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

[El Payaso]

Buddy I don't know what your problem is but I don't stick my air in the air at anybody let alone a bunch of anonymous strangers. Everybody is on this board because they enjoy superhero movies so cut that out about people on the comic board sticking their nose in the air. If you ever really posted there you'd know that's not the case as people there enjoy superhero movies as well.

We're all fans of this character yes? so wtf is a "true fan". There are just preferences over what you like. This is the beauty of such a character in the first place. Also just curious have you actually read the aftermath of all those plot points? because you should the know the outcomes of the majority of them were fairly universally well received.

Even with Spider-Man despite the fact that the event that led to those outcomes in his case was hot garbage. If you gave them a chance and just weren't enjoying them on the other hand for technical reasons or something ok. However if you've never read them how do you know if you'd enjoy them or not?

I know plenty of people in real life that don't know anything about Batman besides movies and cartoons I don't think any less of them. We're all Batman fans that's the point of us all posting here in the first place. I'm just a fairly blunt person but geesh I didn't know people took this boards THAT seriously to read into everything like that.

The problem my man is that you sounded like you were dismissing my opinion only because I don't read comics. Which is, btw, a mere assumption of your part, and on top of that, an assumption based on the fact I don't post on the Batman comics section. I don't need to tell you that I can read all the comics I want without going to post there and then again I don't have to read every Batman comics to know what Robin is about. As the critic said, I don't need to drink the whole barrell to know when the wine went bad.

You said "People who don't regularly read the comics shouldn't even bother trying to speak on what's good or bad about them," suggestinmg that if people don't read comics they should not post. Last time I checked we were free to post opinions comics or not.

And I never said Robin was "the WORST part" of Batman as you said, I said "Movies should reflect good things from comics." Not the best and the worst are not the same; I have said many times in this thread that Batgirl and Batmite are worse than Robin.

So yes, it IS annoying that people dismiss your opinion and tell you not to post about certain topics based on assumption that are in turn based on another assumption. If you think that's taking things too seriously, well maybe, but it is annoying.

 

[Crook]

Again these movies have nothing to do with TAS or any way Batman has been portrayed in the past. So looking at those for support on how Batman should behave doesn't make sense.

I am comparing them because they feature the same characters and have shared histories of great tragedy. You cannot isolate Nolan's films. Not when his characters are based off of a character that has lived for 70 years in all mediums, and especially when he's simply putting a new twist onto circumstances the character has already gone through in these past stories. Are the events in TDK exact as to the comics and whatnot? No, but the level of impact is certainly no more than what he's faced previously.

I am not clearly writing off Robin because I dont like the character, Robin is an icon just as much as Batman is. Im merely going on what Nolan has said as well as my own personal opinion.

All Nolan said on the character is that Dick's off in a crib somewhere. Which, for the purposes of the film universe is pointless when said crib is never seen, nor is he or his family referenced. Now, it's more likely Nolan gave out a light-hearted answer as to effectively distinguish any discussion on the matter. Whether or not he likes the character is inconsequential because as long as he's the director, Dick isn't even old enough to put on a suit. It was his way of washing his hands of the subject without actually addressing it.

However as with most discussions on art, you never go with what the artist says, rather the product itself. For a variety of reasons, but primarily because the artist's vision may not clearly be translated or as intended with the final product. In this particular case, BB and TDK do not have material eliminating Dick's inclusion. None at all. No matter how large the odds are against it, it's just not conclusive in any way. That is why this thread still exists and a Rachel thread isn't.

Also, there were many people posting on these boards who thought things would appear the film and did not i.e. joker being perma-white. You don't hear much from those people either so it goes both ways.

I'm not sure what you're getting at, because you just reiterated what I said. Yes, people go on for months and years believing one thing, only to find out they were flat-out wrong. What have you contended here, exactly?

And for the most part, I think we all know Robin isn't going to be in the films. This discussion has long parted with that thought. We are all arguing the merits of the character in this universe, with or without Nolan's blessing. That's different from insisting Nolan is going to do this and that.

 

[Cain]

Fair enough, from the looks of things I shall just continue ignoring this section as I've always had. Got no time to counter ultra sensitivity brought forth from misinterpretation so it's better to just fall back.

