View Poll Results: Who is the second most important character in the Batman universe?

Voters
151. You may not vote on this poll
  • Commissioner Gordon

    26 17.22%
  • The Joker

    13 8.61%
  • Robin

    53 35.10%
  • Alfred

    55 36.42%
  • Other

    4 2.65%
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 121
  1. #76
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    12,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    I don't think Robin would fix the villain upstaging thing, and I'm definitely not sure it'd make him resonate more with audiences. Not unless they really tonally shift Batman away from the serious storytelling mode and towards something more campy. Because I don't think you can do Robin young enough for the father/son dynamic thing to work and not have it be a campier, more goofy take. That's just the problem of a kid Robin.
    Robin doesn't have to be that young of a kid beyond the story Bruce first meets him. That's usually just used as kind of a lazy strawman/excuse to avoid bringing him in the movies. Jump ahead and do it like BTAS did and have him be 18-21 to Bruce's early 30s and it shouldn't have to be a tonal shift.

    It wouldn't automatically make him resonate with audiences more, but it wouldn't automatically ruin anything either. We already have solo Batman in films where the villains resonate more with the audiences than Bruce, so there's no real solid proof that Bruce always works better without Dick or that their dynamic is unnecessary.

  2. #77
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    Robin doesn't have to be that young of a kid beyond the story Bruce first meets him. That's usually just used as kind of a lazy strawman/excuse to avoid bringing him in the movies. Jump ahead and do it like BTAS did and have him be 18-21 to Bruce's early 30s and it shouldn't have to be a tonal shift.

    It wouldn't automatically make him resonate with audiences more, but it wouldn't automatically ruin anything either. We already have solo Batman in films where the villains resonate more with the audiences than Bruce, so there's no real solid proof that Bruce always works better without Dick or that their dynamic is unnecessary.
    He can't start out as 18-21 because then there's the problem with Batman adopting a grown man but there's also a problem with with introducing Dick much younger and then skipping ahead 10-ish years - you'd have to age Batman by a decade too. While you can cast a younger and an older Dick, what do you do with Bruce, add some old man wrinkles digitally or with prosthetics to show time's passed? And what about all the years that had to be skipped, no important adventures happened then that might've made for an excellent movie?

    Their dynamic is unnecessary if he keeps getting great movies without it.

  3. #78
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    12,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    He can't start out as 18-21 because then there's the problem with Batman adopting a grown man but there's also a problem with with introducing Dick much younger and then skipping ahead 10-ish years - you'd have to age Batman by a decade too. While you can cast a younger and an older Dick, what do you do with Bruce, add some old man wrinkles digitally or with prosthetics to show time's passed? And what about all the years that had to be skipped, no important adventures happened then that might've made for an excellent movie?

    Their dynamic is unnecessary if he keeps getting great movies without it.
    So introduce him as 12-14 and skip ahead to 18. Bruce would be in his late 20s/early 30s (he generally should only be around a decade older than Dick) and people in that age range don't visibly change that much in general, especially in a Hollywood production.

    If the audiences weren't bothered seeing Michael Cain not age a day in Batman Begins when we saw Bruce go from a child to Christian Bale, I don't see anything breaking suspension of disbelief here. We also don't even need to touch on an origin at all aside from some flashbacks or exposition. Just do what BTAS did and drop us into a movie with them both at the ages they need to be.

    Keep in mind the "great movies" he's been getting usually cite Bruce as the weaker/blander part compared to the villains. A common criticism of the 1989 film at the time was that it should have been called "Joker" instead of "Batman." Alfred and Gordon, for supposedly being more integral, aren't really big selling points on those either. Yeah, WB doesn't have incentive to break from their formula, but that's not always indicative of a good thing. They don't have much incentive to break from Evil Superman either, do they? Though Superman is an easier sell than Robin, and they keep fucking that one up. If Robin is to be left out of the movies, it's not because he's not a good character or integral, it's just probably for the best WB doesn't cast their gaze on him because God knows what they'd do.
    Last edited by SiegePerilous02; 05-04-2021 at 06:38 AM.

