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

[Saint]

The same could be said about adapted suits for other franchises.

And?

And I know this is going to get you all enraged, but people already saw "Dead End".

Hardcore fanboys (and no one else on Earth) saw Dead End for free, so I hardly see what the relevance of this is to your argument that the success of rubber suits among moviegoers is indicative of anything.

I also said it depends on each other's subjectivity, which you cleverly left out.

I didn't cleverly leave out anything; subjectivity is implicit in every statement in this thread, so we don't need to talk about it. What I did is tell you that your elaboration on greatness wasn't really meaningful.

Obviously you misunderstood. Mr. Earle got it right.

Whoops! I took "Like Morrison," to mean "Like Morrison has done."

The only one that keeps bringing the subject to iconic emblems is you. I'm talking about the whole appearance.

You were responding to a thread of our discussion that was specifically regarding emblems. I said I would wear them, so I can't fault a hero for doing the same--you argued that I would wear one because a precedent exists (that they are elements of pop culture). I explained that the relevant precedent is iconography, and that it exists in the fictional world as much as it exists in our own.

If you feel that I have lost focus here, I think you should re-read this particular line of quotes. I understand that frame of reference can be lost in Quote Wars.

You're right. I guessed I expected more from a scientist. The likes of Barry Allen can dress all in the goofiness they want.

Barry Allen was a Jay Garrick fanboy, so I'm hardly surprised. I imagine plenty of scientists are fanboys.

 

[katie_girl09]

I always thought that the addition of Robin tends to ruin the dynamic of things. I didn't like The Batman (TV series) after they added Robin.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I always thought that the addition of Robin tends to ruin the dynamic of things. I didn't like The Batman (TV series) after they added Robin.

The Batman was bad to start with. Robin was mostly a kid spitting out cliche catchphrases, so its only natural that you didnt like him.

You need to read the current Batman and Robin monthly series. Although it is about Dick and Damian and not Bruce and Dick, but still....

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I want Dick Grayson to just be in the movies. I don't care if he doesn't become Robin or Nightwing, I just want him in the movies.

But I honestly think its a perfect time to add Dick Grayson. He doesn't have to be adopted by Bruce, nor does he had to be Robin. I believe he should come in as Nightwing. It would be the perfect time.

Just think about it. Batman would be more alone now than ever after Rachel and Harvey deaths. Batman would believe he has to be the only one to save the city, which in the comics is why he got sloppy because of self-reliance. Also the scene with fake batmen could also help lead into it. It would be about time until someone else came up and became a vigilante along with Batman.

Dick Grayson could be that other character who could be as clever and as well trained as Batman. I'm sure Nolan could go into details, but back to my original point, at least having Dick Grayson make an appearance in the film wouldn't ruin any dynamics, even if he was an employee of Wayne Enterprises and help Bruce along with Lucius.

 

[Pythagoras]

If they can make Robin appear in screen like how they did in BTAS, Robin would be liked by the fans and general audience.

 

[Drz]

If they can make Robin appear in screen like how they did in BTAS, Robin would be liked by the fans and general audience.

Except that it loses the point of Batman being an adoptive father and the progression. Robin in BTAS was a grown up but they did do his origin where he was a child you know.

 

[katie_girl09]

The Batman was bad to start with. Robin was mostly a kid spitting out cliche catchphrases, so its only natural that you didnt like him.

I disagree. I actually loved that show in the beginning.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I disagree. I actually loved that show in the beginning.

I liked some parts of it, like how Batman starts alone with the police chasing after him and no Gordon to help him out. Then he makes friends with Yindel and his friend becomes Clayface in a very good episode.
I also liked Robin's origin, and all the team ups he had with other superheroes in the last season.
But apart from that (and maybe some other stuff that i cant remember) the Batman was pretty childish. Overly long action scenes, meaningless plots, the Penguin knows martial arts, Robin and Batgirl are only there to deliver cheesy one-liners, etc.
Oh yeah, and Batman's design was atrocious! But i did like most of the villains' designs.

 

[Pythagoras]

Except that it loses the point of Batman being an adoptive father and the progression. Robin in BTAS was a grown up but they did do his origin where he was a child you know.

I'm talking about the orgin part from the show. They should hve that on film then go from their with Bruce being a father figure and all that.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I think it would be good if Tony Zucco was just a thug and murders Graysons parents on the Penguins orders.

