Batman returns once more: Christopher Nolan does it again!!!

[JohnnyL]

No offense but Robin kinda ruins everything. Good thing he won't be appearing in any of the Nolan Batman films. Bale even said that if they were to add a sidekick for him, he'd quit.

I honestly can't see Riddler being as appealing as the other dudes, he probably can get knocked out in a single punch. But his appearance would make sense for the 3rd. I mean, with the way Batman was running from the cops and all.

Maybe add Red Hood (he could be anybody, and ironically RH is now the 2nd Robin who Joker killed. Wanting to get revenge on Batman for not avenging him)

 I think they could effectively use the Robin character if done correctly, but they could not approach the character the way they have in the previous films.  Either way, I think the point is probably moot, because Nolan has stated in interviews that he's not interested in using Robin in any of his movies.  And honestly, after the disasterous Schumaker films, I can understand the stigma surrounding the character.

Btw, Dollaz+Sense, did you hear that the next animated DC film is going to be "Batman: Under the Hood," based off of the comic series you were talking about with the 2nd Robin returning as the Red Hood?  It looks pretty cool. There's a little info on it here, along with one screen shot:

http://enewsi.com/animation/194-16773.html

Not to mention the portrayal of Robin in the campy 1960's Batman, "Holy jeepers creepers, Batman! Jiminy Crickets!" and all the jazz. That's kinda hard to not forget.
also, good looking on the animated film. it looks real cool. unusual list of voice cast though, I'm used to the usual Kevin Conroy & Mark Hamill.

 Lol.  Yeah, the campiness is what killed Batman for many people, for years.  And when Schumaker was still directing the Batman movies, he would always site that old t.v. show as one of his biggest influences.  He was a big fan of the old 60's show, and unfortunately it clearly came across in his movies. In the modern comic books though, Robin is actually a pretty effective character.  It's too bad that to date, no one has been able to translate that into a film well.
 I agree with you on the animated casting too, btw.  For an animated film, you can't go wrong with Conroy or Hamil.  To me, the "Batman: The Animated Series," from the 90's is still the best animated adaptation of Batman that there's ever been.

[thisoneguy360]

I could care less about Superman, always looking forward to some new Batman though  good shit.

[eazye]

No offense but Robin kinda ruins everything. Good thing he won't be appearing in any of the Nolan Batman films. Bale even said that if they were to add a sidekick for him, he'd quit.

I honestly can't see Riddler being as appealing as the other dudes, he probably can get knocked out in a single punch. But his appearance would make sense for the 3rd. I mean, with the way Batman was running from the cops and all.

Maybe add Red Hood (he could be anybody, and ironically RH is now the 2nd Robin who Joker killed. Wanting to get revenge on Batman for not avenging him)

 I think they could effectively use the Robin character if done correctly, but they could not approach the character the way they have in the previous films.  Either way, I think the point is probably moot, because Nolan has stated in interviews that he's not interested in using Robin in any of his movies.  And honestly, after the disasterous Schumaker films, I can understand the stigma surrounding the character.

Btw, Dollaz+Sense, did you hear that the next animated DC film is going to be "Batman: Under the Hood," based off of the comic series you were talking about with the 2nd Robin returning as the Red Hood?  It looks pretty cool. There's a little info on it here, along with one screen shot:

http://enewsi.com/animation/194-16773.html

Not to mention the portrayal of Robin in the campy 1960's Batman, "Holy jeepers creepers, Batman! Jiminy Crickets!" and all the jazz. That's kinda hard to not forget.
also, good looking on the animated film. it looks real cool. unusual list of voice cast though, I'm used to the usual Kevin Conroy & Mark Hamill.

 Lol.  Yeah, the campiness is what killed Batman for many people, for years.  And when Schumaker was still directing the Batman movies, he would always site that old t.v. show as one of his biggest influences.  He was a big fan of the old 60's show, and unfortunately it clearly came across in his movies. In the modern comic books though, Robin is actually a pretty effective character.  It's too bad that to date, no one has been able to translate that into a film well.
 I agree with you on the animated casting too, btw.  For an animated film, you can't go wrong with Conroy or Hamil.  To me, the "Batman: The Animated Series," from the 90's is still the best animated adaptation of Batman that there's ever been.

Truth

I don't really know why though, I could never actually watch all of the episodes.Probably got around to the middle of season 3 and stopped. I should try to continue from there.I loved those series damnit!

[G-Funk]

No offense but Robin kinda ruins everything. Good thing he won't be appearing in any of the Nolan Batman films. Bale even said that if they were to add a sidekick for him, he'd quit.

I honestly can't see Riddler being as appealing as the other dudes, he probably can get knocked out in a single punch. But his appearance would make sense for the 3rd. I mean, with the way Batman was running from the cops and all.

Maybe add Red Hood (he could be anybody, and ironically RH is now the 2nd Robin who Joker killed. Wanting to get revenge on Batman for not avenging him)

 I think they could effectively use the Robin character if done correctly, but they could not approach the character the way they have in the previous films.  Either way, I think the point is probably moot, because Nolan has stated in interviews that he's not interested in using Robin in any of his movies.  And honestly, after the disasterous Schumaker films, I can understand the stigma surrounding the character.

Btw, Dollaz+Sense, did you hear that the next animated DC film is going to be "Batman: Under the Hood," based off of the comic series you were talking about with the 2nd Robin returning as the Red Hood?  It looks pretty cool. There's a little info on it here, along with one screen shot:

http://enewsi.com/animation/194-16773.html

Not to mention the portrayal of Robin in the campy 1960's Batman, "Holy jeepers creepers, Batman! Jiminy Crickets!" and all the jazz. That's kinda hard to not forget.
also, good looking on the animated film. it looks real cool. unusual list of voice cast though, I'm used to the usual Kevin Conroy & Mark Hamill.

 Lol.  Yeah, the campiness is what killed Batman for many people, for years.  And when Schumaker was still directing the Batman movies, he would always site that old t.v. show as one of his biggest influences.  He was a big fan of the old 60's show, and unfortunately it clearly came across in his movies. In the modern comic books though, Robin is actually a pretty effective character.  It's too bad that to date, no one has been able to translate that into a film well.
 I agree with you on the animated casting too, btw.  For an animated film, you can't go wrong with Conroy or Hamil.  To me, the "Batman: The Animated Series," from the 90's is still the best animated adaptation of Batman that there's ever been.

Truth

I don't really know why though, I could never actually watch all of the episodes.Probably got around to the middle of season 3 and stopped. I should try to continue from there.I loved those series damnit!

Hell yeah, I have the complete animated series on DVD. Turned out to be a bootleg though (can tell from the whole bunch of spelling errors on the packaging), but I got it for a very fair price and all's that matter is that they work and that I can enjoy them.

Word of caution, if you want to buy the complete animated series online, ask questions about it, maybe some pictures. Y'know, examine it thoroughly.

[Shallow]

There is no way in the current universe you can justify a multi-millionaire socialite taking in an orphaned teen and then training him to fight in the streets as a sidekick, and no way can you do it all in a single film. First you need a way to get the kid; Bruce Wayne in the eyes of the city and world is a male Paris Hilton. It took Wayne a life time of training to feel street ready, or at the very least 5 to 10 years, and he wasn't on the street himself until his 20s. So the boy robin makes no sense. A full grown Robin makes no sense as to why Bruce would take him in at all and why he would trust him.

The best they could without insulting the fans is have Wayne be somehow connected to the family more so than the circus because their needs to be a personal reason why the boy would be left with Bruce Wayne. If you make him a distant cousin you might make the comic nerds upset.

