Originally Posted by Rorschach2012
John Blake isn't any of the Robins from the comics, therefore he isn't Robin.
If Nolan created a character named Jason Stevens in Batman Begins, without anyone named Bruce Wayne, and he had some of the characteristics of Batman, and at the end of Batman Begins some lady revealed that Jason Steven's real name was Batman, does that make him Batman to you too?
Blake isn't Robin.
Wait, what? Are you implying that if something in the story isn't EXACTLY like it the comics, it CAN'T exist? What you're saying takes away from a director's (as well as screenwriter and producer) creativity.
Batman and Robin had "Barbara Wilson" as Batgirl, not Barbara Gordon. Are you saying she wasn't Batgirl? (Put the fact that the movie as a whole was TERRIBLE aside for a second)
I'm not saying John Blake WAS a personification of Robin. His name was just a nod to the fans and he was just the successor to Bruce Wayne in the mantle of "the Batman." BUT I am defending the blanket subject that a screenwriter or director can create a new version of a character if they decide to. Unless the film is a DIRECT reflection of the "source comic story" (see The Dark Knight Returns films), they are typical considered to be loosely based on, or inspired by different sources.
Bottom line, if Christopher Nolan wanted John Blake to be Robin, or Nightwing, or even Batman, he has the freedom to do that.