 

[The Guard]

I miss this thread. You all have no IDEA how much this thread has inspired me and others in the last year. No idea.

Now then...

I'm 30 pages behind, so bear with me.

Why are people still on this whole "It's not good for someone like Bruce to adopt a kid" kick? Batman's not exactly a mentally healthy person. And you all realize his approach to fighting crime isn't normal or mature, right? It's just hilarious to hear people going "Sure, he'd be violent and lawbreaking, but he wouldn't endanger a kid!"

I think the time period when Batman takes on Robin matters. He needs to be youngish. Mid thirties, tops. Any older and the brothers to father/son dynamic gets a bit weird.

1) another character is introduced into the film which means screen time must be divided

...So?

2) his back story must be carefully done

Like any character who is to be presented successfully...

3) they must try to erase the stain of Batman Forever

BATMAN FOREVER was one of the highest grossing films of the year. What stain are they trying to erase from it, exactly?

BATMAN & ROBIN was the challenge, and the issue was one of tone, not characters used. I feel like BATMAN BEGINS and THE DARK KNIGHT and a number of other comic book films have handily erased the stain BATMAN & ROBIN left.

4) finding the proper actor

So...cast the proper actor.

5) design that will both make sense in the story, plus be true enough for fans to enjoy

So design a costume that works.

6) write it in such a way that will make the viewer believe that Robin is as realistic as Batman & as necessary as Batman (this probably couldn't be done by even the most seasoned Hollywood writers)

That's horse****. How hard is it to accomplish?

I've come to a conclusion. The "problems" surrounding Robin are the same ones surrounding any character: They all amount to: Some fanboys just aren't creative enough to see a way it could work.

Because many of them flat out SAY that.

You all realize that half of what makes these concepts lasting is the "cheese factor" married with relevant elements, right? What makes these concepts relevant is putting real thought and care into their execution, even though they are weird, and somewhat out there. And are we really pretending the Nolan Batmovies have been devoid of cheese?

Now compare that to a handsome child acrobat who incredibly can fight adult criminals, and since he is heroic.. and an acrobat... he wears a tight with outfit with heroic motifs (like a cape) and make snarky remarks while defeating criminal scum using only his fists and legs. That is cheesier, because is redundant, idiotic and has no layer of deeper meaning.

That's a somewhat limiting explanation fo Robin, but I really fail to see the issue here. The kids an acrobat, probably knows some martial arts, and he has a snarky personality. The average action movie features people with decent, but not world-olympic-level skills, who are occassionally snarky or quippy types, and they succeed because the story demands it.

Who says Robin has to wear a cape all the time? He could have a retractable cape. You know, for acrobatic "flight". But a retractable cape...wow...that idea would never work...right? Right? .

As I said before, the Batman stories are spawning and episodic, and contain many contradictory elements.

Contradictory elements such as...

I think the more practical route is to remove the traditional idea of Robin as combatant. Batman can train him, but as you say, he can't train a teenager in a short amount of time to go fight thugs on the streets of Gotham and swing off buildings. Instead, Robin could be Batman's support. Surveillance, tech support--out of sight, out of danger stuff. For dramatic and story reasons, yes, he's probably going to get involved where he shouldn't--in combat against Batman's wishes. The logical approach in a Nolan film would be to play this as Batman's mistake; Batman got him involved, and now things have escalated beyond what he expected and perhaps beyond his ability to control. Usually, people say the moral problems involved in taking on Robin as a side kick mean it shouldn't be done; I feel they are precisely the reason it should be explored.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

 

[Faramir]

Why are people still on this whole "It's not good for someone like Bruce to adopt a kid" kick? Batman's not exactly a mentally healthy person. And you all realize his approach to fighting crime isn't normal or mature, right? It's just hilarious to hear people going "Sure, he'd be violent and lawbreaking, but he wouldn't endanger a kid!"

Hello there. I haven't been able to catch up with the thread but there is a good point from those with concerns about Bruce endangering a kid. As for your rationale, I don't follow it. Just because two things are inmature doesn't mean they are equivalent. When fighting crime, Bruce is violent and lawbreaking towards criminal. But a kid --an innocent kid-- is a totally different matter. Nobody would want to endanger a kid and even less someone who is as over-protective and senstive about child victims as Bruce. Yeah, I know that's precisely what he does in the comics, but don't expect me to think that's consistent.