Now the best idea I can think of is;

Wayne Tech supplies the innovative technology that the circus uses; some type of mechanical ropes and harnesses. The gangsters who are trying to extort the circus tamper with the technology and the older Graysons fall to their death. Naturally Wayne tech Industries gets all the bad press so Bruce as Batman goes on the case, discovers what happened and who did it, and goes after the thugs, only to find the surviving Grayson already there trying to kill them himself. The kid gets captured and about to be killed as Bats saves the day. The next day Bruce Wayne faces the media, states that the fall was not due to bad equipment but due to criminal tampering and right next to him Jim Gordon, thanks to Batman's tip, is confirming the whole thing. Even though not to blame Wayne shows public sympathy for the boy and states he will be paying for him to attend the top boarding school in the country, with young Dick spending summers at Wayne Manor in the care of a private nanny and educator approved by child services. Over the years Bruce notices the desire for vengeance grows in the young man, written letters of anger sent to the thugs now convicts, fights at school, etc. Wayne takes him aside and trains him to channel his rage into martial arts and councils him by sharing their stories. Young Dick who while staying there for the summers with Alfred realizes something is up and eventually discovers the secret. Wayne further trains him and shows him how everything works but refuses to let him on the street until he is at least 19-21. Wayne uses the Batman and Robin image to inspire the city that needs more than a picture of Harvey Dent to feel safe. I'd imagine the first time he lets the kid on a real mission it would have to be something urgent that requires two men and something very noble and heroic. Let's say a burning orphanage.

Batman jumps to go and Dick stresses he'll need someone in the car to man the operations while Bat's is in the building among the flames. Batman gets stuck with the kids while in there and Robin jumps out of the car and comes to the rescue. The scene ends with the two of them in what looks like a pose as the children are safe and sound being looked at by EMT and a front page picture of the whole thing in a great shot makes Batman a hero again.

Now we just have to justify the cop killing, which is as easy as blaming one of the many Bat impostors gone rogue. An escapee from Arkham donned the suit and let his crazy paranoia make him think he was Batman, he thought the cops were dirty and killed them. He was so convincing in the role that he fooled Gordon and it wasn't until Gordon saw the two Batmen together that he realized the truth. At least that's the story the media would know. They can use any unaccounted for Arkham loon to be the set up guy.

[JohnnyL]

There is no way in the current universe you can justify a multi-millionaire socialite taking in an orphaned teen and then training him to fight in the streets as a sidekick, and no way can you do it all in a single film. First you need a way to get the kid; Bruce Wayne in the eyes of the city and world is a male Paris Hilton. It took Wayne a life time of training to feel street ready, or at the very least 5 to 10 years, and he wasn't on the street himself until his 20s. So the boy robin makes no sense. A full grown Robin makes no sense as to why Bruce would take him in at all and why he would trust him.

The best they could without insulting the fans is have Wayne be somehow connected to the family more so than the circus because their needs to be a personal reason why the boy would be left with Bruce Wayne. If you make him a distant cousin you might make the comic nerds upset.

Now the best idea I can think of is;

Wayne Tech supplies the innovative technology that the circus uses; some type of mechanical ropes and harnesses. The gangsters who are trying to extort the circus tamper with the technology and the older Graysons fall to their death. Naturally Wayne tech Industries gets all the bad press so Bruce as Batman goes on the case, discovers what happened and who did it, and goes after the thugs, only to find the surviving Grayson already there trying to kill them himself. The kid gets captured and about to be killed as Bats saves the day. The next day Bruce Wayne faces the media, states that the fall was not due to bad equipment but due to criminal tampering and right next to him Jim Gordon, thanks to Batman's tip, is confirming the whole thing. Even though not to blame Wayne shows public sympathy for the boy and states he will be paying for him to attend the top boarding school in the country, with young Dick spending summers at Wayne Manor in the care of a private nanny and educator approved by child services. Over the years Bruce notices the desire for vengeance grows in the young man, written letters of anger sent to the thugs now convicts, fights at school, etc. Wayne takes him aside and trains him to channel his rage into martial arts and councils him by sharing their stories. Young Dick who while staying there for the summers with Alfred realizes something is up and eventually discovers the secret. Wayne further trains him and shows him how everything works but refuses to let him on the street until he is at least 19-21. Wayne uses the Batman and Robin image to inspire the city that needs more than a picture of Harvey Dent to feel safe. I'd imagine the first time he lets the kid on a real mission it would have to be something urgent that requires two men and something very noble and heroic. Let's say a burning orphanage.

Batman jumps to go and Dick stresses he'll need someone in the car to man the operations while Bat's is in the building among the flames. Batman gets stuck with the kids while in there and Robin jumps out of the car and comes to the rescue. The scene ends with the two of them in what looks like a pose as the children are safe and sound being looked at by EMT and a front page picture of the whole thing in a great shot makes Batman a hero again.

Now we just have to justify the cop killing, which is as easy as blaming one of the many Bat impostors gone rogue. An escapee from Arkham donned the suit and let his crazy paranoia make him think he was Batman, he thought the cops were dirty and killed them. He was so convincing in the role that he fooled Gordon and it wasn't until Gordon saw the two Batmen together that he realized the truth. At least that's the story the media would know. They can use any unaccounted for Arkham loon to be the set up guy.

  I had my own thoughts on how they might be able to introduce the character in the current film series, and they were actually pretty similar to your's, at least in some ways.  I agree that that is a story line that could not be told in a single movie.  In order for it to work, it would have to be a "slower burn" than that.
  The idea I was tossing around in my head would be to have Anthony Zucco take over the Falcone family after Sal Maroni was killed by Two Face in the events from "The Dark Knight."  This would also have comic book precedent, because that's similar to how Jeph Loeb depicted Zucco in the graphic novel "Batman: Dark Victory."  My idea was to have the story play out very similar to Robin's comic book origin with Grayson's parent's killed by Zucco.  But by the end of the movie, when people are expecting Richard Grayson to become Robin, it doesn't happen.  I would actually write the events to play out over the course of three movies, with Grayson having a more behind the scenes role similar to Alfred, in the second of the three movies, and actually becoming Robin in the third one.  Of course to me, the trick would be keeping this story peripheral to the main story, and having it play more like a sub-plot.  To me, it's important to keep Batman as the focal point.  As far as the Richard Grayson character himself, I would cast some who's about 12 years old for the first of the three movies.  Since there's usually about a 3 year period between each of the movies that would make him 18 yrs. old by the time the third movie rolled around, and he actually appeared as Robin.
 The other thoughts I had about a potential Robin story is in my version of the story (if I were to write it), originally Bruce Wayne would have no intention of training Grayson to be a "sidekick."  Initially, he's only interested in him, because he is a witness to his parent's murder.  And since Wayne already suspects Zucco is involved, he wants to find out what the kid knows.  Over the course of the second movie, he would somehow gain Wayne's trust, and end up helping him and Alfred behind the scenes in the batcave.  And finally (either at the end of the second or beginning of the third movie) there would be some kind of catalyst to change Wayne's mind about training him to actually fight.  
  As with all comic book movies, there's a thin line between what will work and what won't.  Some things that work in the comics just won't work in the movies, but I think if the story line was handled with care, it could work.  People have to bear in mind that the only time the Robin character was even attempted in the movies, it was by a group of people that were more interested in selling Batman merchandise than they were making a good movie.  If the creative team behind the current Batman movies attempted to adapt the character, and they were actually motivated to do so, they could probably make it work.

[JohnnyL]

No offense but Robin kinda ruins everything. Good thing he won't be appearing in any of the Nolan Batman films. Bale even said that if they were to add a sidekick for him, he'd quit.

I honestly can't see Riddler being as appealing as the other dudes, he probably can get knocked out in a single punch. But his appearance would make sense for the 3rd. I mean, with the way Batman was running from the cops and all.

Maybe add Red Hood (he could be anybody, and ironically RH is now the 2nd Robin who Joker killed. Wanting to get revenge on Batman for not avenging him)

 I think they could effectively use the Robin character if done correctly, but they could not approach the character the way they have in the previous films.  Either way, I think the point is probably moot, because Nolan has stated in interviews that he's not interested in using Robin in any of his movies.  And honestly, after the disasterous Schumaker films, I can understand the stigma surrounding the character.

Btw, Dollaz+Sense, did you hear that the next animated DC film is going to be "Batman: Under the Hood," based off of the comic series you were talking about with the 2nd Robin returning as the Red Hood?  It looks pretty cool. There's a little info on it here, along with one screen shot:

http://enewsi.com/animation/194-16773.html

Not to mention the portrayal of Robin in the campy 1960's Batman, "Holy jeepers creepers, Batman! Jiminy Crickets!" and all the jazz. That's kinda hard to not forget.
also, good looking on the animated film. it looks real cool. unusual list of voice cast though, I'm used to the usual Kevin Conroy & Mark Hamill.

 Lol.  Yeah, the campiness is what killed Batman for many people, for years.  And when Schumaker was still directing the Batman movies, he would always site that old t.v. show as one of his biggest influences.  He was a big fan of the old 60's show, and unfortunately it clearly came across in his movies. In the modern comic books though, Robin is actually a pretty effective character.  It's too bad that to date, no one has been able to translate that into a film well.
 I agree with you on the animated casting too, btw.  For an animated film, you can't go wrong with Conroy or Hamil.  To me, the "Batman: The Animated Series," from the 90's is still the best animated adaptation of Batman that there's ever been.

Truth

I don't really know why though, I could never actually watch all of the episodes.Probably got around to the middle of season 3 and stopped. I should try to continue from there.I loved those series damnit!

If you get a chance, try checking out the 4th season (a.k.a. The Batman and Robin Adventures).  To me, it has some of the most solid stories of the series.  Unfortunately, it was the last year the show ran, but it was really good season imo.

[G-Funk]

No offense but Robin kinda ruins everything. Good thing he won't be appearing in any of the Nolan Batman films. Bale even said that if they were to add a sidekick for him, he'd quit.

I honestly can't see Riddler being as appealing as the other dudes, he probably can get knocked out in a single punch. But his appearance would make sense for the 3rd. I mean, with the way Batman was running from the cops and all.

Maybe add Red Hood (he could be anybody, and ironically RH is now the 2nd Robin who Joker killed. Wanting to get revenge on Batman for not avenging him)

 I think they could effectively use the Robin character if done correctly, but they could not approach the character the way they have in the previous films.  Either way, I think the point is probably moot, because Nolan has stated in interviews that he's not interested in using Robin in any of his movies.  And honestly, after the disasterous Schumaker films, I can understand the stigma surrounding the character.

Btw, Dollaz+Sense, did you hear that the next animated DC film is going to be "Batman: Under the Hood," based off of the comic series you were talking about with the 2nd Robin returning as the Red Hood?  It looks pretty cool. There's a little info on it here, along with one screen shot:

http://enewsi.com/animation/194-16773.html

Not to mention the portrayal of Robin in the campy 1960's Batman, "Holy jeepers creepers, Batman! Jiminy Crickets!" and all the jazz. That's kinda hard to not forget.
also, good looking on the animated film. it looks real cool. unusual list of voice cast though, I'm used to the usual Kevin Conroy & Mark Hamill.

 Lol.  Yeah, the campiness is what killed Batman for many people, for years.  And when Schumaker was still directing the Batman movies, he would always site that old t.v. show as one of his biggest influences.  He was a big fan of the old 60's show, and unfortunately it clearly came across in his movies. In the modern comic books though, Robin is actually a pretty effective character.  It's too bad that to date, no one has been able to translate that into a film well.
 I agree with you on the animated casting too, btw.  For an animated film, you can't go wrong with Conroy or Hamil.  To me, the "Batman: The Animated Series," from the 90's is still the best animated adaptation of Batman that there's ever been.

Truth

I don't really know why though, I could never actually watch all of the episodes.Probably got around to the middle of season 3 and stopped. I should try to continue from there.I loved those series damnit!

If you get a chance, try checking out the 4th season (a.k.a. The Batman and Robin Adventures).  To me, it has some of the most solid stories of the series.  Unfortunately, it was the last year the show ran, but it was really good season imo.

I'm on the 2nd disc (out of 4) of the 4th season. I didn't like some of the redesigns they gave some of the characters. Mad Hatter looks weird, Joker doesn't look the same without his red lips (though, i don't mind his design in later appearances, i.e. Justice League, etc), Ventriloquist, etc.

[JohnnyL]

No offense but Robin kinda ruins everything. Good thing he won't be appearing in any of the Nolan Batman films. Bale even said that if they were to add a sidekick for him, he'd quit.

