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

[raybia]

you just read that eddie murphy was playing riddler, and it was the robin being apart of the film tidbit that made you ask for proof?

lol

 

[Spider-Bite]

here you go

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,469305,00.html

 

[El Payaso]

You just read that Eddie Murphy was playing Riddler, and it was the Robin being apart of the film tidbit that made you ask for proof?

Hehe. I just highlited the topic of the thread to keep it nice and tidy.

Plus Murphy's rep said "not true."

 

[wellsy]

Spider-Bite - WB Executives have publicly debunked that rumour.'

Right now, BB3 is very nebulous. Apart from the returning cast, there is very little else known in the public sphere. And it'll be that way for a fair while.

 

[Spider-Bite]

I know I just found this. when my friend read the happenings article he made it sound as fact and then I found the sites on the internet talking about it.

I just found this article.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28298887/

 

[The Guard]

Less is more

Not in terms of "interesting". Less emotional depth is somehow more interesting?

 

[Alex Logan]

No, actually. Part of why I'm so bitter. I WANTED to be upset by it... I just didn't think it was handled in the best of ways. I think there was so much potential there that just didn't come off in the final product. At least for me, you know?

It almost felt rushed. The Two-Face thing, I mean. The strange thing is, I already care about this character from the comics, so you would think I would already have established a strong bond with him... but I was waiting to really FEEL for Eckhart's Harvey... and it really never came. Not sure why.


~HoH~

Rachel was an unlikable character almost from the start. When they replaced her with a different actress even more of the connection was lost.

Very strange you felt that way about Harvey, I felt very sorry for him. I hated and loved Two Face all at the same time, in fact Two Face was my favorite part of film.

Yeah, 0801. THE JOKER. But I've already told you that in PM.

~HoH~

The fact that you know that blows me away.

 

[El Payaso]

Not in terms of "interesting".

Yes. Sometimes in terms of "interesting" less of certain characters around the main role is better.

Less emotional depth is somehow more interesting?

Are you gratuitously implying Robin/Batgirl/Batmite (or their mere presence) = emotional depth?

Very strange you felt that way about Harvey, I felt very sorry for him. I hated and loved Two Face all at the same time, in fact Two Face was my favorite part of film.

Same here. Two-Face was IMO the best characterized character in every aspect. By the time he's killing people you can feel and know exactly why is he doing it and why is he doing the way he does.

IMO Eckhardt should be the nominated one, to any good award you want. The trip his character takes from his first scene to the last one is incredible. I appreciated his performance more than Ledger's, which is not saying anything bad about Heath.

 

[Alex Logan]

a happenings magazine just posted an article saying that Rahel Whyce, not sure if the last name is right, is playing Catwoman, Eddie Murphy is playing the Riddler, and yes Robin will be in the movie. Not sure if Robin is a set up for part four or not, but I think that would be the more realistic way to go. It was ridiculous how in batman #3 from the other series, the guy just discovers all his equipment and bam he's now a superhero.

That was total bull.

dick's becoming robin should take years of transition.

True, but Batman's transition should have also taken years. They just don't have that kind of time in a film.

 

[The Guard]

Yes. Sometimes in terms of "interesting" less of certain characters around the main role is better.

How does having less characters around the main role have a thing to do with making that character "interesting" or not? You seem to be confusing interesting and serious/realistic.

Are you gratuitously implying Robin/Batgirl/Batmite (or their mere presence) = emotional depth?

No. Are you stupid enough to think I care about the silly picture that was posted? Notice how I didn't include or reference what was in the picture in my quote when I replied?

It should be pretty clear what I was referring to.

And by the way, adding Bat-Mite, Batgirl and any other silly element would tend to make Batman's world that much more "interesting". Just not quite as realistic, or serious, depending on which element is used.

 

[Alex Logan]

Same here. Two-Face was IMO the best characterized character in every aspect. By the time he's killing people you can feel and know exactly why is he doing it and why is he doing the way he does.

IMO Eckhardt should be the nominated one, to any good award you want. The trip his character takes from his first scene to the last one is incredible. I appreciated his performance more than Ledger's, which is not saying anything bad about Heath.

WOW!

