I was watching me some Batman today and it got me to wondering...

I was watching me some Batman today and it got me to wondering. In the modern day live action superhero trend of more serious superheroes, is there a place for the boy wonder in a Batman movie made today? Particularly in the more heavy Dark Knight style movies that have become the dominating trend of Batman movies? Previously, the introduction of Robin in the movies seemed to herald lighter and sillier tones no longer suiting to the current trends.

so my question, Sup Forums, is how would YOU do a modern Robin to suit the modern Batman? Or perhaps Sup Forums would be more interested in the dark styles of the more modern Batman to give way to the lighter and sillier tone that seems to always be brought along when Robin is introduced in the movies?

Discuss.

Basically an adaptation of how Robin was introduced in Dark Victory.

Robin requires more nuance to the Batman character than a two hour movie can afford. You either need to have him in an immediately understandable golly gee whiz classoc robin role (like Lego batman or adam west bats) or drop him entirely (every other batman).

This is mainly because explaining why batman would adopt and grow close to a child in a believable manner almost requires a movie by itself. If it goes unexplained batman just seems like a psycho

This, and have him start by doing scrub work in the Batcave

>or drop him entirely (every other batman).
BvS shows Robin's costume. Granted it looks like Mista I went to town with his crowbar in this universe, but still.

I dont know if you could do that now

it just seems weird for him to keep a boy in a bikini around as a partner. I dont know how people would respond to that if it happened today

This, really. Modern Batman incarnations seem to be characters too gritty to adopt and raise/train a child, instead of something like founding an orphanage and not having any residual distractions

A modern Robin would basically be a Kickass that doesn't ask questions

I assume if anyone tried to take this on, then they'd probably try to do a more modern take on the outfit. Because yeah, panty teens probably wouldn't fly today.

But modern Batman has a Robin.

There's really not much to it. He sees a boy get his parents killed by a criminal and offers to take him in so the kid doesn't wind up as fucked up in the head as he is.

This. The Dark Knight ain't got shit on how gritty some of the modern Batman comics can be, and they keep Robin.

I don't think the character isn't unsalvageable in film, its just that he has a long term social stigma attached that would take a lot of effort from a really good writer to overcome.

It don't think the Dark Knight's problem was that it was "too dark". Hell, endangering a kid is pretty dark if you write it that way. Nolan wanted a grounded as possible film featuring Batman. He had little interest in telling a comic book story.

Nothing about Robin is inherently silly. I don't get why so many casuals think this shit. All you have to do is not make him "Be sure to brush your teeth after you eat, Robin!" "Gee wilickers, Bastman!" shit based on the 60's show and you're fine.

Robin has been done absolutely fine since the 70's, there have even been reinterpretations of his childhood that worked just fine.

>Previously, the introduction of Robin in the movies seemed to herald lighter and sillier tones no longer suiting to the current trends.
Absolutely untrue. The only two movies with Robin were "sillier" because of the change of directors and the studios wanting to change the tone to sell more toys to kids. In fact, the parts with Robin in Batman Forever were easily the most serious parts of the movie.

Just read some comics, dude. The question of "how do you do Robin in the modern age?" has been thoroughly answered over and over and over again, ESPECIALLY with Tim and Damian.

it helps that in real life children arent just half the height of adults.
i like robin best as a girl
otherwise just make him cool and kind of a spider-man kinda guy. agile, quips, good at distracting the enemy.. maybe even a pathological okayness with putting himself in danger being that he's a daredevil and a gypsy

see there was a time when boys wearing pants was disrespectful.. because of really creepy fucked up social shit. but in essence he's wearing trunks and that is fine, oftentimes with tights which makes sense for an acrobat, and evidently his costume is meant to evoke robin hood (doesnt explain the peter pan booties but whatever) so making the vest look more like a tunic helps greatly with the whole bare legs thing. Yknow, basically make him look like Link.

I didn't necessarily mean that the movies becoming sillier was Robin's fault, nor did I mean Robin is inherently silly. Because yeah, in Batman Forever he WAS one of the least silly parts. More I mean that the character seems very difficult for live action to wrap its head around, and has a bit of a long standing social stigma of being that gee whiz 60s kid.

I know for a fact that Nolan specifically stated Robin would never be in his films so this is most a theoretical discussion. But part of the reason I do want him in these more modern movies is because of that, because the character can be a great one if the writer can actually apply himself, and I personally just really like the idea of Batman having a protege that he sees parts of his past in. I see a value in the characters but with Nolan's and Bale's statements regarding him in TDK universe it just seemed unfortunately obvious that writers are stuck on that 60s kid stereotype.

It doesn't work in any serious adaptation.

It's EXTREMELY against his character to think that even though he needed decades of intense training to do this shit that he can just toss a minor into it after only a fraction of the training he recieved.

It's grossly irresponsible.

Fuck off, Ollie.

