The Dark Knight Rises Nolan...add Robin!!!!!!

[Majik1387]

I don't understand why people are infuriated by someone for not including a character he probably feels he can't do justice to.

This is respect at its finest. Nolan doesn't feel he can do Robin right, so he doesn't want to, so as not to butcher the character, probably leaving him for a director who does like him and can handle him. That's just good form.

I feel the same way.

 

[Timstuff]

If people want Robin so bad that they'd want to see Nolan forced into it, then it'll be crap. If I was being forced to put Robin into a Batman movie against my will, I would turn him into a whiny emo kid who gets offed less than half way through the movie. It's not because that's necessarily how I view Robin, but because being pressured into writing him by fanboys would only make me have more contempt for the character. As selfish as it may sound I'd probably end up wanting to extract some kind of revenge on the Robin fanboys, and it would probably come in the form of a negative portrayal of the character.

When you are forced to adapt a character you don't like into a story, you are not going to want to do them justice. If you were remaking Star Wars Episode 1, would you like it if the studio forced you to include Jar Jar Binks? You would probably have his head get blown off by a missile 5 seconds after he meets Qui Gon if they'd let you.

 

[GL1]

Wow...

Again, not explaining why, just calling names.

This is why I despise these tedious line-by-line arguments. To respond to a comment stating a lack of explanation and then quote the explanation below is clumsy, if not outright silly. Why do people here do this?

A) Robin, if accurate to the comics, still should be an underage in a red costume. That only would put unnecessary light in the dark – and successful - Batman franchise we’re having.

B) Batman is fulfilling the original concept.

C) Batman’s current adaptation doesn’t need of a Robin.

Not if they’re being assessed, not ignored.

I don't see any of these statements as relevant either. My A invalidates your C - highlighting that you do ignore these simple facts, even while you address one. Btw: Underage for what, exactly? Breathing?

As for B, Batman is, funny enough, the exception, in a movie full of other characters who are definitely not fulfilling their original concept to the benefit of all... and (C) it depends on the story they tell, that determines what Batman needs. An adapted Robin could meet so many different types of story and character needs, it's impossible for you to prove this statement, though if it were true, it would be relevant.

If that’s true, then no one needs to use the word.

Or – even if they’re not – the closest to it.

No, they haven’t given a full detailed explanantion of that. The movies being without Robin, though, speak for themselves.

Semantic arguments and comparison to, I guess, Schumaker movies aside... you seem to be reading a different set of comics than I am if you consider the Batman character in Begins/TDK anything like the quintessential Batman... you seem to be watching different movies if you think this Batman doesn't rely on his supporting cast like sidekicks. Older, non-costumed sidekicks, but sidekicks nonetheless... you seem to be using a different dictionary than I am if you can look at the colors of a comic book costume and conclude that the character cannot be adapted successfully...

So: Different movies. Different comic books. Different dictionaries.

Perhaps we should just agree to disagree.

 

[El Payaso]

^ you lost all credibility when you suggested talia as a villain, she's way more cliche than robin and batman, who arent cliche b/c they elevated the sherlock watson thing by adding another dimension to an already complex character,

I'm eager to know what that other dimension is. Somehow I knew it wasn't going to be mentioned.

But I didn't mention Talia necessarily as a villiain, but a love interest with an evil touch, like what Catwoman is, but this time attached to his pre-Batman past.

talia is the daughter of a dead villain, which is just an excuse to reuse the first plot.

Lack of creativity attacks again. Interesting characters are more than an excuse.

and batmans loner extra dark thing has to change, its natural progression,

Lightness for Batman is not natural progression, as darkness is not natural progression for Superman. Progression is good, so far we have had progression for Nolan's Batman and Robin hasn't been even suggested.

it happened in the comics for a reason,

To attract a younger audience, which we have discussed before.

he feels for the kid, he knows what he's doing by training him.

He's depriving him of a normal life and he's putting a underage's life in danger.

even though all-star has faults, it has the best reasoning behind robin, even showing the downside.

Robin can work in comics, I've had admitted that.