  4. #79
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    So introduce him as 12-14 and skip ahead to 18. Bruce would be in his late 20s/early 30s (he generally should only be around a decade older than Dick) and people in that age range don't visibly change that much in general, especially in a Hollywood production.

    If the audiences weren't bothered seeing Michael Cain not age a day in Batman Begins when we saw Bruce go from a child to Christian Bale, I don't see anything breaking suspension of disbelief here. We also don't even need to touch on an origin at all aside from some flashbacks or exposition. Just do what BTAS did and drop us into a movie with them both at the ages they need to be.

    Keep in mind the "great movies" he's been getting usually cite Bruce as the weaker/blander part compared to the villains. A common criticism of the 1989 film at the time was that it should have been called "Joker" instead of "Batman." Alfred and Gordon, for supposedly being more integral, aren't really big selling points on those either. Yeah, WB doesn't have incentive to break from their formula, but that's not always indicative of a good thing. They don't have much incentive to break from Evil Superman either, do they? Though Superman is an easier sell than Robin, and they keep fucking that one up. If Robin is to be left out of the movies, it's not because he's not a good character or integral, it's just probably for the best WB doesn't cast their gaze on him because God knows what they'd do.
    Eh, fair enough that Robin could work in a film, maybe, still doesn't make a case for him being the most integral supporting character, since he's lacking in so many versions.

    And agreed that WB would probably fuck it up on Robin. I'm not a Robin fan, but if I were I'd pray that current WB never dares to think of using him in any upcoming Batman movie, because they'd bungle it so thoroughly that it'd be the last film he'd ever get, with the executives thinking it's proof that Robin is a bad character, rather than accepting the responsibility that he failed because they fucked it up ala Batman and Robin/Catwoman/Green Lantern/Jonah Hex.

  5. #80
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    12,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    Eh, fair enough that Robin could work in a film, maybe, still doesn't make a case for him being the most integral supporting character, since he's lacking in so many versions.
    He's really only lacking in a lot of the film versions (he's shows up in pretty much all the major animation and video game installments), but I wouldn't say that makes a case for him not being the most integral supporting character (or among them). Because not just in Batman films, but CBMs in general, a lot of integral stuff for the characters' mythos don't make it into the adaptations, or can't play out in the same way due to the limitations of live action and run time

    And I think another poster, K. Jones, laid out earlier in this thread why characters like Alfred and Gordon (and Lucius, Vicki and Leslie) are kind of all interchangeable or can come and go in their functions while the Robin identity (especially Dick, but definitely all of them as a whole) have a function in the Bat-verse none of the others can replicate as easily as they do for each other.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    And agreed that WB would probably fuck it up on Robin. I'm not a Robin fan, but if I were I'd pray that current WB never dares to think of using him in any upcoming Batman movie, because they'd bungle it so thoroughly that it'd be the last film he'd ever get, with the executives thinking it's proof that Robin is a bad character, rather than accepting the responsibility that he failed because they fucked it up ala Batman and Robin/Catwoman/Green Lantern/Jonah Hex.
    Agreed on this, I wouldn't want Reeves to be forced to use him if he doesn't have plans for him, and I also wouldn't want the studio to just have a puppet director who'd let them run all over them with most likely dodgy ideas. Or have a true "auteur" (ugh) who makes changes to the whole concept that it becomes unrecognizable. Some director has to be out there who can adapt and make a good story out of Batman and Robin and actively wants to, but then we have to factor in that they may not want to work with WB to begin with.

  6. #81
    Extraordinary Member Gaius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    5,428

    Default

    Audiences have accepted teenage Spider-Man, of which the MCU version already has a sort-of father-son dynamic with Iron Man that isn't too far off from a Batman/Robin relationship, so I don't think audiences would be turned off by a Batman and Robin film if it were done well enough.

