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

[Judson Caspian]

The only problem with robin in BF and BR was that he was to old.

Right. A younger Robin would've been more serious. Having a kid tagging along with Batman. You know, because that makes Batman look even more badass.

What the hell is wrong with you?

 

[Amon]

I'm a huge fan of Robin, but I do not think he should be in Nolan's "trilogy" of sorts. If anything, he could show up at the end of the movie to set up the next trilogy, but I think we should get three Batman films before going into the Robin story. Robin is an integral character to Batman, and as much as some of you seem to hate him, he can't just be ignored. There is a fan base for the character. He wasn't done right whatsoever in Batman Forever or Batman & Robin.

Nolan, assuming he goes on to do a second trilogy, could make this character work on the big screen. I have faith that the next time we see Robin in a Batman film that he will be a lot more fleshed out as a character. Batman, without Robin there to save him from the abysmal world that is Gotham City, becomes too dark and he loses something about himself. Robin is the key to bringing Batman full circle as a character. The father-son bond that they have is a vital part of changing the Batman character for the better. Without Robin, he would not be able to redeem himself.

If Nolan doesn't want to do him in the first trilogy, that's fine, but there will be a point (whether Nolan is back to direct after the trilogy or not) that Robin will be a necessity. There are so many infinitely great possibilities by introducing Robin into this series. All in all, though, I do say that the Dick Grayson character should at the very least be introduced in the third film.

And just to end on a high note... Do any of you really think that Warner Bros. is going to ignore the Robin character? He can be in the second trilogy of Batman films and after that... Oh, that's right. We could then have a Nightwing franchise. Do you think that WB is going to pass up the opportunity to get to that point? Robin is an alluring idea and a significant addition to the Batman films. When the time is right, Robin will be introduced.

That's just fact.

 

[COMPO]

I'm a huge fan of Robin, but I do not think he should be in Nolan's "trilogy" of sorts. If anything, he could show up at the end of the movie to set up the next trilogy, but I think we should get three Batman films before going into the Robin story. Robin is an integral character to Batman, and as much as some of you seem to hate him, he can't just be ignored. There is a fan base for the character. He wasn't done right whatsoever in Batman Forever or Batman & Robin.

I thought they did a good interpretation in Batman forever except the laundry scene, dear god.

Nolan, assuming he goes on to do a second trilogy, could make this character work on the big screen. I have faith that the next time we see Robin in a Batman film that he will be a lot more fleshed out as a character. Batman, without Robin there to save him from the abysmal world that is Gotham City, becomes too dark and he loses something about himself. Robin is the key to bringing Batman full circle as a character. The father-son bond that they have is a vital part of changing the Batman character for the better. Without Robin, he would not be able to redeem himself.

yeah Batman softens Robin up, it allows him to care for someone, I mean I know Batman does care for people ie Racheal but I feel like through time he starts to harden up and keep himself distance almost cutting himself off from his humanity which messes with his mission, Robin helping him think whilst on the field of the people around him ie BTAS-Old Wounds with the thug and his family.

If Nolan doesn't want to do him in the first trilogy, that's fine, but there will be a point (whether Nolan is back to direct after the trilogy or not) that Robin will be a necessity. There are so many infinitely great possibilities by introducing Robin into this series. All in all, though, I do say that the Dick Grayson character should at the very least be introduced in the third film.

I think sooner or later robin will come, it doesn't matter if people don't like him others do and he's in the comics so sooner or later WB or another director will want to introduce him.

 

[Texas Zombie]

I would like nolan to finish the first 3 and then maybe another director can come in and ruin it or do great(idk).

It's similar to xmen origins series I think. If they have robin, and then nightwing, i think nolan will be out for sure after 3, but i hope he comes back for 3 at least.

 

[Construct]

I say go for it.

However, I don't see the character's inclusion being conventional in that he'll be adopted right after the tragedy at the circus; I think that Bruce's life in the sequel should be too hectic for that. I'm going for something unprecedented, introducing both Richard Grayson and Jason Todd at the same time. I posted what I thought should be their story in the sequel in the "What Do YOU Want in the Sequel?" thread (link: http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=16365799&postcount=293):

Two teenagers who have experienced the loss of their parents by the hands of the mob take to their own resources, indirectly provided by Wayne to help them (and their orphanage) financially after witnessing their parents' deaths at the circus, to exact revenge on their parents' murderers.

