The Dark Knight Rises Christian Bale Rules Out Robin For Batman 3 (and beyond)

[The Joker]

As much as I like Robin, I can't say I'd be disappointed if he was omitted from future movies.

 

[Rezzo]

Not sure if this was posted.

Should Robin Appear In A Batman Movie? Comic Legend Jeph Loeb Defends The Boy Wonder

The Internet fan community is in agreement: Do not, under any circumstances, put Robin anywhere near Christopher Nolan’s Batman universe, a world grounded in reality, where the laws of physics apply to hero and villain alike, where bullets wound and punches bruise. An acrobatic little kid in tights? Do it and I walk, Christian Bale even reportedly said recently.

Which is a little ironic, considering that one of Bale’s favorite Batman comics is “Dark Victory,” by fan-favorite creators Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale. And who do you think appears as a critical character in “Dark Victory”? (Hint: He wears a red and yellow costume.)

So how do you reconcile the two disparate viewpoints?

“Take the time to tell the story properly,” Loeb told MTV News. “There is a story of Dick Grayson and how he becomes Robin that is extremely moving and very helpful.”

In the events of Loeb’s “The Long Halloween,” which preceded “Dark Victory” and served as a partial inspiration for “The Dark Knight,” the main characters are all left alienated and alone, bereft of even a little hope. It’s Robin’s presence that can change that for Bruce, Loeb argues, creating a father/son dynamic that can mirror Wayne’s relationship with his own dad. In short, Robin can teach Bruce how to be more human, Loeb insisted.

“It’s all about building the relationship between Bruce and Dick. Dick hates Bruce. He doesn’t understand why it is that he needs to do this and Bruce doesn’t understand why he’s doing it either because he’s not a parent. He doesn’t know how to be a parent,” Loeb said. “And together, they make each other better people. So that for me would be the next step.”

But for all the fans already crying out in horror just at the thought of it, Loeb isn’t actually talking so much about Robin as he is about Dick Grayson. In fact, the best Robin story might not actually have “Robin” at all.

“I wouldn’t let him become Robin until the third act, if that. I think that’s the other problem when you tell that story is that there’s this rush to put him in a costume by the end of the first 20 minutes and in that case I think it’s a disaster,” Loeb said. “So if you look at ‘Dark Victory’ Tim and I went nine out of twelve chapters before you even started to talk about putting him in a costume and he doesn’t put the costume on until the last chapter of that book.”

 

[ShadowBoxing]

The first being, who, Schumacher? And hmm... the introduction of what character signalled the start of that downward spiral? The film that almost killed Batman as a viable screen franchise was called "Batman & ???"....

In the comics, Robin serves a crucial role - both Dick Grayson and Tim Drake are great characters in their own right. In the films, especially with the tone set up in Nolan's films, I just don't see how the character could work.

Straw Man. Robin had nothing to do with the downward spiral of that series, and you know it. Schumacher thought comics were joke books for children, and his films mirror that belief. This has absolutely nothing to do with the character of Robin, his potential in a realistically toned series, or his importance to the mythos.

If Nolan has a problem with Robin then quite frankly, he has his head up his ass and Bale is licking it. The only reason they are saying this is because they think they are appealing to the fanbase; getting rid of something we don't want. I've got news for you though, as cheesey as Robin started out he's stayed with the series since year four, even with new boy wonders dawning the mask. If you think he has no place in Nolan's films then you're wrong. It's not an opinion, you're wrong. Robin IS part of the story, he has been done in a realistic and dark tone several times over, and he has been adapted successfully into perhaps the best adaptation of a superhero to date: BTAS.

Just because Schumacher f--ked it up that makes him a bane upon the Batman franchise; what kind of bullcrap logic is that? Marvel f--ked up Hulk but I didn't see them taking away his purple pants. James Bond has had several flops but I didn't see his golden gun or Aston Martin disappear from future installments. Nolan again, is just trying to curry favor with fanboys, and he is not thinking about the importance of the character.

 

[copywrite]

I think Bale might have been a bit sarcastic in his comment about Robin. I definitely doubt he would quit if Robin were introduced.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I think Bale might have been a bit sarcastic in his comment about Robin. I definitely doubt he would quit if Robin were introduced.

Well, he might. Remember he almost played Robin in Batman Forever.

 

[Crook]

Actually, he denies that rumor in the recent GQ interview.

 

[The Shadow]

http://www.slashfilm.com/


Posted on Wednesday, July 2nd, 2008 at 12:47 pm by: Hunter Stephens“If Robin crops up in one of the new Batman films, I’ll be chaining myself up somewhere and refusing to go to work.”

He can go ahead and refuse to go to work for all I care, he aintnothin special. Get someone else to play Batman, preferabley better than Christian Bale.

 

[AgentGraves!]

look when you get to the bones of it...

the HISTORY of it all...

Robin was introduced to lighten up The Dark Knight and was also introduced to give a reason for KIDS to start reading Batman comics...

at a time when Batman "became too dark for young readers"

I respect the history and the idea behind robin. I do...

but in all accounts, Robin is the neon lights to the Batman's shadow.

I've got no problem with Robin in the books - none

but in the films, Yeah, that's a problem...

and

let's look at it this way thanks to the ass who suggested that Batman is a ped'file. (way back in the days)

it's in the back of everyone's mind. that the bat is keeping the boy for his own spandex adventures in between the satin sheets. and with Kiddy Sh*** making News all over again as it seems to do every 4 to 6 years something big comes out

we are in a time where every corner you turn there is some sort of kiddy porn crap out and about

the poly's out in texas
that poor poor girl out in VT.

throwing in a young boy in bright colors into this dark world the Nolans' and Goyer have created wouldn't be a good idea...

and lets remember something else too...

THE LAST TIME WE GOT A ROBIN LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!!!!


Just accept it, somethings Just Should Not be translated into film from comic books.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Robin was introduced to lighten up The Dark Knight and was also introduced to give a reason for KIDS to start reading Batman comics...

at a time when Batman "became too dark for young readers"

I respect the history and the idea behind robin. I do...

but in all accounts, Robin is the neon lights to the Batman's shadow.

And that's kind of the point. Batman can't be doom and gloom all the time, he just can't. He spiral out of control and kill himself. This idea of a hapless loner is nice and all, but somewhere down the line the character actually has to progress and move somewhere. It's been a classic motif in literature for centuries for the orphaned hero to reconcile his grief by creating the make-shift family. If Robin is the light to Batman's dark then he truly serves a significant purpose.

And how come this is an issue now with Robin, and not with Alfred, who Goyer essentially stuck in there for little for than sarcastic wit and comic relief. Or what about the fact that really, without Robin, Batman sounds really awkward making light of situations like he did countless times in Batman Begins. Batman doesn't make jokes, but Robin does, and deep down we realize watching that kid makes jokes is what's keeping Batman from putting a bullet in his head.

Also, in reality, it's important for the creation of his villains. Robin becomes a catalyst for Joker's obsession. Joker looks at Robin with envy and jealousy, further fueling his obsession with the Batman. You act as though general audiences will never accept him, yet the character now...who you dismiss as "an attempt to lighten things up"...seriously has stuck around now since Batman's fourth year, and has stuck with the book even when it was at it's darkest tone. Dark Victory, Death in the Family, Batman Beyond, the Brian Azzerello runs, and even Frank Miller have all utilized Robin, and they're even darker and grittier than the Nolanverse. Nolan can't adapt Robin? Give me a f--king a break.

THE LAST TIME WE GOT A ROBIN LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!!!!

BTAS did Robin and it was fine, and that show was a serious adaptation of the comic.

 

[Crook]

So, the top 3 reasons Robin should not be in this film according to you:

1) Robin is the neon light to Batman's shadow

2) Brings back the pedo vibe

3) Look at what happened last time


Well I must say that's a fantastic argument.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Ten bucks says Nolan will eat his words when Captain America adapts Bucky and no one has any problem with it.

 

[Crook]

Truthfully, audiences don't "get" or "want" anything until it's already been delivered properly. I have no doubt this is the case here.

 

[OSM]

That doesn't count. Bolland drew it. Bolland can make ANYTHING badass. Give the man a sketch pad and put a block of cheese in front of him and ask him to draw it.

A few seconds later you got the most BAD ASS looking block of cheese ever.



But yea, no Robin in Nolan's movies please.

 

[Mandalore464]

Um...because people have been "believing" it for 70 years?

Um.. I specifically mentioned the Nolan verse. I don't know what it has to do with the 70 years of comic books... Nolan wants to make things look real, that's his choice and his problem. I'm just saying that Robin as he appears in comic books doesn't fit this choice.

 

[Majik1387]

Has Bale forgotten that he auditioned for Robin in the past?

 

[Mandalore464]

Try to understand... Some people here aren't saying Robin just can't be in a Batmovie. Some people, like myself, are only saying that the only Robin you'd get from Nolan would NOT be Robin, cause the character as he is in the comics (bright-coloured kiddo whose purpose is to make Batman understand he has to lighten up) simply will not happen in that specific verse.

As said before, Robin IS a tremendously important part of the Batman mythos and I have no problem with that. Just not in NOLAN's verse. Cause that wouldn't be Robin.

Bring back Robin whenever a director takes over from Nolan and gets away from his "realistic" take on the mythos. Doing it before is pointless and would look ridiculous, unless the character is modified to the point that he isn't himself anymore.

Although I have no interest in him, I wouldn't have the slightest problem with him appearing in a decent Batmovie. Just not in this particular one. Let's wait for a couple of years before we suggest his return on screen.

 

[Crook]

Has Bale forgotten that he auditioned for Robin in the past?

He didn't. He denied those rumors.

Um.. I specifically mentioned the Nolan verse. I don't know what it has to do with the 70 years of comic books... Nolan wants to make things look real, that's his choice and his problem.

Except that there's nothing "unreal" about Robin's presence in the story and his relation to the characters. It's fine if it doesn't fit people's tastes, but it's very much in line of what Nolan would consider plausible, from an emotional and thematic sense alone.

 

[Two-Face]

He can go ahead and refuse to go to work for all I care, he aintnothin special. Get someone else to play Batman, preferabley better than Christian Bale.

That makes me laugh....


I rather have Bale as Batman than Robin in Batman movies.


If Bales quits then you have Oldman, Caine & Nolan quiting, I don't want them leaving of Boy Wonder. You need recast for their roles.

 

[souvlaki]

I'm slightly conflicted on this. On the one hand I think Nolan could do an amazing job adapting Robin if he chose to. On the other hand I believe a case can be made for why he doesn't need to appear in the third film. For one, going by modern day continuity Robin appeared somewhere around Batman's third year (anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this). By the time Dick Grayson was introduced in Dark Victory, over half of Batman's rogue gallery had already appeared in some form or another. There are plenty of Robin-less Batman stories to tell. Unless there is some huge gap between the second and third movie I'd guess the third film will take place at some point during Batman's second year. If Nolan doesn't want to put Robin in his films, fine. No sense in forcing him into something he's not interested in.

 

[Mandalore464]

Except that there's nothing "unreal" about Robin's presence in the story and his relation to the characters. It's fine if it doesn't fit people's tastes, but it's very much in line of what Nolan would consider plausible, from an emotional and thematic sense alone.

I personally don't believe that a guy like Bruce Wayne would put a kid's life on the line by allowing him to go out at night and fight armed criminals while wearing a green and red outfit, and nothing else than a domino mask to conceal his identity.

This is not realistic, there's no way it could be realistic, there's no way it's happening in a Nolan movie.

Then of course, maybe it could work with a 20-25 year old, dressed in dark colours, with a cowl or mask that won't let any of his features show. Is that the Robin you want? I for one wouldn't mind, but I'm sure that a lot of people here would then go and whine about how far from the comic books Robin this one is.

 

[Keyser Soze]

Straw Man. Robin had nothing to do with the downward spiral of that series, and you know it. Schumacher thought comics were joke books for children, and his films mirror that belief. This has absolutely nothing to do with the character of Robin, his potential in a realistically toned series, or his importance to the mythos.

If Nolan has a problem with Robin then quite frankly, he has his head up his ass and Bale is licking it. The only reason they are saying this is because they think they are appealing to the fanbase; getting rid of something we don't want. I've got news for you though, as cheesey as Robin started out he's stayed with the series since year four, even with new boy wonders dawning the mask. If you think he has no place in Nolan's films then you're wrong. It's not an opinion, you're wrong. Robin IS part of the story, he has been done in a realistic and dark tone several times over, and he has been adapted successfully into perhaps the best adaptation of a superhero to date: BTAS.

Just because Schumacher f--ked it up that makes him a bane upon the Batman franchise; what kind of bullcrap logic is that? Marvel f--ked up Hulk but I didn't see them taking away his purple pants. James Bond has had several flops but I didn't see his golden gun or Aston Martin disappear from future installments. Nolan again, is just trying to curry favor with fanboys, and he is not thinking about the importance of the character.

I find it ironic how you seem to take such delight in mocking fanboys. You're posting on Superhero Hype. We're all fanboys. It's just that the anti-Robin crowd are the fanboys who don't want Nolan to risk screwing up a winning formula with a tonal 180, to shoehorn in a character who the majority don't even want to see in this series.