  7. #82
    Leftbrownie Alpha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,853

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius View Post
    Audiences have accepted teenage Spider-Man, of which the MCU version already has a sort-of father-son dynamic with Iron Man that isn't too far off from a Batman/Robin relationship, so I don't think audiences would be turned off by a Batman and Robin film if it were done well enough.
    I mean, Spider-man can lift a car.

  8. #83
    Mighty Member Bat-Meal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius View Post
    Audiences have accepted teenage Spider-Man, of which the MCU version already has a sort-of father-son dynamic with Iron Man that isn't too far off from a Batman/Robin relationship, so I don't think audiences would be turned off by a Batman and Robin film if it were done well enough.
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpha View Post
    I mean, Spider-man can lift a car.
    Spider-Man is also a superhero on his own, who decided to be one entirely on his own - he wasn't adopted and raised by Iron Man to become a superhero, but mentored after the fact. I think that may be part of the issue for many with the Robin story for live action - because depending on how it's done, it could potentially be quite disturbing.

    I mean, the MCU aged-up Bucky Barnes and made him Captain America's best friend.

  9. #84
    Invincible Member MajorHoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    21,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bat-Meal View Post
    . . . I mean, the MCU aged-up Bucky Barnes and made him Captain America's best friend.
    Didn't they also pretty much ignore the Nazis during WWII as well and replace them with HYDRA?

  10. #85
    Mighty Member Bat-Meal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MajorHoy View Post
    Didn't they also pretty much ignore the Nazis during WWII as well and replace them with HYDRA?
    And Bucky was introduced as an adult, not a child.

  11. #86
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    12,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alpha View Post
    I mean, Spider-man can lift a car.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bat-Meal View Post
    Spider-Man is also a superhero on his own, who decided to be one entirely on his own - he wasn't adopted and raised by Iron Man to become a superhero, but mentored after the fact. I think that may be part of the issue for many with the Robin story for live action - because depending on how it's done, it could potentially be quite disturbing.

    I mean, the MCU aged-up Bucky Barnes and made him Captain America's best friend.
    Spider-Man lifting a car doesn't make Tony recruiting him while his clueless aunt is in the next room any less disturbing and kind of hypocritical considering his motivation in that film was kickstarted by a teenage civilian getting killed as a result of superhero fights, leading his angry mother to confront Tony. How pleasant of a reaction is he expecting out of May if Peter got killed?

    This is why Tim's comic origin never sat right with me, because his actual dad is still alive and not informed he's been recruited into a life of a vigilante. Dick's setup has some hurdles too, but at least Bruce is his legal guardian. They could set it up as Bruce saying "I will train you, but you are not going out with me until you are at least 18 and I'm damn sure you're ready" and it would take the edge off. And also preferably abandon the pretense that the DCU is in any way realistic.

  12. #87
    Mighty Member Godzilla2099's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,475

    Default

    Voted Alfred

    I grew up with the Keaton Movie. Also take in Bale and Affleck had no Robin either

    What did all three movies have in common? A good father figure backing them up

  13. #88
    Astonishing Member failo.legendkiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Posts
    2,170

    Default

    Robin

    if Robin is around my interest in a Batman story, movie, cartoon etc is increased tenfold. Maybe a little less if the robin is Damian

  14. #89
    Extraordinary Member dietrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    9,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by failo.legendkiller View Post
    Robin

    if Robin is around my interest in a Batman story, movie, cartoon etc is increased tenfold. Maybe a little less if the robin is Damian
    That's more a point in favour of Robin not being integral if something so simple as which Robin is a deciding factor.

    Alfred is important or not
    Jim etc are all important supporting part of the Batman regardless of changes.

  15. #90
    Invincible Member MajorHoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    21,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dietrich View Post
    That's more a point in favour of Robin not being integral if something so simple as which Robin is a deciding factor.
    Maybe if the option had been for a more specific version of Robin it would be different.
    (I wonder what the numbers would have been for, say Dick Grayson <Robin/Nightwing/Batman>?)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •