The Dark Knight Rises Nolan...add Robin!!!!!! - Part 1

[Knight Rise]

manip.

But. Has, everyone agreed now? Robin can, and should, work? YAY!

Not for Nolan. Robin doesn't HAVE to be in a Batman film. He didn't start with batman, he was thrown in at some point

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Not for Nolan. Robin doesn't HAVE to be in a Batman film. He didn't start with batman, he was thrown in at some point

Robin wasn't just thrown in at some point. He was introduced in Detective Comics #38. Less than a year after Batman. He has been there longer than anyone other than Batman. And the creator of Batman begs to differ as to his importance, it because of Robin that Batman is even around. In fact, Robin could have held his own regular spot in Detective Comics without Batman. It's only because of the contractual agreement with Bob Kane he didn't.

So, if you're gonna hate for no reason. I'd suggest doing some research.

 

[Knight Rise]

Robin wasn't just thrown in at some point. He was introduced in Detective Comics #38. Less than a year after Batman. He has been there longer than anyone other than Batman. And the creator of Batman begs to differ as to his importance, it because of Robin that Batman is even around. In fact, Robin could have held his own regular spot in Detective Comics without Batman. It's only because of the contractual agreement with Bob Kane he didn't.

So, if you're gonna hate for no reason. I'd suggest doing some research.

To that first one: so yeah, thrown in at one point

2nd: No Batman is around because his parents were murdered. Dick wasnt around when that happened, Robin isnt the freaking main reason Batman is around. Batman is Batman. Thats how it is. You can do things without Robin, some are the best Batman stories ever written.

So yeah, understand Batman before you understand Robin or else you have no effing reason to put him in a BATMAN film to begin with. Im not hating, im just making it clear

 

[The_Raganork]

Robin wasn't just thrown in at some point. He was introduced in Detective Comics #38. Less than a year after Batman. He has been there longer than anyone other than Batman. And the creator of Batman begs to differ as to his importance, it because of Robin that Batman is even around. In fact, Robin could have held his own regular spot in Detective Comics without Batman. It's only because of the contractual agreement with Bob Kane he didn't.

So, if you're gonna hate for no reason. I'd suggest doing some research.

To be fair it's been historically noted that Robin was added to make Batman comics less threatening as comic books as comics were being attacked by mainstream America at the time.

His placement came so that he was a violent scary thing and could justify boys reading Batman.

Subsequently Robin was twisted into a homoerotic deviancy for Batman and further subjected to attack from nay-sayers of comics.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

To that first one: so yeah, thrown in at one point

Not sure if serious.

2nd: No Batman is around because his parents were murdered. Dick wasnt around when that happened, Robin isnt the freaking main reason Batman is around. Batman is Batman. Thats how it is. You can do things without Robin, some are the best Batman stories ever written.

Oh, silly me. I thought you meant from a real world perspective, since you were discussing the two ideas as if they were one. Oh, and just for the record, the best recieved, and highest acclaimed and selling Batman story in years doesn't feature star Bruce Wayne at all. The argument works both ways. And my point still stands. Had Robin not been the breakout hit he was in Detective Comics and Batman he wouldn't have got past 1941.

So yeah, understand Batman before you understand Robin or else you have no effing reason to put him in a BATMAN film to begin with. Im not hating, im just making it clear

You're not hating. But you said Chris Nolan, should he decide to return to Batman, could never write Robin correctly. And that he shouldn't be in Bat Films. Well, surely one could understand why that could be misconstrued as hating. Oh, and before you say "Robin is not essential". Nobody said he was, but neither are any of the supporting characters. So yeah. The bat universe. Read up on it.

 

[Knight Rise]

Not sure if serious.



Oh, silly me. I thought you meant from a real world perspective, since you were discussing the two ideas as if they were one. Oh, and just for the record, the best register Batman story in years doesn't feature star Bruce Wayne at all. The argument works both ways. And my point still stands. Had Robin not been the breakout hit he was in Detective Comics and Batman he wouldn't have got past 1941.



You're not hating. But you said Chris Nolan, should he decide to return to Batman, could never write Robin correctly. And that he shouldn't be in Bat Films. Well, surely one could understand why that could be misconstrued as hating. Oh, and before you say "Robin is not essential". Nobody said he was, but neither are any of the supporting characters. So yeah. The bat universe. Read up on it.

i never EVER said that. i said he does not fit in THIS universe, a younger Batman thats focused on HIS start and his start alone. something that a lot of people fail to grasp. and he wont return to Batman after this, once one director has had his go at these films, hes done. you arent getting a Nolan Robin, thats that.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

i never EVER said that. i said he does not fit in THIS universe, a younger Batman thats focused on HIS start and his start alone. something that a lot of people fail to grasp. and he wont return to Batman after this, once one director has had his go at these films, hes done. you arent getting a Nolan Robin, thats that.

