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

[cin0]

I know it probably doesnt mean anything but check this out
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1345836/

 

[The Guard]

I think this thread should be called "Round Robin".

Because round and round it goes.

So many people are trying to logically assess why Bruce would do this or that in regard to Robin. Which is what Bruce would do himself, but that doesn't work real well where Grayson is concerned. There's no real, true, seamless "logic" to Robin, or Batman having any other partner. In the end, to me, being Batman is all about risk and sacrifice (and not just his), the inclusion of Robin has always been all about emotion, and what having a partner means to Batman emotionally and spiritually, and if you disagree with that, I'd say you don't understand the basic dynamic of the "Batman Family".

And nonsense like "What can Dick bring to the story that other characters can't?" Come on, people. A son, in both the literal and metaphorical sense. Granted, you could skip Dick and use Jason or Tim, or have him have a daughter like Stephanie or Carrie Kelly, and it'd be a similar dynamic, but what "Robin" represents is obvious.

I smile every time I see someone say how Batman wouldn't put a kid in harm's way. Nevermind that, for decades in the comics, he has done just that, but half of what is compelling about Batman as a character are his flaws. And avoiding the angle where "Bruce puts Dick in harm's way" is as simple as "Dick puts HIMSELF in harm's way, and Bruce does, as Alfred before him did, what he CAN to help his charge not kill/lose himself." It's pretty much that simple. Dick thinks Bruce/Gotham needs help, even if Bruce doesn't. It creates more conflict on both ends and gives Dick a more compelling character who drives his own story forward.

I get that there are adoption standards, but in the real world, I fail to see how someone with Bruce Wayne's money and resources would realistically be denied guardianship of a child, and I think some of you are naiive about our adoption system. But that said, Bruce doesn't actually have to adopt Dick up front, or even make him his "ward". In fact, Bruce having to correct his image as a reckless playboy somewhat in order to be considered worthy, not only by the state, but by Alfred and Dick, could be a very compelling and rewarding story element.

I really don't think we'll see Robin, though. Realistically, I just don't see it being executed very well as the franchise gets more and more complex. They barely managed to provide any characterization for Batman himself in THE DARK KNIGHT with The Joker and Two-Face to flesh out and develop. More and more, I feel like the story of Robin should be for an inevitable fourth Batman film, and probably will be.

 

[Jahu-Momus]

I would love it if Dick is in police custody the majority of the movie. If the mansion is rebuilt, and the movie shows Bruce's perceived maturity and philanthropic tendencies, I could see them letting Dick live with Bruce, but only after so much time. I would love it if the last shot was Dick opening the door to the mansion, Bruce opens it and smiles at him like a father would. Its simple, effective, and should please both sides I think

 

[Two-Face]

How about no Robin in Batman? ^

 

[3atman]

I think Robin can be perfectly fit into Nolan's established universe even after Nolan is gone. Like I said, you don't just have him show up as Robin. You have him orphaned, Bruce takes him in. Then maybe Dick goes through trouble, he steals stuff, once Bruce (or batman) gets him to stop stealing stuff, his repressed anger makes him a violent kid. Say he goes out with a girl when he's 16. Some jagoff from his high school says that he only has the girl because of Bruces money, not because of his real family. This causes Dick to snap and beat the crap out of the kid. Bruce teaches him to neutralize his enemies without disfiguring them.

So really, he trains him for a lot of what would make him Robin before Bruce is even thinking of making him a sidekick. He doesn't wan't him to be a sidekick, he doesn't want to put him in danger. Then, maybe there is a bank robbery where Dick is about to take out some money for a date, Batman shows up, almost dies and Dick saves him, finds out he's Batman.

I also thought of a fun scene. Lets say dick is 13-14, first week he's with Bruce, Bruce and Alfred take Dick to see a movie. As they're leaving they are held at gunpoint. Bruce has flashbacks and is freaking out, but out of nowhere Dick disarms the guy.

His Robin suit doesn't have to look gay. The Forever suit wasn't bad if you take off the nips. You can even use the idea that since Robin is quick (still with the freerunning idea) he should be more colorful to draw attention to himself as he avoids contact while Batman sneaks around the shadows and takes the bad guys out.

As for why Bruce would pick Dick, of all the orphaned kids in Gotham, why he would pick a circus performer could be explained in that he feels a kinship to Dick. Maybe Bruce witnesses the death of Dick's parents.

or maybe it's not even really Bruce that wants to care after him. Maybe Alfred does. Maybe Alfred sees a little Bruce in the little Dick (yea, lulz at that one) and wants to take care of him.

 

[El Payaso]

I really don't see Bruce having the troublesome and complicated playboy/businessman/Batman triple life he has with Alfred both covering Bruce's back from people AND the child (while taking care of him) who happens to live inside Wayne manor. I can't see why in hell Bruce would take all that effort with a child that he knows we won't be around enough to take care of. Because it's not like Bruce should adopt him just to tell Alfred 'raise this kid for me.'