 

[El Payaso]

Does Nolan hate Robin? I've seen him say Robin is in a crib somewhere and not for a few movies down the line (which is a perfectly valid explination), but never seem him say he hates the character, hes never said the character doesn't exist in his universe. Bale seems to hate him but Nolan is quite respectful.

Nolan doesn't hate Robin. But if he wanted to have him he would have put Dick Grayson somewhere. Instead, he has declared the character won't be there in his watch because he's "in a crib somewhere". A respectful way to state he simply doesn't want the character in his movies.

 

[jackshea]

the other dimension is his humanity, with someone else to care for he loses that, you keep talking about batman as if he's a real person, which he isn't, some of the decisions made aren't purely for story, sometime things happen to him that are good story-telling elemets, such as adding a juxtaposed character to play off. and you can't keep reversing it for superman, who has gotten darker, they aren't just opposites of each other, you're just being ignorant.

 

[jackshea]

and talia wasn't attached to his past, he's never met her.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Does Nolan hate Robin? I've seen him say Robin is in a crib somewhere and not for a few movies down the line (which is a perfectly valid explination), but never seem him say he hates the character, hes never said the character doesn't exist in his universe. Bale seems to hate him but Nolan is quite respectful.

This discussion may be moot, because a lot of these quotes have been taken out of context, and warped to fit one side or the other. For example the "Robin is in his crib" quote was more to hit home that the focus of the first movie was just Batman, and he wasn't necessarily cutting him off completely (Remember, the first movie started off when Robin wasn't even invetro). The quote from Bale about refusing to work if Robin was included actually has never been credibly referenced, and is more than likely just something someone said.

The truth is, both Bale, Nolan(s) and Goyer would never set in stone rules from film to film. They are going to be in pitch meetings and rewrites for a long time before coming up with even a basic outline for the third, which we all know, will be changed again and again before shooting. Remember when Penguin and Black Mask was suppose to be in The Dark Knight, or when Robin was suppose to be in Batman Returns or when Superman Returns was actually gonna have a sequel. I do. We all saw how that went.

I wouldn't count him out completely.

 

[mat]

Um...robin is in both movies. Now admitedly there have been many robins in the comics and many different takes on the caracter so a fresh approach is needed. Also filmakers seldom ever waste screen time on unecessary developpement like for instance on a small blond boy wearing a red t-shirt. To whom batman gives a device from his belt. And later saves him from zazs...In dark knight the young boy is now in Gordons care. And just like with Dick Grayson before him the young boy is held hostage by two-face. The boy is also significant in the fact that unlike the Batman vigilantes that ressemble the sons of the batman from Dark Knight Returns, he will not be swayed by the lie that Batman is a killer that is conceived at the end of Drak Knight. He is a boy that can believe in a hero willing to sacrifice himself for the good of others. This also makes sense if one considers that it is only a subtle shift from barbara gordon who ultimately becomes batgirl and is crippled by the Joker in The killing Joke. This boy can be a combination of Grayson, Todd, Drake and Gordon. Ultimately however I believe the boy will not be a Batman sanctionned robin like Tim Drake was at first when he replaced Todd. He also will most likely be claimed by the madness Batman brought to gotham via the league of Shadows.

 

[GhostPoet]

I hate Robin. His costume makes no sense in relation to Batman's goal.
And he's just plain annoying.

I prefer Batman the loner.

 

[spideymouse]

If people want Robin so bad that they'd want to see Nolan forced into it, then it'll be crap. If I was being forced to put Robin into a Batman movie against my will, I would turn him into a whiny emo kid who gets offed less than half way through the movie. It's not because that's necessarily how I view Robin, but because being pressured into writing him by fanboys would only make me have more contempt for the character. As selfish as it may sound I'd probably end up wanting to extract some kind of revenge on the Robin fanboys, and it would probably come in the form of a negative portrayal of the character.

When you are forced to adapt a character you don't like into a story, you are not going to want to do them justice. If you were remaking Star Wars Episode 1, would you like it if the studio forced you to include Jar Jar Binks? You would probably have his head get blown off by a missile 5 seconds after he meets Qui Gon if they'd let you.

haha, i'm really glad you're not in charge of making any of these films.