 

[El Payaso]

Fair enough, from the looks of things I shall just continue ignoring this section as I've always had. Got no time to counter ultra sensitivity brought forth from misinterpretation so it's better to just fall back.

Don't tell people to read comics or stop posting, assuming thay're not reading them in the process, and things will get better.

 

[akfj]

The comedy was most certainly a part of it. The humour inherent in a young girl brutally and mercilessly killing criminals with OTT and unnecessary acrobatic movement and flair is what makes for acceptance.

Also, c***s. can't forget that.

only point I'm making is that characters must fit pre-established tone(we clearly agree here). Furthermore, there is no reason that Robin cannot be successfully integrated into that which is already set.

Particularly the escalation theme and continued development of Bruce Wayne as a character. That is not to say that Robin is necessary; as i have said before, anyone who suggests that a story cannot be crafted without Robin's inclusion for the third movie that is relevant, entertaining and progressive of Bruce Wayne's character grossly underestimates the characters, both used and unused(besides Grayson, obviously) and the craftsmen themselves.

So then you end up getting Nolan's Robin, which would be a dramatically toned-down Robin, instead of the Robin that Robin fans would probably want. It's how Venom fans wanted Venom in a Raimi movie, but ended up getting Raimi's version of Venom which they didn't like. Would it perhaps be better for Robin fans to wait for a director that will set a tone with his/her Batman films that will allow for a more comic-like Robin?

 

[sdc10]

I am comparing them because they feature the same characters and have shared histories of great tragedy. You cannot isolate Nolan's films. Not when his characters are based off of a character that has lived for 70 years in all mediums, and especially when he's simply putting a new twist onto circumstances the character has already gone through in these past stories. Are the events in TDK exact as to the comics and whatnot? No, but the level of impact is certainly no more than what he's faced previously.

All Nolan said on the character is that Dick's off in a crib somewhere. Which, for the purposes of the film universe is pointless when said crib is never seen, nor is he or his family referenced. Now, it's more likely Nolan gave out a light-hearted answer as to effectively distinguish any discussion on the matter. Whether or not he likes the character is inconsequential because as long as he's the director, Dick isn't even old enough to put on a suit. It was his way of washing his hands of the subject without actually addressing it.

However as with most discussions on art, you never go with what the artist says, rather the product itself. For a variety of reasons, but primarily because the artist's vision may not clearly be translated or as intended with the final product. In this particular case, BB and TDK do not have material eliminating Dick's inclusion. None at all. No matter how large the odds are against it, it's just not conclusive in any way. That is why this thread still exists and a Rachel thread isn't.

I'm not sure what you're getting at, because you just reiterated what I said. Yes, people go on for months and years believing one thing, only to find out they were flat-out wrong. What have you contended here, exactly?

And for the most part, I think we all know Robin isn't going to be in the films. This discussion has long parted with that thought. We are all arguing the merits of the character in this universe, with or without Nolan's blessing. That's different from insisting Nolan is going to do this and that.

We saw a very young Barbara Gordon in TDK now from a comic book mentality which many here seem to have that would out rule Robin considering she is supposed to be older than him.

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Barbara Gordon is Jim's wife, in The Dark Knight.

 

[sdc10]

Barbara Gordon is Jim's wife, in The Dark Knight.

we also saw his daughter, more than likely that is also barbara

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

That's like saying one of the psychos we saw in Arkham was the Ventriloquist.

 

[akfj]

Nolan was actually asked by MTV about Gordon's daughter in the movie. Here's the article:

Does Batgirl Have A Secret Cameo In 'The Dark Knight'?

Posted 7/16/08 3:09 pm ET by Larry Carroll in News

This weekend, millions of moviegoers will head to their local theater and fork over their ten bucks for "The Dark Knight," eager to see Batman, the Joker, Two-Face and some other Gotham City favorites. But will they also get a brief glimpse of Batgirl?
MTV News recently caught a screening of "The Dark Knight," and it isn't giving away any spoilers to say that Gary Oldman's James Gordon has a very different-looking family. The role of his wife has been recast (Ilyssa Fradin in "Batman Begins," now Melinda McGraw), as has his son James Jr. (an infant in "Begins," now 10-year-old Nathan Gamble). Most suspiciously, however, a daughter has been added.