I like Robin, in the comics, in the cartoons. But I like Clayface and Mr. Freeze too, and I think they'd be totally out of place in this current series of Batman films.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I find it ironic how you seem to take such delight in mocking fanboys. You're posting on Superhero Hype. We're all fanboys.

Wow, when you don't have anything else to go on resort to that old classic...

It's just that the anti-Robin crowd are the fanboys who don't want Nolan to risk screwing up a winning formula with a tonal 180, to shoehorn in a character who the majority don't even want to see in this series.

Dark Victory is a tonal 180? Nope...it's actually more dark. Robin doesn't change the tone at all, in fact he logically progresses Nolan's own character.

I like Robin, in the comics, in the cartoons. But I like Clayface and Mr. Freeze too, and I think they'd be totally out of place in this current series of Batman films.

Except, and here is the kicker skippy, no one has made a good argument why he'd be out of place. At all, considering time and again the character of Robin has been placed in a realistic setting, done with excellent dramatic effect, enhanced the character of Batman, and been handled in a dark and serious tone. So to lump that character in with Clayface, who has superpowers which border on fantasy, is idiotic.

 

[Keyser Soze]

Except, and here is the kicker skippy, no one has made a good argument why he'd be out of place.

I thought the argument was pretty self-evident. When you read any of the stuff about "The Dark Knight" aspiring to be a crime epic in the vein of "Heat" or "The Godfather", when you see the very grounded tone they're going for in the clips we've seen so far. Then you imagine a crime-fighting kid in a yellow cape and a bright red costume thrown in there.

You talk about repititions of tired old arguments, yet you continue to cling on to "Dark Victory", a book which doesn't in fact feature ROBIN until the very end, and then it does kinda feel out of place with what has preceded. I've lost count of the amount of times I've seen someone reiterate that "the films are not the comics", only for it to fall on deaf ears.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I'm not saying Robin should NEVER EVER EVER be in a Batman film. If Nolan could come up with a convincing way to make him fit into his version of the Batman universe, I could most likely be won over. But as it stands I'm doubtful about how it could work. It seems like a big gamble, especially since bringing in Robin seems like it would essentially mean losing Nolan and Bale. I for one don't think it's a gamble worth taking.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I thought the argument was pretty self-evident. When you read any of the stuff about "The Dark Knight" aspiring to be a crime epic in the vein of "Heat" or "The Godfather", when you see the very grounded tone they're going for in the clips we've seen so far. Then you imagine a crime-fighting kid in a yellow cape and a bright red costume thrown in there.

You're trying to make a stark contrast where one doesn't exist. Perhaps I could say the same thing about another character. Here watch: When you read any of the stuff about "The Dark Knight" aspiring to be a crime epic in the vein of "Heat" or "The Godfather", when you see the very grounded tone they're going for in the clips we've seen so far. Then you imagine a purple suited, maniacal clown in there.

That seems pretty ******ed too, doesn't it. See, instead of using some sort of false argument about your expectations of Robin, let's actually look at the character. Is the character always a kid in spandex man panties and a bright yellow cape? No, in fact we've moved past that even in the comics. I don't see why fanboys piss and moan about Robin being in yellow tights, yet seem to have little problem with switching Batman to a Robocop suit. I'd say it's a pretty safe assumption that given the same costume designers who gave us the TDK suit, we wouldn't get a panel for panel translation of the Robin costume.

You talk about repititions of tired old arguments, yet you continue to cling on to "Dark Victory", a book which doesn't in fact feature ROBIN until the very end, and then it does kinda feel out of place with what has preceded. I've lost count of the amount of times I've seen someone reiterate that "the films are not the comics", only for it to fall on deaf ears.

Yet the films are ABOUT the comics. See that problem. If the films are not the comics you've just made the perfect argument to through out Batman himself. He's not remotely realistic. Not his style of crimefighting, not his ability to magically find criminals, not even his suit...most of that is highly exaggerated...so really unless you think "Batman" should last one film so we can all see Bruce get shot and go "wow, well it's not the comics", then Robin should be included.

Films are supposed to represent the mythos. Robin arguably is more important to that than even Joker, and definitely more important than Two-Face. And as for "Dark Victory", now you're just being combative. Robin held a very important place in that story, if you've actually read it instead of just looked at the pretty pictures. Batman's life was spiraling out of control, much like it is in TDK, and Robin comes in and provides the only shred of sanity Bruce has left, in effect saving him. So yeah, it's a tad more important to the story than some out of place element thrown in at the end.