Dick Grayson Casting Thread

[chamber-music]

For some reason I still think WB is scared of having a young Robin in these Batman films despite the fact we have seen a teen Spider-Man and Hit Girl from Kick Ass.

The teen sidekick thing is still seen as morally dubious.

 

[Eddie Dean]

The woke mob won’t allow it

 

[Brotherhood]

Woke doesn't really mean anything.

Anyway, I think its more to do with not wanting to take the focus away from Batman.

 

[metaphysician]

For some reason I still think WB is scared of having a young Robin in these Batman films despite the fact we have seen a teen Spider-Man and Hit Girl from Kick Ass.

The teen sidekick thing is still seen as morally dubious.

I don't really believe that for a second. They don't find it morally dubious, they just find it impossible to take seriously, due to their own biases and assumptions about what constitutes a "proper" movie.

 

[WayneMB]

The woke mob won’t allow it

ah, you're one of those cringelords

 

[Eddie Dean]

The woke mob won’t even let you bring your radio into the bath tub!

 

[The Lazarus Pit]

I am loving Reeves cans Pattinsons comments on Robin. Sounds like he is coming to the series! Would love to see him in the sequel

 

[Airwings]

If they bring Robin into the fold he can't be younger than 16. Just the way Reeves' world has shaped his world, I can't conceive of a child running around in this.

You have a point. Maybe 16 is the youngest Warner should go.
For the actor, that is.
The character can be younger.
If Grayson is introduced in a sequel that comes out in 2025, the shooting of the film would have begun the previous year. If it's going to be an actor who will be 16 during 2024, then he's born as late as 2008.

I found a couple from that year with a look that fits Dick Grayson:
Ambrosio De Luca and Kaan Guldur. The latter played young Arthur Curry in Aquaman which means people at Warner know about him.

There are also those who want Robin to be 19 or in his early 20s.
If the actor is right, it can work. But there's always the risk of getting a new Chris O'Donnell situation. A lot of people have a problem with him being too old for the role. And yes, his age was evident. He was an adult trying to act like a cool, rebellious teenager.

Just for comparison, I looked up some "older" candidates. In 2025, these will be around the same age as O'Donnell when he first played Robin.
Do you think they would feel as miscast as he did because of their age?

CJ Adams
Griffin Gluck
Lino Facioli
Joshua Bassett
Aramis Knight
Gavin Casalegno
Jace Norman
Isaac Hempstead-Wright
Chandler Riggs
Daniel Huttlestone
Charlie Plummer

Half of them haven't even been mentioned in this thread before

For some reason I still think WB is scared of having a young Robin in these Batman films despite the fact we have seen a teen Spider-Man and Hit Girl from Kick Ass.

The teen sidekick thing is still seen as morally dubious.

I was thinking of Hit-Girl too. She surely could fight.
The problem is that Batman is a much more serious film than Kick-Ass.
Ever since Nolan reinvented the character, the cinematic Batman's fault mode is dark and gritty. Every actor plays a Batman that has some level of darkness and grittiness.
Actually they're all grounded versions too. Affleck played a sort of grounded Batman in a world where the fantastical happened to exist. He was also brooding, like Pattinson is, and like Bale was.

 

[Invader Joker]

For some reason I still think WB is scared of having a young Robin in these Batman films despite the fact we have seen a teen Spider-Man and Hit Girl from Kick Ass.

The teen sidekick thing is still seen as morally dubious.

Teen Spider-Man has literal superpowers and Hit-Girl was from a comedy movie. Not remotely the same thing. In Hit-Girl the whole joke was about how absolutely ridiculous, insane and borderline abusive the idea of a teenage girl doing that was.

 

[Airwings]

Anyway, I think its more to do with not wanting to take the focus away from Batman.

I'm sure a guy like Charlie Plummer would take some of the focus away from Pattinson.

That was an example. He won't get the role.

I don't really believe that for a second. They don't find it morally dubious, they just find it impossible to take seriously, due to their own biases and assumptions about what constitutes a "proper" movie.

With Plummer brought up again, an actor of his caliber would help a lot.
Robin can be taken seriously.

 

[Brotherhood]

I don't mean take away from Batman in terms of acting, I just mean I want to explore Batman and Bruce Wayne throughout this trilogy, and feel bringing in Robin could take away from that. I'd prefer to have a couple of films with just Batman and his rogues, and then start to delve into the family, especially given this is second year Batman.

I'm not saying Reeves should never bring Robin in, it'd be great, I'm just saying hold off for at least the next movie.