As die-hard fans of the comics (and Sixties TV series) know, several incarnations of the Batman universe have had Gordon fathering a daughter named Barbara, who then grows up to don a costume of her own and take on the persona "Batgirl." In "The Killing Joke" storyline, the Joker turns her into a paraplegic, and she becomes Oracle.
In "Dark Knight," Gordon's daughter appears to be 8 or 9 years old, and experiences the sort of creepy close encounter with a supervillain that could make a young gal want to grow up and fight crime. So, is Nolan planting a seed?
"I don't think I'm going to answer that," the writer/director grinned slyly when I asked him directly whether Gordon's daughter was indeed named Barbara. Check out the video for yourself, and you can see the way he takes a very long sip of his drink and squirms a bit before answering – could it be that we've caught him in the sort of sneaky scheme usually reserved for a Gotham evildoer?
In the "Dark Knight" end credits, it says the character is named "Gordon's daughter," and that she is played by Hannah Gunn. So, I asked Nolan if he even knows the name of James Gordon's daughter in his universe. "Possibly," he grinned.
To further strengthen the case, online versions of the "Batman Begins" script show that Gordon's wife (who is also named Barbara) was pregnant – which we were unable to see since she was sitting down in her one scene. Clearly, there has been a near-decade growth in the Gordon children between films, making it quite possible that Nolan is laying the groundwork to do the same between "Knight" and the third movie. That would leave Gordon’s daughter at the appropriate age to take on the Batgirl persona.
The big question for now, however is a simple one: What the hell is that little girl's name? I went straight to Oldman himself, and this was how our conversation went down:

MTV: Towards the end of the movie, we see you with your children. What's your daughter's name? Is it Barbara?
GO: (confused) No.
MTV: Do you know who Barbara Gordon is?
GO: Yeah.
MTV: Well, I ask because in the comics, Commissioner Gordon has a daughter named Barbara. Barbara grows up to Batgirl.
GO: She grows up to be Batgirl, yeah. But I completely blanked on the name.
MTV: Well I don't mean the actresses' name, I mean in the movie did they say to you her name?
GO: Yeah, no. You know, we were talking about it earlier. Please no Robin, not in the third one. No Robin, no Batgirl.
So, Oldman seems opposed to any incarnation of Batgirl. But still, the question remains: What is the name of Gordon's daughter in the new Batman movies, and where is this storyline headed?
What do you think? Could Nolan make Batgirl (or Oracle) a cool character, or should Gordon's mysterious new daughter simply stay in the background?

 

[weezerspider]

Fair enough, from the looks of things I shall just continue ignoring this section as I've always had. Got no time to counter ultra sensitivity brought forth from misinterpretation so it's better to just fall back.

Yah, I'm not telling you to quit posting here. If you quit posting things that seem as if you are implying our opinions don't matter, you are welcome here in my eyes. I don't care if your opinion is different than mine, I enjoy friendly debates. I just don't like it when you assume people don't read comics because they don't like Robin. I also don't like it when you assume people who don't read comics opinion's are inferior.

 

[Crook]

We saw a very young Barbara Gordon in TDK now from a comic book mentality which many here seem to have that would out rule Robin considering she is supposed to be older than him.

You're backing yourself into a corner. If you're going to take into account the ages from the comics, then Batman himself is already off by about 5 years (Bats started out in his mid-20s). You can't look at one portion and not the other.

And the daughter was never named. So again, regardless of anyone's intentions, the film has the final say. We never explicitly saw Barbara, the daughter.

 

[The Joker]

Anyway, the daughter didn't even have red hair

 

[GlasgowBat]

So then you end up getting Nolan's Robin, which would be a dramatically toned-down Robin, instead of the Robin that Robin fans would probably want. It's how Venom fans wanted Venom in a Raimi movie, but ended up getting Raimi's version of Venom which they didn't like. Would it perhaps be better for Robin fans to wait for a director that will set a tone with his/her Batman films that will allow for a more comic-like Robin?