Erm...

manip.

But. Has, everyone agreed now? Robin can, and should, work? YAY!

Not for Nolan. Robin doesn't HAVE to be in a Batman film. He didn't start with batman, he was thrown in at some point

Yeah, actually. You did.


Oh and btw to the second part of your response. No one thinks we are getting a Nolan Robin. The word "can" means it hasn't happened. And I never specified it should be in The Dark Knight trilogy and "should" mean that it is something, if it were to happen, would happen in the way specified in the sentence. Which is "well".

 

[Knight Rise]

Erm...






Yeah, actually. You did.

no you just took it too literally. you didnt see it from my view

 

[The_Raganork]

You two could benefit from reading Krim and my discussion a page or so back...

 

[Knight Rise]

You two could benefit from reading Krim and my discussion a page or so back...

but im bored

 

[Godzilla2014]

Robin wasn't just thrown in at some point. He was introduced in Detective Comics #38. Less than a year after Batman. He has been there longer than anyone other than Batman. And the creator of Batman begs to differ as to his importance, it because of Robin that Batman is even around. In fact, Robin could have held his own regular spot in Detective Comics without Batman. It's only because of the contractual agreement with Bob Kane he didn't.

So, if you're gonna hate for no reason. I'd suggest doing some research.

Actually, that is false. The longest-running supporting character (who still makes regular appearances) is Commissioner James Gordon, who first appeared in Detective Comics # 27, same as Batman himself.

 

[Kynergy]

Actually, that is false. The longest-running supporting character (who still makes regular appearances) is Commissioner James Gordon, who first appeared in Detective Comics # 27, same as Batman himself.

Nerd knowledge FTW

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Actually, that is false. The longest-running supporting character (who still makes regular appearances) is Commissioner James Gordon, who first appeared in Detective Comics # 27, same as Batman himself.

I haven't read my Detective #27 in years so I clearly don't remember that, I thought he was just "Commissioner" or even "Chief".

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Oh, if anyone wants the historic first 11 issue run of Batman, you can get it dirt cheap:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/14012...945?ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&qid=1277854628&sr=8-1

 

[Doc Holliday]

Erm...






Yeah, actually. You did.


Oh and btw to the second part of your response. No one thinks we are getting a Nolan Robin. The word "can" means it hasn't happened. And I never specified it should be in The Dark Knight trilogy and "should" mean that it is something, if it were to happen, would happen in the way specified in the sentence. Which is "well".

You're clearly making a leap from what he said to what you understood.

He responded "no" to your question of rather or not Robin "can, and should, work [in a Nolan Batman movie]." Now, it seems to me that nowhere in his response did he insinuate Nolan couldn't write a good Robin character. His response only indicates that he disagrees with some part of your question, be it the whole thing, or—as is my case—only the subordinate clause: that it "should work."

I think Nolan is a very capable screenwriter and could conjure up a great story with Robin involved, but I don't think he should. Some of my favorite Batman stories are sans-Robin. TLH? No Robin. Year One? Obviously no Robin. I think Bruce is a very deep character that still has plenty to be explored; no need to add another hero.

 

[Knight Rise]

Liam Aiken for Robin/Nightwing

 

[weezerspider]

Nolan's series focuses on a young Bruce still adjusting to being a superhero. WHY THE HELL would he begin to train a superhero when he himself is still new at the work of superheroism. It makes NO sense. Robin could work fine on screen, but it doesn't make sense in this trilogy because it is about Bruce as a young Batman.

 

[Knight Rise]

I agree, I meant Liam Aiken after Nolan is done

 

[cin0]

Liam Aiken for Robin/Nightwing

Pleas no.

 

[Camara]

Apologies if this has already been posted, its just been text to me http://m.youtube.com/?rdm=4n1d7biii...&feature=player_embedded&v=x_s-RmS6Q3I&gl=GBt

 

[Rodrigo90]

This is how I'm writing Robin in my script.

Firstly. Bruce Wayne is a lot more disturbed, and there's a reason why this works in Robin's favour.

In the script, Bruce does not see Dick Grayson as a person so to speak - he see's himself. Since Joe Chill was never found and tried, Batman see's Zucco as his parents murderer, since he see's his younger self in Dick.

Dick is taken to a foster home, where Batman visits him every night. When Zucco's men try to kill Dick, fearing he's the key witness, Batman takes him in.

So initially, Dick is trained so he can become a fighter for when he's older, not as a sidekick.

When Gotham is troubled by Mr. Freeze, Batman concerns himself with him. But Dick wants revenge and thinks Batman is neglecting his parents murder. So he dresses up as Robin, and goes to kill Zucco himself. Never fighting criminals, but using the skills he knows best to infiltrate Zucco's location. Eventually Robin finds him, but cant bring himself to kill him. That answers the question symbolicley "Would Batman kill Joe Chill?" Through Robin not killing his parents murderer, the answer is, no.

I felt if Robin were to be in it, he should have a more important meaning. He is a representation of innocense in Batman's world.
Since I'm writing Batman as a self-proclaiming 'Man Of Vengeance' in this film, as opposed to Christian Bale's 'Man Of Justice', I felt Dick should be that guiding light.
Cause this Batman has no proper idea of what he's fighting for, and the only way he could answer that question is if he came face to face with Chill...Vengeance or Justice?
In the movie, I have him debating wether he should actually kill Freeze or not, since he has no pity for him (and this is the first time he comes face to face with a Supervillain). But by the end, as Freeze tells his tragic tale - Batman remembers Dick not killing Zucco, and realises not everything in the world is so black and white as he first saw it, he lets Freeze go!

So the events help Batman realise what he truly is. This is then followed by an invitation into the JLA from Superman. Happy Ending

 

[DaveMoral]

^ I like that. Batman as a restrained Punisher in that he's a Man of Vengeance. Even in that role, he wouldn't kill, but he's got no real direction. He's just punching faces because, well it feels good to him. Robin representing innocence for Batman is something I think we see in comics even from the start, though it's not articulated as such back then. That never really comes to fruition until 89-90 with the advent of Tim Drake and him pointing out that Batman has lost something in the aftermath of Jason Todd's death. While he was more grim after Dick left and struck out on his own to become Nightwing in the 70s, he didn't lose it. Because Dick was still alive to represent Bruce's own innocence lost. He fully bonds to Jason in that regard, and with Dick having some animosity for Bruce anyway, Jason steps into the role. With Joker killing him, it's as if Bruce's entire mission is a failure. Tim comes along and points out that Batman needs Robin, that Robin keeps him from becoming a monster that is little more than a bully in a Halloween costume.

If we ever get a Batman and Robin movie again, it needs to be approached like this. In which case, Dick's youth cannot be shied away from. It's that youthfulness that gives Robin meaning. If he's 19-21 years old like in Batman Forever and B&R then Robin is just there to be there. If he's even 14 or 15 he can still represent for Bruce his own lost innocence. Robin keeps Batman in check by his very presence, makes him a man with a real mission and a meaning behind what he does. And simultaneously Bruce holds Dick together and keeps him from falling apart by being his adoptive father and mentor. Which is something that Alfred surely tried to be for Bruce, but never really could be. Probably at least because he had been in the employ of the Waynes all of Bruce's life.

 

[drunkhomer]

Pointless argument.... No way in hell is Nolan going to have Robin in his take on batman, case closed, end thread and all other robin related pointless threads....

 

[The_Raganork]

Pointless argument.... No way in hell is Nolan going to have Robin in his take on batman, case closed, end thread and all other robin related pointless threads....

The thread appears to be talking about Robin in a grounded future non-Nolan film now.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Thanks Dave Good insight there as well.

I was just researching what Vengeance really is, and what would it mean to Batman?

It was the talk between Rachel and Bruce in BB that got me thinking about the difference between Justice and Revenge. Are they really that different that they should be put in seperate categories? When Justice is served, revenge comes along with it in situations.

Say somebody is killed, and the murderer is sentenced, Justice AND Revenge have been served. That's what I believe Batman truly is about. He's about Revenge for the victims and those who suffer loss, and about reaping Vengeance on those are guilty. That's why Bruce became Batman originally. But he also has the respect for Justice that the Punisher doesn't have, that's why he wouldn't cross the line and leaves the rest up to the authorities above him.

I tried looking at Batman and Robin's relationship from a realistic POV. What effect would he have on this emotionally shattered child, when he himself is just as in a bad place? Cause I in the story, I have Dick being influenced by Bruce.

He asks Bruce "Would you kill the man who murdered your parents?". Even Bruce doesn't honestly know the answer to that, and Dick interprets that as 'yes'. So he goes off to kill Zucco, but can't bring himself, and turns him over to the authorities. And to Bruce, as he see's himself in Dick, thats what he's really like as well. So Dick helps Bruce keep his innocense for not turning into a criminal himself eventually.