Why include Robin(s)? First, the story would allow for it. In the sequel, Batman has less reign in Gotham, which causes him to go undercover; this allows for more outright criminal activity and maybe less vigilante activity because of criminal and police deterrence, but those that would remain would use bolder tactics to offset that and Batman's reduced presence. My ideas are at least slightly influenced by the B:TAS episodes "Robin's Reckoning" and "Shadow of the Bat" in that they involve Robin striking out on his own for revenge, the drama that can occur while undercover (Batman's dilemma), and possibly Commissioner Gordon being targeted by criminals.

I see that many would like to see this movie's final scene occur at Wayne's parents' grave site. I think that coupling Wayne with Grayson at the site would produce a moving scene as well as a (if not the) key bonding experience for the two. If Deathstroke is involved in the movie, that should also heighten the drama and enrich Grayson's story.

Second, this hasn't been done. Grayson's been seen on film, yes, but Todd hasn't been seen in anything beyond the comics other than a caricatured drawing on an episode of Teen Titans. Some might be thinking, "...and for good reason," but I'm thinking that his character, in tandem with Grayson, would bring an interesting dynamic to the film and give viewers something they haven't seen before: not only Grayson being a vigilante prior to being "Robin", but him working with Todd and the plain inclusion of Todd's character. Having them work as a team should also produce intriguing action scenes, perhaps with them using Parkour to evade their enemies.

Third, Robin is an important part of the "Batman" mythos. Like many have said, Robin brings a certain humanity to Batman that keeps him from being completely cold, which is a road that I think he may head down in the sequel given that his circumstances are the way that he and Gordon describe at the end of TDK.

Furthermore, I don't think that Nolan is averse to including Robin(s); some might have taken them the opposite way, but I took the fake Batmen in TDK as a foreshadowing for Robin(s) and slightly modeled how I think Grayson and Todd might be after the way that the fake Batmen operated (though with more stealth and different costumes -> CORDURA® fabrics, Kevlar vests, face-concealing masks, etc.).

I think that if Robin is depicted in this fashion or something similar, his character would fit the more grounded, verisimilitudinous nature of this series.

 

[BatmanForNever]

No. And I don't mind Robin, but no....no way. Batman shouldn't need Robin until he starts to show age, wear and tear. And Nolan's Batman is still very, very young.

 

[Alex Logan]

Nah, Nolan and Bale haven't done anything to Batman to make him any cooler than he already was.

You're either blind to what's gone on with Batman in last 5-6 years or you're just asking like jackass.

At this point, I'm not sure.

 

[Amon]

I say go for it.

However, I don't see the character's inclusion being conventional in that he'll be adopted right after the tragedy at the circus; I think that Bruce's life in the sequel should be too hectic for that. I'm going for something unprecedented, introducing both Richard Grayson and Jason Todd at the same time. I posted what I thought should be their story in the sequel in the "What Do YOU Want in the Sequel?" thread (link: http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=16365799&postcount=293):

Why include Robin(s)? First, the story would allow for it. In the sequel, Batman has less reign in Gotham, which causes him to go undercover; this allows for more outright criminal activity and maybe less vigilante activity because of criminal and police deterrence, but those that would remain would use bolder tactics to offset that and Batman's reduced presence. My ideas are at least slightly influenced by the B:TAS episodes "Robin's Reckoning" and "Shadow of the Bat" in that they involve Robin striking out on his own for revenge, the drama that can occur while undercover (Batman's dilemma), and possibly Commissioner Gordon being targeted by criminals.

I see that many would like to see this movie's final scene occur at Wayne's parents' grave site. I think that coupling Wayne with Grayson at the site would produce a moving scene as well as a (if not the) key bonding experience for the two. If Deathstroke is involved in the movie, that should also heighten the drama and enrich Grayson's story.

Second, this hasn't been done. Grayson's been seen on film, yes, but Todd hasn't been seen in anything beyond the comics other than a caricatured drawing on an episode of Teen Titans. Some might be thinking, "...and for good reason," but I'm thinking that his character, in tandem with Grayson, would bring an interesting dynamic to the film and give viewers something they haven't seen before: not only Grayson being a vigilante prior to being "Robin", but him working with Todd and the plain inclusion of Todd's character. Having them work as a team should also produce intriguing action scenes, perhaps with them using Parkour to evade their enemies.

Third, Robin is an important part of the "Batman" mythos. Like many have said, Robin brings a certain humanity to Batman that keeps him from being completely cold, which is a road that I think he may head down in the sequel given that his circumstances are the way that he and Gordon describe at the end of TDK.