 

[Robin_will_Rise]

did you see Jett and pj's new article on bof on robin, they are Both Now convinced Robin can work in nolan's next film, and how batman would need robin in the next film! i agree as well because i had the same idea, it feels like the end of the dark Knight sets up robin so well!

 

[Quinzel]

and talia wasn't attached to his past, he's never met her.

Talia should be in the next movie.

It would make sense.

 

[Robin_will_Rise]

and the ending puts batman at being total isolation, in complete outcast mode, he would need Robin now more than ever!

 

[I Am The Knight]

Mind posting that article?

 

[Robin_will_Rise]

i amknight im sorry im clueless when it comes to links?lol it brand new right in the front page of bof news today in the batman movie news section

 

[Link67]

I could see Hayden Christensen playing an awesome Robin

 

[I Am The Knight]

i amknight im sorry im clueless when it comes to links?lol it brand new right in the front page of bof news today in the batman movie news section

Kay.

Here it is:

OPINION: "Robin - To Be or Not To Be"
Author: Paul J. Wares
Wednesday, July 30, 2008

I actually began writing this piece in 2005, immediately following the release of BATMAN BEGINS. There had been plenty of talk across the net about Robin and whether Chris Nolan would include him in a later movie pondered this for a while and started writing. After repeat viewings of BATMAN BEGINS though, I decided that Robin just wouldn’t fit into the world that Nolan created.

Robin is a problematic character, particularly in this new movie universe. This isn’t exclusive to the movie world Nolan has crafted though. I’ve always had problems with the Robin character, mostly due to how he contradicts Batman. One of Batman’s mantras in my favourite comic book incarnations is the notion that he is Batman to prevent his tragedy befalling another. Robin completely contradicts that notion.

With BEGINS and now THE DARK KNIGHT, Nolan has given us a rich, layered and psychologically “realistic” version of Bruce Wayne. We understand his motives behind the path he has ultimately chosen, but if one of his guiding principals is to protect the innocent and prevent his tragedy befalling another, then there is no good reason why he would put anyone in harms way -- least of all a thirteen year-old boy wearing a brightly coloured costume. It makes no logical sense and the suspension of disbelief that Nolan and team worked so hard for in his two movies is thrown out of the window with the inclusion of Robin at Batman’s side.

Or is it?

After my third viewing of THE DARK KNIGHT, I’m now not so sure.

I can understand to a certain degree fan desire to include him in the franchise at some point. He’s been fighting crime at Batman’s side on and off for over 67 years and if this film seriesis going to be considered the definitive portrayal of the Batman, then at some point Robin will have to show up, right?

Let me say that I’m in no hurry to see Robin on screen again any time soon. I’m not a fan of the character at all, despite what the essay might allude to. I certainly didn’t want to see him make an appearance TDK, but after the events of that movie, I now wouldn’t rule out seeing him in the third movie of this series.

Why? Well, because Batman is very nearly broken in that TDK. He is at the edge of the abyss and his world is darker than at any other time in his adult life. His best friend and potential lover, the person to whom he pinned his hope on a normal life is gone. The man that he truly believed could make Gotham a better place is gone and he himself is being hunted by the police, believed to be a murdering psychopath. In the next film I can see Bruce Wayne all but disappearing into the guise of The Batman, being more obsessed than he ever has been and for the first time, battle worn and without hope.

He will need something or someone to bring him back from the edge, to remind him that he is human and that he does make a difference. He needs redemption, not only in Gotham’s eyes, but in his own. To that end, the Robin character would make an enormous impact in the world of Batman. Yes he might be an implausible character, but if TDK showed us anything, is that this team know how to make the implausible, plausible.

But how do you make the Robin character work believably on screen?

For what it’s worth, here’s how I would do it. Make it a subplot of the third movie, not the focus. Batman hears rumours of another vigilante in Gotham, like him it is said that this new vigilante strikes quickly from the darkness and is never seen in full view. This character though, doesn’t seem to proactively fight crime, but rather save people who are the victims of a crime in progress. Witnesses that have been saved by this person speak of seeing nothing more than a blur in a trenchcoat & hoodie and a red clad chest with an embroidered “R” sewn into the fabric. This causes the press to dub him “Robin,”

Batman pays these reports little attention, disappointed that he still appears to be inspiring copycats, until this “Robin” interferes with one of Batman’s nightly patrols. Like the other witnesses, The Batman sees very little of Robin aside from the fact that he is a boy of around fourteen years old and his acrobatic prowess is staggering. Robin escapes before Batman has a chance to question him, leaving The Dark Knight curious to the young boy’s identity.