I think the time period when Batman takes on Robin matters. He needs to be youngish. Mid thirties, tops. Any older and the brothers to father/son dynamic gets a bit weird.

Well, as of The Dark Knight, Bruce is 31. If he meets Dick now and has him undergo a several years training as he once did, then he will be like 37-39 when Dick is no longer a minor and becomes Robin. Being 40 and having an 18-year-old son is not weird at all.

Another character is introduced into the film which means screen time must be divided... So?

I don't know, but other characters who may be more fitting in this current moment of the storyline should have priority over Robin. Robin's origin is a long story and shouldn't be started in the last installment of a trilogy, IMO. This is a thread about Robin during Nolan's reign, not the impossibility to ever add Robin again to a live-action film. If Nolan has Robin in his third movie I think he would be hard-pressed to continue it since it would require more than one story to make it truly believable. Not to mention he has already ditched the concept of Robin in his series publically... If he doesn't think he can handle it or doesn't want to, who are we to demand it from him? Every director should do ONLY those ideas he or she feels most comfortable with.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Batman's not exactly a mentally healthy person. And you all realize his approach to fighting crime isn't normal or mature, right? It's just hilarious to hear people going "Sure, he'd be violent and lawbreaking, but he wouldn't endanger a kid!

Great post, but i just wanted to comment on this specific quote, which i disagree with.

Yes batman is obsessive but he is not insane. Putting on a flashy costume and fighting crime or having a kid sidekick is not something that only Batman does. Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Arrow, Flash, and others have done the same. Batman lives in a world where half the population consists of people in spandex, so he is not weird for doing so, nor is he crazy for having a kid sidekick. Its comics and its the world and physics that Batman lives in. People should stop questioning the logic and realism and accept the mythos for what it is: A comic book story about a guy that dresses like a bat, who loves a woman who dresses like a cat and whose best friend is an alien who flies because he absorbs solar radiation.

I just wanted to put that out there.

 

[Faramir]

Sure, but many of the other superheroes' kid sidekicks (with the obvious exception of Green Arrow) are, well... superpowered. It's not the same deal with Robin. Of course, he can be 'super-trained', but you need time to get there and accomplishing that in one single film that deals with some other huge isses is more than tricky.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Sure, but many of the other superheroes' kid sidekicks (with the obvious exception of Green Arrow) are, well... superpowered. It's not the same deal with Robin. Of course, he can be 'super-trained', but you need time to get there and accomplishing that in one single film that deals with some other huge isses is more than tricky.

Superpowered heroes fight equally powerful villains. So when Robin fights thugs with guns, kid Flash fights Zoom. And besides, even if a kid has superpowers, wouldnt it be better if it had a normal childhood instead of spending it fighting crazy people in spandex? In real life it would be unrealistic, unnatural and disturbing no matter how you'd cut it.

I undestand that some elements are harder to adapt than others, but all these elements make the mythos as great as it is. All they need is some careful adaptation.

 

[Faramir]

My point was that any kid with superpowers has more chances against his superpowered enemy than an inadequately trained Robin against deadly criminals. The believability of the concept depends on the extent of his training and, if it's going to be played close to the comics, that is always going to be a bumpy ride. You don't need the same amount of screentime for Robin that you need for any villain. Not to mention the necessary development of the "Batman as public enemy no. 1" angle. Can he take all that and still find the time to train a sidekick?

I undestand that some elements are harder to adapt than others, but all these elements make the mythos as great as it is. All they need is some careful adaptation.

'Careful adaptation' is not the same thing as 'careful adaptation from the same person', which is what this thread happens to be about, Robin under Nolan's pen. If you, like me, accept the premise that this next bat-film may be Nolan's last, the odds of having Robin in grow considerably small.

 

[Saint]

The "problems" surrounding Robin are the same ones surrounding any character: They all amount to: Some fanboys just aren't creative enough to see a way it could work.

Indeed; this is such a frustrating problem to circumvent when talking about this stuff.