I was thinking the very samething. I still loved Ledger, but I knew he would be amazing right after I saw the first full trailer. Yeah, Eckhart's performance really leaped out to me, eveytime I watch the final scene I get emotional, it's hard to watch.

 

[Spider-Bite]

That was total bull.



True, but Batman's transition should have also taken years. They just don't have that kind of time in a film.

actually he spent 5 years in prison constnatly getting in fights with like five people at a time. and it was in china I believe. for all we know some chinese martial artist prisoners trained him in their spare time which they had plenty of. And on top of that the movie never confirmed how long he spent training with the ninjas and Ras ah guhl.

the movie never really showed much of his childhood either. he could have been studying martial arts his whole life for all we know.

and yeah they do have that kind of time in a film. think about it. in x-men weren't they training for years and years? Think about martial arts movies. Isn't it usually assumed that the martial arts masters had been training since they were kids?

a descent change they could make is having Bruce Wayne come across this teenage kid in a ghetto beating the crap out of three punks at once, and have it turn out that he was from the circus as a kid, his parents died and he had been living in a foster care home as a troubled youth for years. Have him already have studied some martial arts prior to having even been introduced in the movie.

that would make it way easier for batman to train him. I'd change his character a bit though from the comics. Give him some agression issues.

There is no way for Robin to fit in these movies while still being true to his comic book counterpart. It would be way too ridiculous.

 

[El Payaso]

How does having less characters around the main role have a thing to do with making that character "interesting" or not? You seem to be confusing interesting and serious/realistic.

I'm not confusing having more characters with having more appropiate characters. You should discern them too before typing generalizations.

But yes, serious and realistic is what this Bat-franchise is about. And what the good Batman mvoies has been about.

No. Are you stupid enough to think I care about the silly picture that was posted? Notice how I didn't include or reference what was in the picture in my quote when I replied?

If I didn't noticed how you dodge things you don't like to address?

If I didn't noticed how you're losing it by calling me stupid?

It should be pretty clear what I was referring to.

You were refering to how adding characters would make Batman more interesting.

I was refering to asking what kind of characters do you want to include.

It is not the amount of characters but whether they're worthy or not.

Yes, that's the process which is used to rule out certain elements. Namely Robin. He doesn't fit with a serious version of Batman. I hope if they try they prove me wrong, but a minor in a red suit next to what Batman has become doesn't fit too well.

You don't see many people fighting to include Batmite or Batgirl (or even Robin) under the idea of their inclusions being "interesting."

WOW!

I was thinking the very samething. I still loved Ledger, but I knew he would be amazing right after I saw the first full trailer. Yeah, Eckhart's performance really leaped out to me, eveytime I watch the final scene I get emotional, it's hard to watch.

Thing with the Joker is that you can make a bigger impact more "easily." You have a lot to catch everybody's attention; the make-up, the humour, the exaggerations, the over-the-top behaviour and acting.

Two-Face is a much more intimate psycho. It's a pathetic tragic character who you won't have as much fun with. It's not the rich mixture between the looney psycho and the flashy comedian Joker is.

Add to that that Harvey Dent was richly portrayed by Eckhardt. Dent alone was already a great character. But the addition of Two-Face to the story made it simply fantastic, specially because of how in detail his behaviour, motivations and modus operandi were explained.

That's why I'm not of the idea of having kept Two-Face for the next movie, or keeping him alive. When he died, I came to the realization that the Dent/two-Face characterization was simply masterful.

 

[Gianakin_]

Thing with the Joker is that you can make a bigger impact more "easily." You have a lot to catch everybody's attention; the make-up, the humour, the exaggerations, the over-the-top behaviour and acting.

Two-Face is a much more intimate psycho. It's a pathetic tragic character who you won't have as much fun with. It's not the rich mixture between the looney psycho and the flashy comedian Joker is.

Amen. And that's the way I feel about Batman and Bale in TDK. He doesn't get as much credit as he should.

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

Rachel was an unlikable character almost from the start. When they replaced her with a different actress even more of the connection was lost.

I totally agree. I hated her from the start, and could never look past the fact that it should have been Harvey in her spot. Sans the romance, of course! Heck, even if Dent was the D.A. in Batman Begins, and Rachel was the assistant D.A., it still would have been so much better. We would have had two movies to develop a serious attachment to this character that is really one of the best, and most tragic villains in Batman's rogue's gallery. I wanted MORE of him, and it felt as if TDK was just too busy to give him his proper dues.