Also Dick was trained by some of the world's greatest acrobats from birth, Tim was a wunderkind gymnast, Damian was trained from birth as an assassin.

>It doesn't work in any serious adaptation.
Yeah except how it's been a staple in the comics even during the most serious times, even in Miller and Loeb's serious works that were the inspiration for Nolan's movies.

Fuck off with this NO FUN ALLOWED garbage and try actually reading a comic book before you spout your mouth off like a dumbass.

I don't like Robin in serious Batman. But then... I don't like serious Batman. So yeah.
>Or perhaps Sup Forums would be more interested in the dark styles of the more modern Batman to give way to the lighter and sillier tone
(Yes, please.)

>Also Dick was trained by some of the world's greatest acrobats from birth, Tim was a wunderkind gymnast

Cool, that means they have 1/30th the qualifications batman felt necessary to start fighting crime.

>Fuck off with this NO FUN ALLOWED garbage
I said in a serious adaptation. The key word being serious.

You can't get both this angry and be purposely ignore what was actually written down THIS hard.

Wich would be the best robin to bring into the Big Screen?
Dick, tim, jason?
We know in the current movies jason is dead,but we could start with any of those

Batman is a guy running around in bat costume punching bad guys. No matter what you do with him it is still a silly concept. Robin isn't really much of a stretch on that level.

The main problem with Robin as a character is that he is still suffering from that awful Batman and Robin movie adaptation. Bruce adopting an adult and the two living together imprinted the idea that is what Robin is and is too silly to ever be anything but that. Then Nolan and Bale refusing to use the character just keeps that live action Batman and Robin version in the minds of the public, even reinforcing it. No one really gave a shit about that "Robin" he used in TDKR.

Bruce has to take in Robin when he is young enough to be believable that he can be adopted. Like 8 or 10 at most and then train them up to basically one day take over as Batman, but that doesn't exactly work out.

Dick solo film, Tim as Batmans Sidekick, Red hood vs Batman movie

Miller and loebs serious works weren't even attempting to be realistic though, which is a key factor in whether or not robin makes any sense.

In any sort of realistic/realistically serious take, he doesn't.

In any sort of unrealistic take, he can, because then anything is on the table.

There's a reason Nolan, who tried to do a realistically serious take, didn't carry over the boy wonder from those stories.

I assume they'd start with Dick Grayson, but its possible they'd go for Tim instead. Jason, probably not. But considering all the issues with training that everyone has brought up, perhaps Damian would be the best choice.

Bruce had decades of training before he became Batman? In most versions doesn't he start training only until after he finishes school or something?

If he takes in someone like Dick who would be the same age as Bruce when his parents died and basically put them on a crash course to learn the steps Bruce learned on his own Robin should be more prepared earlier than Bruce was.

In almost every canon he literally starts preparing for it shortly after his parents die, mostly academically and somewhat physically.
He just can't travel and do the extreme training until he's older.

The study aspect of his training alone was ridiculous, and the physical aspect outstrips Dick's acrobatics training massively.

Really, the amount of things bruce had to study alone would reasonably have been impossible almost in a lifetime.

He learned so many languages and scientific fields so quickly, then went and mastered god knows how many martial arts, escape arts, misdirection, sneaking, security bypass, computer programming and hacking, soooo much shit.

Nah man, you were an acrobat? Fuck, here's a costume.

Yeah and someone like Dick was already far ahead of Bruce at the same age with physical training.

Far ahead of bruce by a few years in one field.

I don't think you have any real grasp as to how much training Bruce did.

I'll argue that being inferior to Bruce would kind of be the point, since Bruce is the mentor he's to learn from.

Bruce and Dick were both the same ages when their parents died, but Dick had a massive head start on the physical aspect because of how he grew up. So when Bruce took him in he already knew how to properly train Dick because of all the hard work and trail and error he went through on his own trying to be Batman. So Dick would be able to become a proper hero far faster than Bruce did and be ready at a younger age. All the stuff Bruce did complements the Robins.

Then there is Damian that had both the physical and mental areas trained into him since birth. So he is ahead of any of them really.

The physical aspect of the training isn't just being physically fit and agile.

Bruce learned everything Dick knew, and then dozens of martial arts and body mastery shit like escape arts, stealth techniques, etc. He trained under magicians even for deception and concealment shit.

Again, the only way this works is if you purposely pretend Bruce did WAY less shit than he actually did before he thought he was ready to be batman.

Nothing I'm saying and nothing you are saying contradict each other. Bruce would have taught Dick everything he needed to know to be a hero and would have been ahead of Bruce at the same age because of it. Martial arts, escape techniques and the rest would have been taught by Bruce and in some instances would send the Robin to go get specific training elsewhere. Bruce would have known what is needed to get Robin to be ready as soon as possible.

Also Damian is the one aspect that is outside of all this. His training was probably more harsh than Bruce's, and started at a much younger age.