I think the more practical route is to remove the traditional idea of Robin as combatant. Batman can train him, but as you say, he can't train a teenager in a short amount of time to go fight thugs on the streets of Gotham and swing off buildings. Instead, Robin could be Batman's support. Surveillance, tech support--out of sight, out of danger stuff. For dramatic and story reasons, yes, he's probably going to get involved where he shouldn't--in combat against Batman's wishes. The logical approach in a Nolan film would be to play this as Batman's mistake; Batman got him involved, and now things have escalated beyond what he expected and perhaps beyond his ability to control. Usually, people say the moral problems involved in taking on Robin as a side kick mean it shouldn't be done; I feel they are precisely the reason it should be explored.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

I'm glad you agree, haha.

 

[COMPO]

I'm just wondering why they don't do what the comics do and have two different series have a solo Batman series and have a Batman and Robin Series, that kind of intertwine with each other but tell different stories. Though it might be confusing it will sort out the different people who want robin and those who don't

 

[syko23]

All the elements are there for a "Robin" type character. Just not Robin! Too campy for Nolan's movie-verse. But, Nightwing, could work. Hear me out!

Joker gave Batman a run for his money in The Dark Knight. Pushed him to his limits. Almost making him break his "one rule". He doens't have public support now and cops want to arrest/ kill him.

Say Two-Face is still alive and Riddler is as crazy as Joker was, or worse. Maybe Riddler is someone who puts Joker on a pedestal and worships him. He wants to be like him. But, he also wants to one up him. He is an agent of chaos.

Now, you already have the copycat Batmen running around. One of them catches Batman's eye. Someone who has talent, is a good fighter, a good detective. But, he doesn't have the money and resources Batman does.

Batman doesn't want to go into this war with Riddler and Two-Face alone. He wants someone to watch his back and make sure he doesn't break his "one rule". Someone to keep him from going over the edge.

Enter Dick Grayson, Nightwing! Batman tells him if he want in, he will help him, but, when Two-Face and Riddler are in Arkham, they go they're separate ways. One time deal! They never show each other who they really are. Nightwing doesn't ever see the Batcave. Bruce never tries to find out who Nightwing is, we all know he could but, call it professional courtesy, he doesn't. No Dick and Bruce, only Batman and Nightwing. Batman gives him an old Batsuit, one where the head doesn't turn. Dick gives it his own style. Ripping off the cape and cowl, uses the Lone Ranger mask.

And here..we..go!

What do you think? I could see this working in one of Nolan's movies.

Jamie

 

[Saint]

If you're going to strip out every element that makes Dick Grayson interesting and relevant to the Batman mythos, why bother?

 

[regwec]

Huzzah! Saint, The Hype's Voice of Reason Incarnate, is still around. I shall prolongue my sojourn.

 

[Two-Face]

All the elements are there for a "Robin" type character. Just not Robin! Too campy for Nolan's movie-verse. But, Nightwing, could work. Hear me out!

Joker gave Batman a run for his money in The Dark Knight. Pushed him to his limits. Almost making him break his "one rule". He doens't have public support now and cops want to arrest/ kill him.

Say Two-Face is still alive and Riddler is as crazy as Joker was, or worse. Maybe Riddler is someone who puts Joker on a pedestal and worships him. He wants to be like him. But, he also wants to one up him. He is an agent of chaos.

Now, you already have the copycat Batmen running around. One of them catches Batman's eye. Someone who has talent, is a good fighter, a good detective. But, he doesn't have the money and resources Batman does.

Batman doesn't want to go into this war with Riddler and Two-Face alone. He wants someone to watch his back and make sure he doesn't break his "one rule". Someone to keep him from going over the edge.

Enter Dick Grayson, Nightwing! Batman tells him if he want in, he will help him, but, when Two-Face and Riddler are in Arkham, they go they're separate ways. One time deal! They never show each other who they really are. Nightwing doesn't ever see the Batcave. Bruce never tries to find out who Nightwing is, we all know he could but, call it professional courtesy, he doesn't. No Dick and Bruce, only Batman and Nightwing. Batman gives him an old Batsuit, one where the head doesn't turn. Dick gives it his own style. Ripping off the cape and cowl, uses the Lone Ranger mask.

And here..we..go!

What do you think? I could see this working in one of Nolan's movies.

Jamie

No, don't have him in the movies then.

 

[Saint]

Huzzah! Saint, The Hype's Voice of Reason Incarnate, is still around. I shall prolongue my sojourn.

Naturally; I'll never leave. Well, not until they ban me for constant rudeness.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I am still on the fence about Robin.

 

[Jumpin' Jack]

If they ever introduce him they should go Dark Victory way.Only IF though.