The Dark Knight Robin To Be Or Not To Be

[StorminNorman]

Hark! Wingnuts in the ballistic apple trees, seething with recalcitrance.

Lingua Mortua Sola Lingua Bona Est

 

[AnimeJune]

In order to get this thread back on a Robin track, let me share with you the worst Robin thread ever:



http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201492

Don't let Schumacher read that! He might get ideas!

Now THAT is an example of something so bad, that it's hilarious. Making Harvey Dent a Mob Heir? Wow, that, uh, that completely reverses his entire character. Kinda like making Batgirl Alfred's niece who likes to race day-glo motorcycles, huh?

 

[Britboy]

I absolutely hate the idea of Robin being in any future Batman films.......
The only time I ever want to see Robin on the big screen is if they do a film version of 'The Dark Knight Returns'.....I'd be happy with that.....

 

[Ronny Shade]

I absolutely hate the idea of Robin being in any future Batman films.......
The only time I ever want to see Robin on the big screen is if they do a film version of 'The Dark Knight Returns'.....I'd be happy with that.....

you are not alone.


But when I say that I am positively not referring to myself

 

[Britboy]

I prefer anything Batman related when he is on his own.........cartoons , films , comics......

 

[Kritish]

No god damn Robin!

 

[The Kid]

Robin Forever!

He's a necessary part of batman's evolution as a character for goodness sakes.

Just like Rachael. **** and he has a cool costume.

 

[El Payaso]

Robin Forever!

He's a necessary part of batman's evolution as a character for goodness sakes.

Just like Rachael. **** and he has a cool costume.

Yes, rachel. What a great contribution.

 

[AnimeJune]

Yes, rachel. What a great contribution.

Rachel contributed nothing to the Batman Begins films except for estrogen.

 

[El Payaso]

Rachel contributed nothing to the Batman Begins films except for estrogen.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Rachel contributed nothing to the Batman Begins films except for estrogen.

But estrogen is good.

Actually I could make a case (and I have in the past) that Rachel did serve a storytelling purpose. I won't say that her purpose could not have been served by another character, or several other characters - because it could - but she did serve a purpose, and it was a purpose that set "Batman Begins" apart from all the previous Batman films.

 

[AnimeJune]

But estrogen is good.

Actually I could make a case (and I have in the past) that Rachel did serve a storytelling purpose. I won't say that her purpose could not have been served by another character, or several other characters - because it could - but she did serve a purpose, and it was a purpose that set "Batman Begins" apart from all the previous Batman films.

M'eh - to me, she was just a girl, one of a number that Batman has in one film, but no others. She just happens to be "chronologically" first.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

M'eh - to me, she was just a girl, one of a number that Batman has in one film, but no others. She just happens to be "chronologically" first.

Okay, that's basically true. But how about the fact that nearly every scene she was in, had to do with keeping Bruce in touch with his humanity, with his conscience, his soul? Previous Batman films have had Bruce as a quiet, nervous guy who is only really comfortable when he's in the suit beating the crap out of guys, and it was never clear whether his motivation was purely personal, or if he did indeed mean to serve the greater good. With each film they made the "greater good" thing more obvious, but at the cost of the character's, well, cojones.

Rachel's purpose was really as a storytelling device. I admit that it could have been handled better, and with other characters, but her purpose was to remind Bruce (and by proxy us, the audience) that Bruce can't allow his motivation to be purely personal. That he has to serve justice, not just vengeance, and that his actions define him as a human being and so he needs to always do the right thing, and not be tempted to vigilantism (Punisher style) just because he could.

Alfred could just as easily have served that purpose - and in some capacity he did - but where Alfred served as the voice of the family, as the keeper of the Wayne Legacy - Rachel was Bruce's conscience, the still small voice in each of us that reminds us to do the right thing when we have the option not to.

 

[The Guard]

Okay, that's basically true. But how about the fact that nearly every scene she was in, had to do with keeping Bruce in touch with his humanity, with his conscience, his soul?

I question whether that was neccessary. Were the writers reluctant to write Bruce as a flawed human being with some conflict as to what he wanted to do with his life and how that would affect him?

Previous Batman films have had Bruce as a quiet, nervous guy who is only really comfortable when he's in the suit beating the crap out of guys.

You left out "dark and brooding".

and it was never clear whether his motivation was purely personal, or if he did indeed mean to serve the greater good.

Good. That's absolutely a major point behind Batman's mission.

Rachel's purpose was really as a storytelling device. I admit that it could have been handled better, and with other characters, but her purpose was to remind Bruce (and by proxy us, the audience) that Bruce can't allow his motivation to be purely personal.

Again, I question why that was neccessary.

That he has to serve justice, not just vengeance, and that his actions define him as a human being and so he needs to always do the right thing, and not be tempted to vigilantism (Punisher style) just because he could.

See, that makes this BEGINS version of Bruce Wayne, well, in some ways, a bit less intelligent than he could be. The Bruce Wayne I know would have considered these things, or would come to these conclusions on his own. It makes him, I feel, a bit more one-dimensional and flat when he has to be told what's wrong with his thinking. I suppose my main beef with it is that it's when he started his mission that he would need to be reminded of these aspects, not before.