Furthermore, I don't think that Nolan is averse to including Robin(s); some might have taken them the opposite way, but I took the fake Batmen in TDK as a foreshadowing for Robin(s) and slightly modeled how I think Grayson and Todd might be after the way that the fake Batmen operated (though with more stealth and different costumes -> CORDURA® fabrics, Kevlar vests, face-concealing masks, etc.).

I think that if Robin is depicted in this fashion or something similar, his character would fit the more grounded, verisimilitudinous nature of this series.

Your ideas are pretty good, but how would Grayson and Todd both work in a film together? I'm a big fan of Jason Todd, but you can't realistically have two Robins tagging alongside with Batman. Maybe it could work in theory, but I'm not a big fan of it. I say if we get Robin it should be Grayson. Then once he becomes Nightwing, introduce Jason Todd as his replacement.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

Screw Todd... Nobody likes him... hell we voted to have him killed... in the comics...
Have it be Tim Drake with Barbara as Batgirl only to be crippled on her first mission and become Oracle.

...

God! Batman is depressing...

 

[bane]

Nolan doesn't want Robin, Bale doesn't want Robin, so no Robin...

 

[Amon]

Nolan doesn't want Robin, Bale doesn't want Robin, so no Robin...

Maybe not in this trilogy, but it has to happen eventually.

 

[Texas Zombie]

Screw Todd... Nobody likes him... hell we voted to have him killed... in the comics...
Have it be Tim Drake with Barbara as Batgirl only to be crippled on her first mission and become Oracle.

...

God! Batman is depressing...

only a few thousand people voted. . . that shows ho many people read comics these days.

 

[Amon]

only a few thousand people voted. . . that shows ho many people read comics these days.

LOL! But seriously, I've been thinking about checking out some digital comics. I wonder if it's worth it!

 

[The Joker]

Nolan doesn't want Robin, Bale doesn't want Robin, so no Robin...

Unless WB pulls a trick like they did on Sam Raimi with Venom in SM-3, by forcing Nolan to use Robin.

 

[Judson Caspian]

Maybe not in this trilogy, but it has to happen eventually.

Of course not. As long as Warner hire good directors.

 

[COMPO]

Unless WB pulls a trick like they did on Sam Raimi with Venom in SM-3, by forcing Nolan to use Robin.

I'd imagine Nolan would just argue he doesn't want to use them and argue the reasons why, I mean WB really need Nolan more than Nolan needs WB. I mean Nolans got them loads of money and sure they could get another director but I doubt they'd chance loosing Nolan when they've got him to make another film and make them more money.

 

[Alex Logan]

only a few thousand people voted. . . that shows ho many people read comics these days.

That was the 80's my friend.

 

[Construct]

Your ideas are pretty good, but how would Grayson and Todd both work in a film together? I'm a big fan of Jason Todd, but you can't realistically have two Robins tagging alongside with Batman. Maybe it could work in theory, but I'm not a big fan of it. I say if we get Robin it should be Grayson. Then once he becomes Nightwing, introduce Jason Todd as his replacement.

They'd be on their own for the majority of the film, like the fake Batmen in TDK. Batman would have no direct sidekicks in this film. I see the third act providing the catalyst for Grayson to be taken under Wayne's wing.

Another reason why I'd introduce both at once is to preserve the aging of the cast members. If the writers were to introduce Grayson then Todd then Drake, it would take maybe 4-5 movies to cover that; I believe that would be too long. I don't know if he was joking or not, but I also believe that Bale would be up for playing Batman for a while as he said, and condensing the time for which these characters are included in the series would keep him as young as possible for possible future films involving other allies. One might think so, but I don't see this as rushing the characters' development, because that implies that I'm not taking the characters' personas and story into consideration (not true), and though my idea does deviate from their comic origins, I think it works in the context of the film medium and the story themselves.

Another thing some might be thinking is that if I'll take Bale at his word for something like how long he plans to play Batman, why not his opinion on Robin? It's because I believe that if the right depiction was brought to his attention, he'd agree with it, and hopefully what I've posted, if not, something like what I've posted, produces that result.

 

[BatmanForNever]

Why include Robin(s)? First, the story would allow for it. In the sequel, Batman has less reign in Gotham, which causes him to go undercover; this allows for more outright criminal activity and maybe less vigilante activity because of criminal and police deterrence, but those that would remain would use bolder tactics to offset that and Batman's reduced presence.