Very strange you felt that way about Harvey, I felt very sorry for him. I hated and loved Two Face all at the same time, in fact Two Face was my favorite part of film.

Maybe I should've saved what I said above for this part... Again, though. I agree. Dent was the best part for me as well. To put it simply, I think it was Ekhart's best performance to date (Thank You for Smoking coming a close second)...I just wanted to see him get to expand more on screen. Thus why two movies would've been better than one. It could've added so much more depth to Harvey...

But I understand that they couldn't waste so much time on just one character when there was so much story to tell in TDK already. Again, that's why adding him in Begins would have been perfect. It ALSO would have made his death at the end of the second one more dramatic, and even acceptable for most people that were upset by it. No one can claim anyone was wasted if they were given that kind of treatment!

The fact that you know that blows me away.

lol, I hate to admit that I know a lot more useless information about him too. You don't even want to know...

I do have a defense for it, but I'm not sure it's any better than knowing it in the first place, so nevermind.

Whenever I manage to sign onto my xbox live, and someone asks me what the 0801 in my name means? All I get are crickets! I don't even need them to say their words out loud to know what they're thinking.

Getting back onto the subject of Robin, though...I still say if he's done correctly, and taken seriously? He could work wonderfully in the new franchise. He doesn't even need to be ROBIN in the next film to add depth. Or even be in the entire thing... for example...

Bruce/Batman spends pretty much the entire movie alone. Struggling alone. Suffering alone. After all, it's what Batman does!
The weight of Rachel's death would only add to the fact that other than Alfred? Bruce has no one. He fights the good fight endlessly, with little to no result.
With no outside help other than Gordon, who he can barely even find the time to speak to at this point because of how things were left off, he could start to feel worn down.

Towards the end of the film is where you could introduce Dick. Alfred makes Bruce take some time out from being Batman. Go to the circus! Relax! Take just one night for yourself! You can even include the main villain into the reasoning behind Bruce deciding to go. That he found out one of the main villain's associates will be attending.

They can tweak Grayson's origin however it will fit the film, and change around the events of what actually goes down, as long as the end result is the same. His parents are killed. Bruce is there to pick up the pieces of the shattered boy who reminds him so much of himself as a child.

At this point, taking down the main villain could become the same thing as helping this new character avenge his parents. And Bruce can do exactly what he has done in the books. Try and stop him from doing ANYTHING, because it was too dangerous for a child to get involved.

Big selling point? DON'T use Dick in costume the entire film. Just... foreshadow to the event. Technically, Robin would never be in the movie, and people that want to see Dick Grayson would be happy with the outcome. You could potentially make almost everyone happy.

But that's just my opinion.


~HoH~

 

[DCnightwing23]

I've always felt like Nolan should add Nightwing first. Nightwing is more of a mature hero. He's his own, he's not a sidekick.

And there are ways of bringing Nightwing into the fold.

Like maybe in BB, when we flash back to Bruce running away, maybe he runs into an orphan a little younger then him named Dick Grayson, and they become close friends, cause we never really hear or see much from his journey to running away from gotham to becoming a prisoner, and the events that happen that we dont get to see.

So thats a way of bringing him into the series.

Then Dick Grayson also returns to Gotham, only being more of a darker, kind of meaner Dick Grayson. And he reunites with Bruce Wayne. They become friends again, and Bruce decides to help him out and give him a job at Wayne Enterprises. And over the course of more films he becomes Nightwing.

 

[The Guard]

I'm not confusing having more characters with having more appropiate characters. You should discern them too before typing generalizations.

I hate to resort to semantics, but I used the word "interesting", did I not? Not "appropriate".

If you want to talk about whether something is appropriate, that's a whole different discussion. Which then harkens back to our "Is Robin appropriate for Batman" discussion.

I'm not confusing having more characters with having more appropriate characters, either. I'm making a distinct statement that the inclusion of Robin allows Batman to have layers he otherwise wouldn't. That it makes him more interesting.

Generalizations? How, when I speak about a relatively specific element of characterization, am I typing in generalizations?

And I can type whatever I please, especially when responding to witty, well thought out stuff like "Less is more". Your misinterpretation of my argument based on something I never made part of my argument is your issue.

If I didn't noticed how you dodge things you don't like to address?

How am I dodging anything again?

I ignored the Bat-Mite picture. Not because I cannot address the issue of Bat-Mite, the Batman Family, and the cheesier era of Batman, but because it is somewhat irrelevant to this discussion.

Nowhere did I advocate including Bat-Mite in the film franchise. Nowhere did I advocate him as a serious character. And since Bat-Mite is irrelevant to my argument, and the person who posted the photo didn't BOTHER to make a concrete point with the photo, and in fact, made a ridiculous assertion about the Batman mythology ("Less is more"), I ignored it.

If I didn't noticed how you're losing it by calling me stupid?

I did not call you stupid. I asked if you were stupid. Second, you were, to all appearances, acting stupid. You made a stupid statement about whether my response to the post, a response that didn't even address the photo, was a gratuitous assumption that adding those elements added character depth.

I was refering to asking what kind of characters do you want to include.

Really? Because normally when that's what people want to know, they don't say:

Are you gratuitously implying Robin/Batgirl/Batmite (or their mere presence) =
emotional depth?

How does that equal "What kind of characters do you want to include?

It is not the amount of characters but whether they're worthy or not.

True.

Yes, that's the process which is used to rule out certain elements. Namely Robin. He doesn't fit with a serious version of Batman. I hope if they try they prove me wrong, but a minor in a red suit next to what Batman has become doesn't fit too well.

And yet...for almost 70 years...

Here we go again.

You don't see many people fighting to include Batmite or Batgirl (or even Robin) under the idea of their inclusions being "interesting."

I don't see many creative people, people with the imagination to see how Robin could work, or people who want to honor more than a few key elements of the mythology here, either. I see people content to rest on their laurels believing that whatever Chris Nolan says is good for Batman must be all there is.

 

[DCnightwing23]

Another idea i had was again we never see the people Bruce runs into during his time away from gotham in BB.

So maybe he meets up with Dick Grayson, an orphan about 5 or 6 years younger then Bruce. And they become friends.

And then Bruce returns to Gotham BB and TDK, and after a year or two after TDK Dick Grayson returns to Gotham after being transferred from Bludhaven, Dick is a very successful Detective and is sent to help Gordon hunt down batman. He's a clean cop and is one of few.

And then meets up with Bruce, and maybe become rivals in a way, Grayson becomes jealous to what Bruce has become. A feud bruins, there are ways to bring the character Dick Grayson into the series.

 

[Alex Logan]

actually he spent 5 years in prison constnatly getting in fights with like five people at a time. and it was in china I believe. for all we know some chinese martial artist prisoners trained him in their spare time which they had plenty of. And on top of that the movie never confirmed how long he spent training with the ninjas and Ras ah guhl.

the movie never really showed much of his childhood either. he could have been studying martial arts his whole life for all we know.

and yeah they do have that kind of time in a film. think about it. in x-men weren't they training for years and years? Think about martial arts movies. Isn't it usually assumed that the martial arts masters had been training since they were kids?

a descent change they could make is having Bruce Wayne come across this teenage kid in a ghetto beating the crap out of three punks at once, and have it turn out that he was from the circus as a kid, his parents died and he had been living in a foster care home as a troubled youth for years. Have him already have studied some martial arts prior to having even been introduced in the movie.

that would make it way easier for batman to train him. I'd change his character a bit though from the comics. Give him some agression issues.

There is no way for Robin to fit in these movies while still being true to his comic book counterpart. It would be way too ridiculous.

I know all this, but what I meant was that there is no way to put ALL their training in a film.

Yes, there is no way for Robin's origin to fit into these movies, that is unless he was given his own film.

Thing with the Joker is that you can make a bigger impact more "easily." You have a lot to catch everybody's attention; the make-up, the humour, the exaggerations, the over-the-top behaviour and acting.

Two-Face is a much more intimate psycho. It's a pathetic tragic character who you won't have as much fun with. It's not the rich mixture between the looney psycho and the flashy comedian Joker is.