 

[Airwings]

I don't mean take away from Batman in terms of acting, I just mean I want to explore Batman and Bruce Wayne throughout this trilogy, and feel bringing in Robin could take away from that. I'd prefer to have a couple of films with just Batman and his rogues, and then start to delve into the family, especially given this is second year Batman.

I'm not saying Reeves should never bring Robin in, it'd be great, I'm just saying hold off for at least the next movie.

I commented on an earlier post from you where I went through this topic.

Would you want every new version of Batman to keep the focus on him, and Robin should be held off every time?
We have had TWO previous incarnations of the Dark Knight where the sidekick was left out (the suit on display doesn't really count, because he's not even mentioned by Bruce or Alfred). And you want the same thing to be done here?

It could end up as a cycle. Reboot with a another actor every 10-15 years. And a story about a young Bats to keep Robin out of the picture. Every time!
Yes, Affleck's take was a seasoned hero but they managed to get rid of Robin another way.

Why does Dick Grayson prevent any exploration of the main hero? Wouldn't having him there add something to Bruce Wayne and Bats, like another layer?

We don't need more of the same thing after Nolanverse, even if Reeves' world is different. We have already seen young Bruce on his way to become The Dark Knight and the whole Batman mythos explored in a trilogy where he worked alone in a grounded world.
How much does Bruce need to be explored as a character? At this point it seems he's always going to be the brooding hero with demons, by default.
Bale did it, Affleck did it and Pattinson is doing it.
Perhaps you care more about seeing the actor doing a one-man show and showing his craft, instead of some interest for the fictional character? Could it be that it's the actor who shouldn't share any spotlight with a sidekick?
I just wonder...

I pick Woody Norman (C'mon C'mon). He's really good and his father-son dynamic with Joaquin is awesome, he's exactly 13 y.o now (so if they really want to cast Robin, he will be older).

I got to think of someone else too. What about Luke David Blumm from the horror film Son?
He's born the same year as Woody.
It could speak in his favor that he's blond. Reeves would perhaps want to challenge us with his version.
Imagine it!!! Somebody who doesn't look like Dick Grayson could end up wearing the classic Robin suit.

 

[Brotherhood]

No, not at all. It's not about the actor @Airwings, I just feel considering where this Batman is at in his life, that it'd be kinda soon to be introducing a young partner in crime.

Just because something might happen in the future that would stop them from exploring Robin, thats no reason to rush to do it, especially if that particular version of Batman in this specific time in his life is not ready for him, because then it could just feel incredibly unauthentic to the narrative and the Bruce Wayne we're exploring and could end up as just Robin for the sake of Robin,

Again, I'm not saying don't do Robin, I'm just saying give this Batman at least one more movie, maybe the trilogy on his own. It's just as possible that this universe could be extremely successful and we'll go beyond the trilogy thats been talked about, meaning we can get more with Batman and eventually Robin.

Don't you think it'd be better anyway to wait? So that Rob's Bruce is a bit older, a bit more experienced, and has more to teach Robin because in the movie thats about to come out he's still learning everything. To go from that to then teaching a young boy how to do it in the very next film would just feel too soon I think.

 

[Airwings]

No, not at all. It's not about the actor @Airwings, I just feel considering where this Batman is at in his life, that it'd be kinda soon to be introducing a young partner in crime.

Just because something might happen in the future that would stop them from exploring Robin, thats no reason to rush to do it, especially if that particular version of Batman in this specific time in his life is not ready for him, because then it could just feel incredibly unauthentic to the narrative and the Bruce Wayne we're exploring and could end up as just Robin for the sake of Robin,

Again, I'm not saying don't do Robin, I'm just saying give this Batman at least one more movie, maybe the trilogy on his own. It's just as possible that this universe could be extremely successful and we'll go beyond the trilogy thats been talked about, meaning we can get more with Batman and eventually Robin.

Don't you think it'd be better anyway to wait? So that Rob's Bruce is a bit older, a bit more experienced, and has more to teach Robin because in the movie thats about to come out he's still learning everything. To go from that to then teaching a young boy how to do it in the very next film would just feel too soon I think.

You seem to confirm my theory.
You defend youself, but you do that with stating the same thing I wrote.

Don't you understand what I'm trying to say here?