A difference of tone does not necessarily equate to a toned down interpretation. Indeed, i would contest whether there is any definitive tone for any of the characters in the Batman mythos, Robin included. As with every instance of a specific storyteller portraying a character they themselves did not create, there will simply be some adaptation and shift of emphasis. For the parameters of the story, certain characteristics will be given more credence or emphasis.

There is, of course, no precedent for the idea that Nolan presents dramatically challenged characters; quite the reverse i would argue.

Again, different tone does not automatically equate to toned-down.

 

[akfj]

Anyway, the daughter didn't even have red hair

Are you sure?

 

[akfj]

A difference of tone does not necessarily equate to a toned down interpretation. Indeed, i would contest whether there is any definitive tone for any of the characters in the Batman mythos, Robin included. As with every instance of a specific storyteller portraying a character they themselves did not create, there will simply be some adaptation and shift of emphasis. For the parameters of the story, certain characteristics will be given more credence or emphasis.

There is, of course, no precedent for the idea that Nolan presents dramatically challenged characters; quite the reverse i would argue.

Again, different tone does not automatically equate to toned-down.

But Nolan's tone is more-or-less toned down from the more flamboyant aspects of Batman. You can look at the comic characters that have appeared in his movies and there are definitely aspects of each one that is meant to be more sensible, with the exceptions of Alfred and Gordon who didn't need any changing to fit Nolan's universe.

Batman: armor instead of tights, other technology is given an explanation
Ra's: no mention of a Lazarus pit
Scarecrow: costume was scaled back
Lucius: figures out that Bruce is Batman
Joker: no perma-white, no goofy weapons
Two-Face: no two-color suit, doesn't become a crime boss

So, what would that mean for Robin, if a teenager would even be able to fight crime in this world? You can bet that his costume would be replaced with armor. Has Wayne Enterprises even created an armored military suit for a teenager? Why would they?

If Robin were to appear, I think he would sit on the sidelines and not get in on the action, which goes back to my point if that is something Robin fans would want to see. Is it just enough for him to appear in the movie? Or does he have to appear in all his glory? I suppose Nolan could always introduce him in the next movie and then hand him off to a director that would be more comfortable with the character.

 

[GlasgowBat]

Again, you did not say that there would be less of the flamboyant aspects, you said that robin would be toned down in a dramatic sense.

All this would be is a shift of emphasis. At the risk of repeating myself; different tone is not the same as toned-down.

(also, a minor adjustment of the suit could easily be easily achieved in order for it to fit Robin. A digression yes, but a throwaway line akin to Alfred to Bruce or Bruce to Alfred "we can make some adjustments" would suffice)

 

[The Joker]

Are you sure?

Doesn't look red to me Looks like brown hair.

 

[GlasgowBat]

impossible to tell. My girlfriend has naturally redish hair, but in certain light it appears brownish, as above.

largely irrelevant though. The inclusion of a daughter does not pre-suppose the inclusion of Batgirl.

 

[Majik1387]

Are you sure?

Yeah, the little girl isn't a red head, the mom Barbara has redder hair than her, but her hair is just brown as well.

 

[akfj]

Again, you did not say that there would be less of the flamboyant aspects, you said that robin would be toned down in a dramatic sense.

All this would be is a shift of emphasis. At the risk of repeating myself; different tone is not the same as toned-down.

(also, a minor adjustment of the suit could easily be easily achieved in order for it to fit Robin. A digression yes, but a throwaway line akin to Alfred to Bruce or Bruce to Alfred "we can make some adjustments" would suffice)

Ah, you misunderstood me. I said "dramatically toned-down," not "toned-down dramatically." I suppose instead of dramatically I should have used seriously, strikingly, or effectively [FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[regwec]

Yeah, the little girl isn't a red head, the mom Barbara has redder hair than her, but her hair is just brown as well.

Brown hair is Nolan's more realistic version of red hair.

 

[akfj]

Brown hair is Nolan's more realistic version of red hair.

You didn't find the mom realistic?

 

[regwec]

No, I thought she was far too lurid and campy. Nolan really sold out his gritty realistic vision there.

 

[akfj]

No, I thought she was far too lurid and campy. Nolan really sold out his gritty realistic vision there.

I thought we were talking about hair.