Add to that that Harvey Dent was richly portrayed by Eckhardt. Dent alone was already a great character. But the addition of Two-Face to the story made it simply fantastic, specially because of how in detail his behaviour, motivations and modus operandi were explained.

That's why I'm not of the idea of having kept Two-Face for the next movie, or keeping him alive. When he died, I came to the realization that the Dent/two-Face characterization was simply masterful.

I didn't have a problem with his death in the film. I was disappointed that I wouldn't see him again, but I never though of his characterization in those terms. As always, a masterful deduction El Payaso.

I totally agree. I hated her from the start, and could never look past the fact that it should have been Harvey in her spot. Sans the romance, of course! Heck, even if Dent was the D.A. in Batman Begins, and Rachel was the assistant D.A., it still would have been so much better. We would have had two movies to develop a serious attachment to this character that is really one of the best, and most tragic villains in Batman's rogue's gallery. I wanted MORE of him, and it felt as if TDK was just too busy to give him his proper dues.

I'll admit that I didn't hate Rachel at first. I had a few problems with Holmes, but after Batman Begins was over I thought she did alright and assumed that I wouldn't see again.

When she was replaced by Maggie, who I don't like even more than Holmes, I thought to myself: Why? What's her purpose? I honestly couldn't think of a single thing. I told myself that Chris Nolan must have a plan. Then after I saw The Dark Knight I knew I was right. She didn't have a purpose. Her role could have been played by any female in Dent's life. Why not Gilda Dent?

Another thing I don't get was why did Maggie play the same character so much differently? It's still suppost to be the same person. I don't get it.

Maybe I should've saved what I said above for this part... Again, though. I agree. Dent was the best part for me as well. To put it simply, I think it was Ekhart's best performance to date (Thank You for Smoking coming a close second)...I just wanted to see him get to expand more on screen. Thus why two movies would've been better than one. It could've added so much more depth to Harvey...

But I understand that they couldn't waste so much time on just one character when there was so much story to tell in TDK already. Again, that's why adding him in Begins would have been perfect. It ALSO would have made his death at the end of the second one more dramatic, and even acceptable for most people that were upset by it. No one can claim anyone was wasted if they were given that kind of treatment!

lol, I hate to admit that I know a lot more useless information about him too. You don't even want to know...

I do have a defense for it, but I'm not sure it's any better than knowing it in the first place, so nevermind.

Whenever I manage to sign onto my xbox live, and someone asks me what the 0801 in my name means? All I get are crickets! I don't even need them to say their words out loud to know what they're thinking. ~

I don't think putting Dent in the first film would have even been possible. Rememver that before Batman Begins the character was pretty much dead, in terms of film making. I don't think they even knew if they could get another film off the ground. And Aaron was not very well known then either.

I thought The Dark Knight give Dent quite a bit of sceen time. Not as much as the Joker, but I though Dent's transformation over the course of the film was perfect.

Getting back onto the subject of Robin, though...I still say if he's done correctly, and taken seriously? He could work wonderfully in the new franchise. He doesn't even need to be ROBIN in the next film to add depth. Or even be in the entire thing... for example...

Bruce/Batman spends pretty much the entire movie alone. Struggling alone. Suffering alone. After all, it's what Batman does! The weight of Rachel's death would only add to the fact that other than Alfred? Bruce has no one. He fights the good fight endlessly, with little to no result.
With no outside help other than Gordon, who he can barely even find the time to speak to at this point because of how things were left off, he could start to feel worn down.

Towards the end of the film is where you could introduce Dick. Alfred makes Bruce take some time out from being Batman. Go to the circus! Relax! Take just one night for yourself! You can even include the main villain into the reasoning behind Bruce deciding to go. That he found out one of the main villain's associates will be attending.

They can tweak Grayson's origin however it will fit the film, and change around the events of what actually goes down, as long as the end result is the same. His parents are killed. Bruce is there to pick up the pieces of the shattered boy who reminds him so much of himself as a child.

At this point, taking down the main villain could become the same thing as helping this new character avenge his parents. And Bruce can do exactly what he has done in the books. Try and stop him from doing ANYTHING, because it was too dangerous for a child to get involved.

