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

[Alex Logan]

It doesn't make it lighter, it just doesn't fit with a loner that has no chance to start a family (due to his mission and his reputation as Bruce Wayne).

And again, thanks!

 

[El Payaso]

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Agreed!



How?



Well, I guess if you don't know already then there's no way I could even begin to explain it.

I don't know it because it is a load of bollox. Nolan could adapt it so it could be brilliant IMO. Just because he has a young side kick doesn't automatically make it childish and cheesy.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

It doesn't make it lighter, it just doesn't fit with a loner that has no chance to start a family (due to his mission and his reputation as Bruce Wayne).

Yea exactly, Bruce has no chance of having a biological family. Why not have a adapted son? There could be extra depth to it, Bruces father was very important in moulding him, especially in Nolans Bat films. Maybe he could pass down them teachings? "Why do we fall Dick? So we learn to pick ourselves up." Then there is the twist of Bruce becoming a Ra's like figure, teaching Dick to use his anger and hatred for good.

 

[terry78]

The sole reason Robin is in the picture (aside from the earlier comics wanting to grab the younger market with a teen sidekick) is because of Bruce's relationship with his father and mother and the fact that they were taken away at a young age, same as Dick's. He does feel an obligation somewhere within him to bring Dick into his fold, because he feels that Dick is going through the exact same torture he has been for years. It's not that he needs a sidekick, he feels he has a kindred spirit.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea, and he doesn't want him letting his anger and thirst for revenge take over him. Bruce sees himself in Dick, I think that could be interesting to see on film, especially with someone like Nolan behind it.

 

[Alex Logan]

I don't know it because it is a load of bollox. Nolan could adapt it so it could be brilliant IMO. Just because he has a young side kick doesn't automatically make it childish and cheesy.

That's the problem right there, with the direction Nolan has taken Batman I just don't see how he can adapt Robin.

The sole reason Robin is in the picture (aside from the earlier comics wanting to grab the younger market with a teen sidekick) is because of Bruce's relationship with his father and mother and the fact that they were taken away at a young age, same as Dick's. He does feel an obligation somewhere within him to bring Dick into his fold, because he feels that Dick is going through the exact same torture he has been for years.

True.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Well he doesn't have to be a little kid does he? He could be adapted to be a 18 year old or something. I think that would work much better. Then Bruce could actually be wary of his anger and him going to far. He would then set out to channel his rage and fear, like what Ra's did with Bruce. An interesting reversal, the apprentice (Bruce) becomes the teacher.

 

[Shiaruki]

Yea exactly, Bruce has no chance of having a biological family. Why not have a adapted son? There could be extra depth to it, Bruces father was very important in moulding him, especially in Nolans Bat films. Maybe he could pass down them teachings? "Why do we fall Dick? So we learn to pick ourselves up." Then there is the twist of Bruce becoming a Ra's like figure, teaching Dick to use his anger and hatred for good.

When you put it like that, the idea does sound appealing... but not quite yet.

In TDK, Batsy is still listening to stories from Alfred, still looking up to him. To have two 'Wise old Joe's' one the scene would be overpowering, how could they work around that?

Maybe in the future, maybe as a fourth and final Batsy from Nolan... (which would probably lead up to some spinoff or something :/)

The sole reason Robin is in the picture (aside from the earlier comics wanting to grab the younger market with a teen sidekick) is because of Bruce's relationship with his father and mother and the fact that they were taken away at a young age, same as Dick's. He does feel an obligation somewhere within him to bring Dick into his fold, because he feels that Dick is going through the exact same torture he has been for years. It's not that he needs a sidekick, he feels he has a kindred spirit.

There is your answer, AL. It would be simple for Nolan to do something if he keeps this in mind. Just not yet.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea I agree, now is not the time for Dick Grayson. Afterall, Batman is still a rookie really and he is the most wanted man in Gotham.

 

[Crook]

Yea I agree, now is not the time for Dick Grayson. Afterall, Batman is still a rookie really and he is the most wanted man in Gotham.

Batman was always a rookie when he first took in Robin. Grayson came along very early on in Bruce's career.

 

[Shiaruki]

Batman was always a rookie when he first took in Robin. Grayson came along very early on in Bruce's career.

Aye but as we know, films do not always stay true to what they are based on : /

 

[Changeling]

Crook, I love that avatar!

 

[Silverglade]

It's not just Nolan who needs convincing. Don't forget Bale said if Robin gets involved he will turn it down.

 

[Crook]

Oh, please. It's clear that none of the crew are well-versed with the character at all. If Nolan takes the initiative and finds a credible way of bringing the character into this franchise, then it won't take much effort to sway his cast. After all, before they met Nolan, I doubt they looked none too highly of Batman himself.

 

[ragdus]

The easy way to get this ball rolling would be for Robin to pop up a few times in the next movie already as Robin. With the theme of logical steps already established (Crime begetting Batman, Batman begetting more crime, more crime begetting more Batman wannabes...) it's not that hard to do.

Robin can be the next logical step following the failure of the Citizens for Batman. Have him pop up and complicate matters for Batman two or three times during the next movie, but at no point be a major player or a sidekick of any kind. At the end of the movie, make it apparent that this Robin guy isn't going away, and have Bruce tell him he's going to need to learn a few things if he wants to get serious. End it on that note right there.

Fin.

 

[Batman137]

How on earth would Catwoman ruin the trilogy?

Okay, well first off it wasn't too long ago we saw a movie about catwoman that was just terrible. The other thing is it dosn't seem like a villain that is more dangerous than the joker. the whole thing about sequel villains is that they have to be more dangerous the previous movies villain. sort of like a villain escalation. Also, don't mean to sound sexiest but a woman could through off the real world though nolan is going for. I just want to see a reasonable and dangerous villain. No pressure on nolan, but if he adds robin or catwoman, its the first step of ruining the past two films reputation, sort of what raimi did to the spiderman movies with the third movie.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

^ That is borderline sexist!
Remember Nolan believes in telling stories not making the latest film bigger in every way than the last. As it is, Nolan needs a few strong female characters besides Gordon's wife

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Okay, well first off it wasn't too long ago we saw a movie about catwoman that was just terrible. The other thing is it dosn't seem like a villain that is more dangerous than the joker. the whole thing about sequel villains is that they have to be more dangerous the previous movies villain. sort of like a villain escalation. Also, don't mean to sound sexiest but a woman could through off the real world though nolan is going for. I just want to see a reasonable and dangerous villain. No pressure on nolan, but if he adds robin or catwoman, its the first step of ruining the past two films reputation, sort of what raimi did to the spiderman movies with the third movie.

You haven't got a scooby, have ya?

 

[Cunning Stunts]

Again, you deliver greatness.



For the most part your idea was pretty good. I couldn't agree more on your second point.

I'm just curious to know, but what did you not like?

 

[Alex Logan]

Okay, well first off it wasn't too long ago we saw a movie about catwoman that was just terrible. The other thing is it dosn't seem like a villain that is more dangerous than the joker. the whole thing about sequel villains is that they have to be more dangerous the previous movies villain. sort of like a villain escalation. Also, don't mean to sound sexiest but a woman could through off the real world though nolan is going for. I just want to see a reasonable and dangerous villain. No pressure on nolan, but if he adds robin or catwoman, its the first step of ruining the past two films reputation, sort of what raimi did to the spiderman movies with the third movie.

First off, no one cares about that terrible pile of garbage. This is Chris Nolan we're talking about and he can give the character the right treatment. I'll also bet that Selina wouldn't be the main villain. She's not really a villain anyway, she's an anit-hero and a love interest.

A woman couldn't handle Nolan's real world? Evey read any comics with Lady Shiva? I guess not.

Nothing could ruin the past two films. Spiderman 1 and 2 are just as good as the first day I saw them and nothing could make Batman 3 as bad as Spiderman 3 was.