Wrong. He doesn't go undercover and have any less reign, he actually has more reign since he's not on anyones side anymore. The dog broke off the leash so to speak, and now he's pissed that Racheal is dead. He's out to wipe the city clean. Nowhere does it say he's going undercover, he's not going to stop fighting crime because the police are now after him again. If anything Batman's presence is more felt in the next sequel since now cops are after him as well as criminals. He's a vigilante through and through no matter what.

Robin has no purpose being in the Nolan universe.

 

[COMPO]

They'd be on their own for the majority of the film, like the fake Batmen in TDK. Batman would have no direct sidekicks in this film. I see the third act providing the catalyst for Grayson to be taken under Wayne's wing.

Another reason why I'd introduce both at once is to preserve the aging of the cast members. If the writers were to introduce Grayson then Todd then Drake, it would take maybe 4-5 movies to cover that; I believe that would be too long. I don't know if he was joking or not, but I also believe that Bale would be up for playing Batman for a while as he said, and condensing the time for which these characters are included in the series would keep him as young as possible for possible future films involving other allies. One might think so, but I don't see this as rushing the characters' development, because that implies that I'm not taking the characters' personas and story into consideration (not true), and though my idea does deviate from their comic origins, I think it works in the context of the film medium and the story themselves.

Another thing some might be thinking is that if I'll take Bale at his word for something like how long he plans to play Batman, why not his opinion on Robin? It's because I believe that if the right depiction was brought to his attention, he'd agree with it, and hopefully what I've posted, if not, something like what I've posted, produces that result.

You do know that they can replace actors, I mean Kilmer was replaced by Clooney, there have been different Batmans in the past twenty years since hes been in the movies and also different robins and Batgirls, so if the actors get to old they could do some movie trick to make them old or replace them.

 

[ultrasuperduckman]

Criminals also should fear him more because Maroni said, "people are wise to your act, you got rules."

So now with everyone thinking he's killed some cops.

Should be bad ass.

 

[COMPO]

Criminals also should fear him more because Maroni said, "people are wise to your act, you got rules."

So now with everyone thinking he's killed some cops.

Should be bad ass.

Yeah I'd imagine Batman would use it to his advantage when fighting crime plus it would be way scarier even when the truth about Dent comes out since the criminals will still wonder if the people are lying and Batman does kill.

 

[Construct]

Nowhere does it say he's going undercover, he's not going to stop fighting crime because the police are now after him again.

I agree that he's not going to stop fighting crime, but I think he'd use different methods because of the heightened attention paid to him. Batman going undercover was my idea to adapt his Matches Malone persona for reconnaissance purposes. I didn't think that it could be pulled off successfully until I'd seen The Prestige, but now I think that it can be done, especially since this film is likely to have the same team behind it.

If anything Batman's presence is more felt in the next sequel since now cops are after him as well as criminals. He's a vigilante through and through no matter what.

I totally agree with this. For those that had qualms about Batman's role in TDK, I think that this film would keep him at the forefront more. That's why I think "Shadow of the Bat" is a good title for the next film on a few levels. About the characters of the film:

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=16365799&postcount=293

They desire to follow it for their own benefit (GCPD, Deathstroke, the Riddler, random citizens, the mob, etc.), they desire to follow in it, using it as inspiration (Grayson and Todd), and one faces the conundrum of evading or embracing it in the midst of the turmoil that occurs throughout the film (Bruce Wayne).

You do know that they can replace actors, I mean Kilmer was replaced by Clooney, there have been different Batmans in the past twenty years since hes been in the movies and also different robins and Batgirls, so if the actors get to old they could do some movie trick to make them old or replace them.

I know, but I'd like this series to be different. Continuity is a big deal to me, especially in franchise films, so if it can be pulled off I say, "Why not?"

 

[COMPO]

well you can still do continuity even with a different actor.

 

[Construct]

well you can still do continuity even with a different actor.

True, but with as character-driven as this series has become, changing a principal actor is likely to elicit a reduced response from the audience, more so than the Schumacher films as they seemed only loosely connected to the Burton films. For instance, I'm a fan of TDK and I think Maggie Gyllenhaal is a good actress, but the fact that Katie Holmes no longer played the Rachel Dawes role diminished my connection with it, which is unfortunate since it is such a key role in the movie.

We've followed Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman from the character's "beginning"; I just think it'd be cool to see Bruce Wayne/Batman continue his journey with Bale as the actor for as long as possible as it would most likely keep the audience's connection with the character strong, and likely strengthen it with the stories told on-screen.