They could always reboot Batman and start over again with him beginning as a masked crime-fighter.
They do a trilogy where he's too young to have his sidekick and tell a very good story.
When Bruce is finally coming to the point where Robin would make sense, that's the end of that particular story arch, and..... REBOOT,
Then begin the same character's journey in another trilogy.
With another actor playing Batman, of course.
They can just keep on doing that.forever, and always keep Grayson out of the picture.
It's possible to have a whole bunch of actors, each of them starring in his own trilogy.

Pretty smart move, wouldn't you say, to always start again with a young Bruce and tell a story of the time BEFORE he could have met Grayson. You know, the 'year one' or 'year two' kind of thing.
Robin will never appear in any of the trilogies then. Not ever!

The other solution to keep Boy Wonder away forever, is to give every Batman reboot a moody tone and dark story enough. Then the kid sidekick won't make sense within the world-building they've created.
Each new take on Batman also need to fascinate the audience, making Bruce Wayne very interesting and getting us to think that it's best to focus only on him and his Dark Knight. We have to believe that Robin wouldn't fit that kind of world, whether its too grounded, too gritty, too violent etc We have to vocally express the opinion "No Robin!!
Different reasons for leaving Grayson out is that he's going to take the edge of the film...
or cheapen the quality of the story....
or stealing important screen-time/focus, and character development, from Bruce (we would hate that)....
or that the circus kid is too silly and/or campy...
or that it's too unbelievable for a grounded Batman to bring a kid with him out on the streets...
or some other similar reason.
The danger here is that those opinions are being expressed by us, the audience. It will justify that the studio leaves Robin out every time. It could be something that Warner Bros have planned, and they lead us onto their path. When they do their different reboots of Batman, there won't be any room for Robin. It's not logical to having him there. We have to thank Joel Schumacher for that. After the 1997 disaster, the sidekick might be banished from ever appearing in a Batman reboot again. That's why Bruce should start his journey as a young crime-fighter.
It needs a director who will fight for having Grayson introduced to break that.

Nolan did a trilogy without Grayson because the circus boy wouldn't have worked there. I think you agree with me on this.
Then we have what Reeves is doing. It's going a bit of the same way, showing the early days of Batman.
If we're ok with Reeves doing something similar as Nolan (and going even darker), the next Batman reboot after Reeves won't have a Robin either (for the same reasons), and yet the next one after that will follow the pattern.
In short words, do a 'young Batman' trilogy. End the story arch. Reboot with another trilogy, another story arch, Repeat the 'young Batman' thing but with a different tone. Keep Robin away. Put a spell on the audience so that they don't want Grayson either, ateleast not before the story arch has been told. But then, that's the end of that take on Batman. His story is over.
Reboot and repeat yet again.
Some people will fall for this, not seeing the big picture.

Hope you see my point now

Hopefully, Pattinson might get his wish to have a Robin. That would break the cycle before it becomes a typical thing for every new Batman trilogy

 

[Brotherhood]

@Airwings I've always understood your point, but your point is saying that concretely it will be rebooted when Reeves' trilogy is finished? But how do you that's gonna happen? How do you know after the third he won't decide to do more, bring in Robin, and you'll get exactly what you're after?

I hope you see my point now

 

[Airwings]

@Airwings I've always understood your point, but your point is saying that concretely it will be rebooted when Reeves' trilogy is finished? But how do you that's gonna happen? How do you know after the third he won't decide to do more, bring in Robin, and you'll get exactly what you're after?

I hope you see my point now

I started to notice there might be someting going on when Reeves does what Nolan did. Which I personally don't think was needed to do again.
There are several parallels:
A young Bruce with demons. Grounded world. The character starting out as Batman. More realistic versions of classic villains. Talks about a trilogy. Reeves being something of an auteur director, like Nolan. A story and cinematic tone that don't match Robin.
If it will be a complete story arch over the course of three films, which I very much suspect, would Pattinson or Reeves be interested in doing more? Wouldn't they be done with the character?
Bale and Nolan moved on with their careers after doing a trilogy. That Batman had come to an end. The same could happen here.
I can't be only one who have that thought cross the mind.

Now, shall we talk actors here in this casting thread?

 

[Brotherhood]

Either way, who knows? Anything can happen.

Casting suggestion? Off the top of my head; Fionn Whitehead.

 

[Airwings]

@Brotherhood
Read my last post again. I've edited it and written more about WB... and then Joel Schumacher

 

[Brotherhood]

@Brotherhood
Read my last post again. I've edited it and written more about WB... and then Joel Schumacher

It's definitely possible, but I don't think you should take the similarities too far, Reeves is also his own man and is doing very different things to Nolan and is certainly more comic book accurate which is exciting. And again, its just as possible that they'll have an idea for more stories and do more. Or Robin could get his own HBO Max spin-off. Literally anything can happen going forward. Anything. Don't let the past worry you too much. It's an exciting time to be a Batman fan.