Big selling point? DON'T use Dick in costume the entire film. Just... foreshadow to the event. Technically, Robin would never be in the movie, and people that want to see Dick Grayson would be happy with the outcome. You could potentially make almost everyone happy.

But that's just my opinion.

~HoH~

Your ideas on Robin are interesting, but I don't think story could or would develop in that way.

First and foremost, if Robin was intoduced I think that Dick needs to be in his late teens (18 - 19) or early twenties (20 - 23). He can't be a child, I just don't think that would work.

As you said, his origin would have to change and if we see him in costume that MUST change too.

Ultimately, when it comes to this subject, I'm more into what the story could or would be. Does Robin fit into the next chapter of Nolan's Batman? I know you don't care for Nolan, but really like his style and I love his Batman.

Now, on a personal level, rather then seeing Robin or any other partnervro that matter, I want to see a new take on some old villains like Catwoman, Riddler, Freeze, and even a couple of new ones: Black Mask and Lady Shiva!!

 

[COMPO]

Another idea i had was again we never see the people Bruce runs into during his time away from gotham in BB.

So maybe he meets up with Dick Grayson, an orphan about 5 or 6 years younger then Bruce. And they become friends.

And then Bruce returns to Gotham BB and TDK, and after a year or two after TDK Dick Grayson returns to Gotham after being transferred from Bludhaven, Dick is a very successful Detective and is sent to help Gordon hunt down batman. He's a clean cop and is one of few.

And then meets up with Bruce, and maybe become rivals in a way, Grayson becomes jealous to what Bruce has become. A feud bruins, there are ways to bring the character Dick Grayson into the series.

lad that kinda destroys the story of Robin and nightwing all together I mean robin is meant to be a mirror to batman as well as nightwing yet they are lighter mirrors. They are what Bruce could have become changing everything about the character doesn't make it better it just doesn't make it the same character it makes it a different character all together.

 

[Cunning Stunts]

Just thought I'd throw this in here, let me know what you think:

Robin:

For starters, not a little kid- he's about 25, give or take a few years. He's an ex-trapeze artist who left the circus (where he worked with his family, SHOCKER!) to join the military and become a fighter pilot (where he became one of the top pilots/engineers in the military quite quickly). Somewhere along the lines, he hears that his family was killed (or possibly he joined the military BECAUSE of his family members' deaths), as was his entire squad, by the same group of people (whoever these people are, they turn out to be Batman's villain in whichever film Robin would appear in).

I haven't thought out all the kinks yet, but I think this would be a good way to bring in Robin, given the background I just gave him, is that Batman finds a need for a Bat-plane, and winds up becoming connected to Dick. Dick eventually finds out who Bruce really is, and he gears up and saves Batman's ass in some sort of climactic conflict.

The best use for the name "Robin" I can think of is that it was his codename while he was a fighter pilot, and perhaps "Birds of Prey" could have been the squad name, or some goofy reference to the other comics like that? I think all these could tie up the loose ends left around his name that Nolan's universe would likely present.

Perhaps he could later take the name Nightwing as an homage to his best friend who was in his squadron?

Anyways, with Robin there, people would start seeing multiple Batmen, thinking that Batman really isn't just one person, or perhaps he really is a beast of some sort, further scaring the crap out of the public. Instead of being a direct combatant, Robin would likely hang in the back to help Batman with traps, fight indirectly through the use of different weapons and/or the vehicles (predominantly the Batwing), therefore giving more logic to the use of an eye-mask instead of a full-on cowl.

Just some ideas that popped into my head before work today. I wanted to test them here and see how the public would take them.

I posted it over in the Interpretation thread, and I figured this would be a good place for it. Just curious to hear what the fanbase would think.

 

[CaptainClown]

thats umm ya interesting

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea it's one of the better ideas for Dick that i've seen.

 

[COMPO]

errr its a good idea but i don't know just doesnt sound like robin i mean if hes from the army he doesnt seem to need batman's help and would be helping out batman more. He seems too experienced.

 

[Cunning Stunts]

errr its a good idea but i don't know just doesnt sound like robin i mean if hes from the army he doesnt seem to need batman's help and would be helping out batman more. He seems too experienced.

That's kind of what the aim was. He's more of a partner for Batman that Batman treats like a sidekick (which will lead to future conflict between the two) than an actual sidekick.