And Bruce should realize that, even when he hasn't witnessed every killing, every victim of crime deserves as much attention from him.

 

[Mr. Earle]

No, I don't buy it. Regardless of his public persona, the people are aware of his morbid past. Considering Dick's own tragedy would be in the public eye as well, no one would bat an eye to Bruce taking him under his wing.

In fact, this would be a great segway to a public Bruce Wayne that redeems his image. To represent the Wayne family in a way that would make his parents proud. Redemption would feasibly be a major theme in the sequel, so this is all aligns with that idea just fine if you ask me.

Nice idea. I never thought of that.
However, even though i am pro Robin, i dont know if this would be a good time to introduce him. First of all we had Rachel and Dent die on Bruce and its only logical that while he'll be craving for company, he'd most probably push others away to protect them. Then, this is a very unstable and dangerous time for Batman. His reputation is tarnished, the police is after him, etc. I think that Robin would be much easier to introduce when Bruce has found some stability in his life.

I don't get exactly why a rich, spoiled guy with a traumatic past similar to the kid's is a better parental figure than a stable, middle-class, functional couple, in a judge's eyes. You want Redemption to honor the Waynes' legacy? Like El Payaso said, open an orphanage and fund adoption programs.

After his psychological journey is completed and he tries to start living up to his father's memory, he makes a public visit to the orphanage at the end of the film and they introduce him to some of the kids. He sees an an 8-year-old and asks the public relations lady about him, who says the boy's new at the place and his parents were murdered in recent days. Wayne crouches in front of the kid and says: "Hello. What's your name?" "Richard." "Nice to meet you Richard, I'm Bruce." End it there. Things can be picked up or restarted in the next movie.

Because something is honoring the Wayne legacy by adopting a traumatized kid (when all Bruce can at the moment is a lousy father), and another is to actually make things that help the people in Gotham. One child doesn't make the difference. Not from where he's standing.

There are many questions about the plausibility of the concept of Robin, but in the end, we are talking about a billionaire whose way of making a difference is dressing up as a bat. Even if he wanted to sidestep the law, he could have trained an army of ninjas or something.
So even the notion of Batman is a very unrealistic one. The story should obviously be grounded, but dont expect it to be utterly realistic, because after all this is a batman movie. Shouldnt we be suspending our disbelief a bit more?

 

[Mr. Earle]

And nonsense like "What can Dick bring to the story that other characters can't?" Come on, people. A son, in both the literal and metaphorical sense. Granted, you could skip Dick and use Jason or Tim, or have him have a daughter like Stephanie or Carrie Kelly, and it'd be a similar dynamic, but what "Robin" represents is obvious.

Agreed. Although i would like to see Dick and not the other Robins. He was the first one, the heir, the son. He was the one that pulled Bruce back from the pit of his obsession. Jason and Tim have very different stories and meanings to Bruce's life. They could always come afterwards...

I smile every time I see someone say how Batman wouldn't put a kid in harm's way. Nevermind that, for decades in the comics, he has done just that, but half of what is compelling about Batman as a character are his flaws. And avoiding the angle where "Bruce puts Dick in harm's way" is as simple as "Dick puts HIMSELF in harm's way, and Bruce does, as Alfred before him did, what he CAN to help his charge not kill/lose himself."

Ditto. I really liked how Schumacher handled this issue. Bruce was naive thinking that he could really be a father to Dick (when he clearly had no time) and then Dick basically forced him to make him his sidekick (with a lot of help from Alfred).
Have Bruce adopt Dick and train him for 1-2 years (helps distinguishing Dick with Robin as well) and then make him his sidekick when Dick's about 16.

In fact, Bruce having to correct his image as a reckless playboy somewhat in order to be considered worthy, not only by the state, but by Alfred and Dick, could be a very compelling and rewarding story element.

Agreed.

 

[TheRookie311]

NNNNNooooooo Waayyyy. No robin. Please lets not ruin another batman. I can't see it happening anyways as Nolan has stated several times that he could not see robin in any vision he has for another movie.

Not to mention I believe bale said he will not play batman if robin is brought in. Although I think his contract would force him too.

 

[Two-Face]

Well he could buy his contract

 

[cin0]

NNNNNooooooo Waayyyy. No robin. Please lets not ruin another batman. I can't see it happening anyways as Nolan has stated several times that he could not see robin in any vision he has for another movie.

Not to mention I believe bale said he will not play batman if robin is brought in. Although I think his contract would force him too.

ignorance 101

the only real movie adaption we've seen robin in were batman and robin and batman forever. we haven't even seen an atempt at placeing robin in a movie so how could anybody say that it would ruin the franchise. one character couldnt change the whole story that much. just because batman and robin was a sorry movie doesnt mean that adding robin would ruin it.