Alfred could just as easily have served that purpose - and in some capacity he did - but where Alfred served as the voice of the family, as the keeper of the Wayne Legacy - Rachel was Bruce's conscience, the still small voice in each of us that reminds us to do the right thing when we have the option not to.

But that's the point. Why do we need a character to be Bruce's conscience? Can't Bruce just be written with a conscience?

 

[batmaluco]

But that's the point. Why do we need a character to be Bruce's conscience? Can't Bruce just be written with a conscience?

 

[Keyser Sushi]

I question whether that was neccessary. Were the writers reluctant to write Bruce as a flawed human being with some conflict as to what he wanted to do with his life and how that would affect him?

Hello, my friend. Somehow I knew this would draw you out of your secret crime lab and gourmet kitchen to match wits with me again. Probably because this was one of the original debates we had last year.

Anyway, I freely admit that it may not have been necessary to include Rachel. But the issue June and I were discussing was wether or not Rachel served a purpose, not whether said purpose was a necessary function of the plot.

You left out "dark and brooding".

This is true; largely because I was focusing on the points where Begins Bruce and Burton Bruce part ways. Both are dark and brooding, but Begins Bruce puts that away in public settings. Burton Bruce seems to make no real effort to hide the fact that he is a haunted and lonely man.

Good. That's absolutely a major point behind Batman's mission.

It is, and Begins dealt with that, too; but they made a point of saying outright that his goal is to serve the greater good, and that the temptation to go all "Punisher" is an aspect of his character that he must not give in to. I prefer a Batman with that measure of restraint, to the Frank Miller "ape****" Batman, which Burton's Batman often emulated.

Again, I question why that was neccessary.

It may or may not be necessary, but in the filmic medium it is sometimes useful to take what amounts to an internal conflict, and externalize it so that the character's thoughts and feelings are laid bare to the viewer.

See, that makes this BEGINS version of Bruce Wayne, well, in some ways, a bit less intelligent than he could be. The Bruce Wayne I know would have considered these things, or would come to these conclusions on his own. It makes him, I feel, a bit more one-dimensional and flat when he has to be told what's wrong with his thinking. I suppose my main beef with it is that it's when he started his mission that he would need to be reminded of these aspects, not before.

I do understand your point. But I think some of it is in your perspective. I don't think that Bruce didn't think about these things, or that he would not have come to those conclusions on his own. I do, however, figure that Nolan and Goyer didn't want Batman to talk to himself, so they externalized that conflict, using Rachel as the voice of Bruce's conscience. The operative word there is Bruce's conscience.

She is giving external voice to what is already within Bruce, not planting these thoughts in his head.

 

[Golgo-13]

I think Robin should be in the BB sequels but NOT in BB2. I think they should give hints in BB2 to show Robin will be in a different sequel. In my mind I think it would be cool to show like a flying grasons poster in BB2, and thats it

All i have to say is, if there is a god, Robin should never breathe the same air in a Nolan based Batman film as Batman....

 

[AnimeJune]

All i have to say is, if there is a god, Robin should never breathe the same air in a Nolan based Batman film as Batman....

Hmmm...a lot of hate directed at Robin. Batman & Robin was a wretched movie, true, but I'm still of the opinion that anything, if done by a person with a knowledge and a love for the material, can be made into an entertaining movie.

Granted, I wouldn't want to see Robin in the movie right away, that doesn't mean that a Batman film with Robin in it is impossible to be good.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Hmmm...a lot of hate directed at Robin. Batman & Robin was a wretched movie, true, but I'm still of the opinion that anything, if done by a person with a knowledge and a love for the material, can be made into an entertaining movie.

Granted, I wouldn't want to see Robin in the movie right away, that doesn't mean that a Batman film with Robin in it is impossible to be good.

Voice of reason.

I was curious what your thoughts were on my defense of Rachel Dawes, though?

 

[Ronny Shade]

Keyser and the Gaurd again

I'd get involved, but honestly, I'm not in the mood.

 

[StorminNorman]

Keyser and the Gaurd again

I'd get involved, but honestly, I'm not in the mood.

They simply scare me with their big words and perfect grammar.

 

[AnimeJune]

Voice of reason.

I was curious what your thoughts were on my defense of Rachel Dawes, though?

Erm, let me put it this way - she seemed livelier after her brain was put through the Scientology Washing Machine. She should have been played by someone with more spunk.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Erm, let me put it this way - she seemed livelier after her brain was put through the Scientology Washing Machine. She should have been played by someone with more spunk.

LOL. I can see that thou dost not like Katie Holmes. Nothing wrong with that, she isn't the greatest actress around... or even one of the most essentially competent.

So if she'd been portrayed by a better actress, you wouldn't have had any problems with the character's inclusion?

 

[Hades]

The thnig that was so refresing about Begins compared to the other ones was that it focued on Bruce. The thing is if we add Robin is the movie will lose that I think. I mean, we already have enough characters as it is.

 

[thedarks0ldier]

At this point, I am for Robin as long as it is done for story purposes and done with class. If it is done anything like Leon the Professional then it would be cool.

If it is like Batman Forever or like Elektra (with that one kid) or if it seems like Mark Steven Johnson is behind it then **** NO