 

[El Payaso]

Yea exactly, Bruce has no chance of having a biological family.

Yes, he has the chance of having a biological family. He can get married and do it. He's not sterile.

Thing is he has a mission. His main concern is not a family since a family would consume the time he needs for fighting crime.

Why not have a adapted son?

Same reason. Because he is Batman and that is incompatible with fatherhood.

Why not having a wife? A dog, a normal life? Because he is Batman. He's not about having children (adopted or not) and a normal life.

There could be extra depth to it,

Or if Batman had cancer, or if he got married and divorced, or if Alfred was actually his father. many ideas could get extra depth. Doesn't mean they're good/suitable/appropriate.

Bruces father was very important in moulding him, especially in Nolans Bat films. Maybe he could pass down them teachings? "Why do we fall Dick? So we learn to pick ourselves up." Then there is the twist of Bruce becoming a Ra's like figure, teaching Dick to use his anger and hatred for good.

In Nolan films, Batman ios always looking for that day when Batman will be no longer needed. He saw that chance in harvey Dent, for example. But Bruce thinks that Batman is just momentarily needed. Now, if at some point he felt that there's has to be constant Batman in Gotham then he could start training a successor, which is a different matter than having an adopted son. It should happen when Bruce was way older.

Yea, and he doesn't want him letting his anger and thirst for revenge take over him. Bruce sees himself in Dick, I think that could be interesting to see on film, especially with someone like Nolan behind it.

If Bruce saw himself in Dick, then he wouldn't want him to become another Batman.

Well he doesn't have to be a little kid does he? He could be adapted to be a 18 year old or something. I think that would work much better. Then Bruce could actually be wary of his anger and him going to far. He would then set out to channel his rage and fear, like what Ra's did with Bruce. An interesting reversal, the apprentice (Bruce) becomes the teacher.

I also think that, if it was to be done, an older Robin would be better. It would a partner, not a son.

Oh, please. It's clear that none of the crew are well-versed with the character at all. If Nolan takes the initiative and finds a credible way of bringing the character into this franchise, then it won't take much effort to sway his cast. After all, before they met Nolan, I doubt they looked none too highly of Batman himself.

That's the thing. The crew can be versed in whatever they want. But it is Nolan himself who doesn't want to use Robin. And we all know that he's so versed in Batman he has even improved things from the comics.

 

[El Payaso]

Okay, well first off it wasn't too long ago we saw a movie about catwoman that was just terrible.

That was anything but Catwoman. That wasn't even Selina Kyle. Not to mention that is the Catwoman-Batman relationship what matters the most.

The other thing is it dosn't seem like a villain that is more dangerous than the joker.

No one is. From that perspective this franchise is already over.

the whole thing about sequel villains is that they have to be more dangerous the previous movies villain.

Catwoman could mean a more dangerous thing for Batman. She shows Batman what is to be in love and not able to develope a normal relationship. He has to arrest her but he's actually in love with her, a woman whose name he doesn't even know.

Plus, Catwoman is physically more skillful about fighting than Joker. She's more dangerous therefore in that aspect.

sort of like a villain escalation. Also, don't mean to sound sexiest but a woman could through off the real world though nolan is going for.

Why? Women don't exist in real world?

I just want to see a reasonable and dangerous villain.

Reasonable contradicts dangerous.

But if you want dangerous: Catwoman.

No pressure on nolan, but if he adds robin or catwoman, its the first step of ruining the past two films reputation, sort of what raimi did to the spiderman movies with the third movie.

That would happen if - and only if - Nolan was forced to use Catwoman. If he doesn't want her, then I'm ok with it.

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

That's the thing. The crew can be versed in whatever they want. But it is Nolan himself who doesn't want to use Robin. And we all know that he's so versed in Batman he has even improved things from the comics.

Oh, sir...

:facepalm

~HoH~

 

[El Payaso]

:facepalm

"Can't... admit... the truth..."