 

[subzero]

**** Robin, one of the most pathethic and useless characters from action figures

 

[Chris Wallace]

I really don't think Robin can work in Nolan's world. Nevermind the fact that he instantly diminishes Batman's mystique-how can you be this fearsome creature of the night with a kid in tow? How can you toss people off of fire escapes & bludgeon cops in front of a kid?-but what judge in his right mind would grant custody of a minor to Bruce Wayne? As far as the public knows, this man went MIA for seven years, (possibly faked his own death) parties with supermodels, crashed his car, and oh, yeah-got drunk & burned his house down. Not exactly the ideal role model for a child.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I say a BIG NO to adopting Dick Grayson. Just create a NEW origin for the movie. A drastic overhaul IMO.

 

[El Payaso]

ignorance 101

the only real movie adaption we've seen robin in were batman and robin and batman forever. we haven't even seen an atempt at placeing robin in a movie so how could anybody say that it would ruin the franchise. one character couldnt change the whole story that much. just because batman and robin was a sorry movie doesnt mean that adding robin would ruin it.

You're forgetting Batman 1966.

 

[raybia]

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Its not a question of whether the character can be added to Nolan's series because he can. Its a question of whether Nolan will actually do it.

I say on previous comments by Nolan himself its 99% that he will not.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I say a BIG NO to adopting Dick Grayson. Just create a NEW origin for the movie. A drastic overhaul IMO.

As it stands, I think the introduction of Robin would be a bad idea. I thought the same in 1989. I don't like the idea of Bruce/Batman trying to parent. I'm open to any idea that would result in a good story, but I don't see how it can be done.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I say a BIG NO to adopting Dick Grayson. Just create a NEW origin for the movie. A drastic overhaul IMO.

Then there is no point in introducing him.

Always kind of thought of it as Alfred could be the parent and Bruce could be the boss.

As Dick Grayson puts it, Bruce is the father and Alfred is the mother.
Besides, the whole point of introducing Robin is giving Bruce a son of sorts. Since he would never sit down and have a normal family, this is the only way he could have one.

 

[cin0]

You're forgetting Batman 1966.

there was one in the late 40's too. i said real, i meant to say most recent.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I just cant see it. Bruce Wayne...An irresponsible, billionaire playboy. Who hangs around and sleeps with several gorgeous women, at the same time! A man who gets drunk and burns his manor down,the man crashes cars and just plainly lives a sexual and mad driven life to the public. Then suddenly,he decides to adopt a disturbed orphan boy,for a reason,which many,many people would wonder about being true or genuine. I just dont think that will work at all.

 

[Eros]

I just cant see it. Bruce Wayne...An irresponsible, billionaire playboy. Who hangs around and sleeps with several gorgeous women, at the same time! A man who gets drunk and burns his manor down,the man crashes cars and just plainly lives a sexual and mad driven life to the public. Then suddenly,he decides to adopt a disturbed orphan boy,for a reason,which many,many people would wonder about being true or genuine. I just dont think that will work at all.

Bruce Wayne saw his parents murdered before his very eyes, everyone in Gotham Knows this. Him takeing in a boy who isn't rich, and who saw his parents killed, would make perfect sense.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Let me present this question,to anybody. Would YOU,let Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne adopt a child?

 

[El Payaso]

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Its not a question of whether the character can be added to Nolan's series because he can. Its a question of whether Nolan will actually do it.

Of course he can be added. The problem is that it most probably ruin the franchise/take it down to a camper level.

I say on previous comments by Nolan himself its 99% that he will not.

It's actually 100%.

As Dick Grayson puts it, Bruce is the father and Alfred is the mother.
Besides, the whole point of introducing Robin is giving Bruce a son of sorts. Since he would never sit down and have a normal family, this is the only way he could have one.

The only way to have a normal family is to quit as Batman and actually start a normal family. That in case that for some reason Bruce could feel the need of having a family.

Having an old man as the mother is the opposite of normal.

there was one in the late 40's too. i said real, i meant to say most recent.

I thouight you meant movies. I didn't refer to the 1966 series but just the movie.

In fact it was amazing how right Schumacher got Robin's origin in Forever. Bruce never adopted, only offered his house to him temporarily. It was a older brother-younger brother realtionship and not this father-son nonsense.

But in the end the figure of Robin always adds an unnecessary and camp element to Batman.

 

[El Payaso]

Bruce Wayne saw his parents murdered before his very eyes, everyone in Gotham Knows this. Him takeing in a boy who isn't rich, and who saw his parents killed, would make perfect sense.

If he weren't Batman, maybe.

 

[BestGirl]

Let me present this question,to anybody. Would YOU,let Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne adopt a child?

I wouldn't, but with Gotham's institutions as corrupt and careless as they are it could happen. I'm just agree with Chris Wallace's post above. I've nevrer had the slightest interest in Robin.