 

[The Lazarus Pit]

Nolan’s “Robin” was a slap in the face. Nolan didn’t need to create a new character, it should’ve just been Grayson.

 

[Airwings]

It's definitely possible, but I don't think you should take the similarities too far, Reeves is also his own man and is doing very different things to Nolan and is certainly more comic book accurate which is exciting. And again, its just as possible that they'll have an idea for more stories and do more. Or Robin could get his own HBO Max spin-off. Literally anything can happen going forward. Anything. Don't let the past worry you too much. It's an exciting time to be a Batman fan.

Perhaps, but the danger lights are going on here. I mean, why should an actor like Pattinson continuing doing Batman films forever. There will be a lot of other interesting projects that he will feel drawn to.

I also what to go back to my previous long post and re-use something here.

This current take on Batman fascinates the audience, making Bruce Wayne very interesting and getting us to think that it's best to focus only on him and his Dark Knight. That could be the whole purpose.
We need to believe that Robin wouldn't fit Reeves world,
Heck, some people even claim that the sidekick would be taking important screen-time off Bats, we can't allow that right? Because this Bruce is so amazingly interesting and mesmerizing.
The thing is that Warner Bros might WANT us to think like that. It justifies the lack of Dick Grayson in Reeves trilogy as much as it did back during Nolanverse.
The question is if this is now a thing that the studio is planning to do with their new cinematic Batmen. When they do their different reboots of Batman, there won't be any room for Robin. It's not logical to having him there. We have to thank Joel Schumacher for that. After the 1997 disaster, the sidekick might be banished from ever appearing in a Batman reboot again. That's why Bruce should start his journey as a young crime-fighter. Or as a seasoned one, but with a dead Robin (Affleck).

And then it's the age thing too, which I've already gone through.

The studio have put a spell on us to not be wanting a Robin for a Batman before a trilogy is completed. Your opinion is just that, right?
But when will that be?
Let us have a sequel in 2025. But when will the third film be out? Somewhere in 2028-29?
If Reeves is doing more after that, we'll be at 2031-32 BEFORE his Batman is going to get his sidekick.
That could mean the actor who's going to be Dick Grayson is currently a toddler. Because Pattinson wants the character to be 13.

EDIT: Keaton doesn't count here because he's not a new Batman. Apparently WB will allow him to have a Robin. Because he's already done his solo journey.

Casting suggestion? Off the top of my head; Fionn Whitehead.

Interesting!
Do you mean you think he'll be a good choice for Robin exactly by now, when the two of us are discussing the matter?

There's NO WAY he will be cast in the decade that comes after the current 2020s.
It's not going to be a 30+ actor as Boy Wonder in 2031. Forget it!

I can go as far as suggesting the youngest actor of them all in the industry today, Asher Miles Fallica. He's only 8 years old but even HE would be too old when it's time to introduce Grayson, according to your wish "a trilogy before the sidekick".
Because Pattinson wants the character to be 13, you know

Hm, maybe it's not a bad after all, idea to get Robin in the sequel in 2025 instead? How about that?

 

[Airwings]

Nolan’s “Robin” was a slap in the face. Nolan didn’t need to create a new character, it should’ve just been Grayson.

It was!!!

Affleck's Robin already being killed off was also a little slap in the face.

 

[Lautox]

Sunny Suljic?

 

[Airwings]

@Brotherhood
I'm not against someone as close to as old as Fionn Whitehead. Not if it there's an actor who's youthful enough. Because everyone ages differently.
But then the actor in question has to play the role as soon as possible, before his actual age catches up on him.

You said you want Dick Grayson to be put on hold and not appear in the trilogy but rather in a possible fourth film. That will happen 10 years from today, or so.
I have trouble understanding how you can suggest someone born 1997 if you think Robin shouldn't be introduced in the Reeves films during our current decade.. Are you aware of how old Fionn is going to be after the trilogy is finished?
I wonder why he's your choice for the character, and if you think he's the most suitable actor.
Don't you know of any younger guys than him? If you do, are they all bad candidates for Grayson?

I want to get some insight in your way of thinking here because this is confusing.

 

[Brotherhood]

Honestly @Airwings, first name that came into my head.