radically the character in some aspects. Well, with Robin could never be any different than change him since the original concepot has little to add to Batman (except younger fans.)

If Forever was the "closest" you've gotten to buying the Robin concept, you clearly do not read the correct comics. Fortunately, this does not preclude them from existing.

haha?

Even though I addressed this above, I would mention that Robin should still receive combat training for safety reasons.

Which is very different from the attack fighting Batman got.

Because those characters are not Robin. Those characters are not Batman's son. The reason I want Robin in the movie is because he is an important character, he is a part of Bruce Wayne. Removing Robin is like removing Thomas Wayne. You're cutting out a part of his family, a person who affects who he is. This is a basic truth of storytelling.

You want to turn Batman into a father. Allow me to disagree. Sounds a terrible idea. If anything I think he would allow himself to be father once he quit as Batman and can have a normal life.

[Keyser Sushi]

That kind of was my point in my previous post(s)...



StorminNorman said that Batman teached Robin how to "take care of himself", which in other words means beat people up when it came time for him to "seek revenge"... and when you look at what I posted, I did say that I didn't think Batman still believed in the concept of "revenge", which is why I think it would be odd for him to help Robin in his persuit for revenge, by giving him, in a way, the tools to make it happen.

It has to be more than that. It has to be convincing Robin that he doesn't need or want revenge. That he should turn his outrage towards a positive and constructive goal like building a better future. Protecting the innocent, standing up for justice and decency and all of that.

[Saint]

Yeah and the thing seems to be that you want to change radically the character in some aspects. Well, with Robin could never be any different than change him since the original concepot has little to add to Batman (except younger fans.)
Change what character? The only change I've suggested is that Robin only enter combat against Batman's will, which is mostly true in modern Batman history.


You want to turn Batman into a father. Allow me to disagree. Sounds a terrible idea. If anything I think he would allow himself to be father once he quit as Batman and can have a normal life.
He has been a father since 1941, regardless of what you think. What you think is simply incorrect. He has had two adopted children (Dick and Tim; I don't believe he ever legally adopted Jason). He has been the father and caretaker of children through his entire career. The theme of the surrogate family Batman has built for himself has been consistent for over sixty years. If you think otherwise, you are simply ignoring the source material.

If anyone is suggesting "radical changes," it's you. You want to remove defining aspects of Batman, and that's stupid.