Back at the Batcave, Batman launches his investigation into this young vigelane. After some searching, he uncovers the story of “The ‘Flying Graysons” and a photo. The photo shows the family all dressed in green and red – their circus costumes – with the first letters of their initials embroidered on their chests. “J” for John, the Father, “M” Mary the mother and “R” for Richard their young son. Batman reads how the boy was orphaned when his parents’ trapeze wire broke and they fell to their deaths, witnessed by Richard. It is believed that they were murdered as part of an extortion racket. The boy went missing days later, but it’s obvious that he has the same thirst for justice that Bruce had at that age. He is striking back at the criminals of Gotham and honouring his parents while he does it, by wearing his circus outfit.

Batman immediately empathizes with the young boy’s situation and events lead him to take him in. However, Batman does not train him, nor does he sanction him. Any Robin action after this point must not be with the consent of the Batman, or all plausibility will disappear.

However, the inclusion of the character brings Batman back from the edge and he is made whole again. At the end of the movie, Robin will leave Bruce’s care and be sent off to school. Leaving the door open for the next film to either pick up the adventures of Robin (or spin off to another movie) or drop him altogether.

Of course, fans will argue that it isn’t faithful to the mythology, or that this isn’t really Robin, but then Two-Face wasn’t burnt by an explosion and he was still “Two-Face.” The Joker wasn’t perma-white, but he was still “The Joker.” If Robin is to be included in this series, this is the only way I could see it working.

Then again, let’s face it. No one knows what may be in store for the next film and that’s half the fun, but if anyone can pull off the inclusion of Robin, it’s Team Nolan.

Oh yeah, did I mention, Catwoman is a must?

http://www.batman-on-film.com/opinion_batman3_robin-to-be-or-not-to-be_7-30-08.html

 

[Ixion]

There are some nice ideas in that article, the death of Dick's parents remains pretty much the same, Bruce sees the similarities between the two of them and most importantly it is Dick and not Tim/Jason/Carrie/Spoiler.

But I think Dick taking it upon himself to become a vigilante, actually saving people, avoiding being caught by the police, evading Batman etc. doesn't really work. Dick would need training by Batman to do any of those things. Bruce should also be there to witness what happens to Dick's parents. And I'd prefer the name 'Robin' to come from a family nickname rather than have the press come up with it, or at least have Dick come up with it himself.

 

[Heretic]

I would have no problem with Jason Todd in part 3, only for The Joker to beat him to death in part 4. And I dont care if he even puts on a costume, just let The Joker kill him...sometime before or after he cripples barbara and kills the elder barbara.

I do kind of have a problem with Robin being in every film though, which is why I wouldnt want Dick in the movie.

 

[JackBauer]

It's pretty important to have Bruce actually train him. It makes them connect more than if Bruce had just taken him in.

Bruce trains him because not only does it keep him grounded, but it also adds to the idea that Batman should be a symbol. He'd want someone to eventually take up the mantle, and wouldn't trust anyone he hadn't guided himself. But then comes the ethical question: is it right to put him in harm's way, even if Dick is willing to put himself in danger without training? Is Bruce doing this for Dick, or for himself?

If they get to the core of the character, and how he affects Bruce, Robin can be a lot more than "just a sidekick".

 

[Two-Face]

"To be or not to be?"


I vote not.

 

[Malone]

There's an interesting topic on this over at batman on film.

 

[Saint]

The argument that Robin adds unnecessary "light" to Batman demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding both Batman and the purpose Robin serves.

Batman isn't about darkness, gentlemen: Batman is about overcoming darkness.

 

[JackBauer]

The argument that Robin adds unnecessary "light" to Batman demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding both Batman and the purpose Robin serves.

Batman isn't about darkness, gentlemen: Batman is about overcoming darkness.

Well said.