I honestly can't see Riddler being as appealing as the other dudes, he probably can get knocked out in a single punch. But his appearance would make sense for the 3rd. I mean, with the way Batman was running from the cops and all.

Maybe add Red Hood (he could be anybody, and ironically RH is now the 2nd Robin who Joker killed. Wanting to get revenge on Batman for not avenging him)

 I think they could effectively use the Robin character if done correctly, but they could not approach the character the way they have in the previous films.  Either way, I think the point is probably moot, because Nolan has stated in interviews that he's not interested in using Robin in any of his movies.  And honestly, after the disasterous Schumaker films, I can understand the stigma surrounding the character.

Btw, Dollaz+Sense, did you hear that the next animated DC film is going to be "Batman: Under the Hood," based off of the comic series you were talking about with the 2nd Robin returning as the Red Hood?  It looks pretty cool. There's a little info on it here, along with one screen shot:

http://enewsi.com/animation/194-16773.html

Not to mention the portrayal of Robin in the campy 1960's Batman, "Holy jeepers creepers, Batman! Jiminy Crickets!" and all the jazz. That's kinda hard to not forget.
also, good looking on the animated film. it looks real cool. unusual list of voice cast though, I'm used to the usual Kevin Conroy & Mark Hamill.

 Lol.  Yeah, the campiness is what killed Batman for many people, for years.  And when Schumaker was still directing the Batman movies, he would always site that old t.v. show as one of his biggest influences.  He was a big fan of the old 60's show, and unfortunately it clearly came across in his movies. In the modern comic books though, Robin is actually a pretty effective character.  It's too bad that to date, no one has been able to translate that into a film well.
 I agree with you on the animated casting too, btw.  For an animated film, you can't go wrong with Conroy or Hamil.  To me, the "Batman: The Animated Series," from the 90's is still the best animated adaptation of Batman that there's ever been.

Truth

I don't really know why though, I could never actually watch all of the episodes.Probably got around to the middle of season 3 and stopped. I should try to continue from there.I loved those series damnit!

If you get a chance, try checking out the 4th season (a.k.a. The Batman and Robin Adventures).  To me, it has some of the most solid stories of the series.  Unfortunately, it was the last year the show ran, but it was really good season imo.

I'm on the 2nd disc (out of 4) of the 4th season. I didn't like some of the redesigns they gave some of the characters. Mad Hatter looks weird, Joker doesn't look the same without his red lips (though, i don't mind his design in later appearances, i.e. Justice League, etc), Ventriloquist, etc.

 Yeah.  The designs were simplified some to match the aesthetics of the animated Superman show which they began to air during the same block of programing as Batman, starting with the 4th Season.  It did take some getting used to, but I actually got to where I preferred most of the 4th Season designs.  I have to agree that Joker did look sort of weird though.  I really like what they did with the designs for Batman, Scarecrow, and Mr. Freeze though.  Not to mention how good the writing is that season. Not that the writing was ever bad.  But I really like some of the stories that were told in the 4th Season.   

[Bananas]

Mr. Freeze> all lol

lol

[Jaydc]

Im sick of johnny depp.He bores me.As does tim burton.Ive never understood what was so great about tim burton.Hes like the king of movies for emo children,thats about it.

[G-Funk]

Im sick of johnny depp.He bores me.As does tim burton.Ive never understood what was so great about tim burton.Hes like the king of movies for emo children,thats about it.

ever notice that practically all of his moves have the same formula & setting?

A dark night (only about 5 minutes of sunshine), snowy weather, pale ass-looking people, his wife in the cast, Johnny Depp.
But aside that, his Batman films really re-defined the series.

[Jaydc]

that barber movie was fucking horrible.

[Shallow]

Im sick of johnny depp.He bores me.As does tim burton.Ive never understood what was so great about tim burton.Hes like the king of movies for emo children,thats about it.

ever notice that practically all of his moves have the same formula & setting?

A dark night (only about 5 minutes of sunshine), snowy weather, pale ass-looking people, his wife in the cast, Johnny Depp.
But aside that, his Batman films really re-defined the series.

I hated his Bat films. And I hated them way before Begins was released. They're just as campy as the 60s stuff except the colours are darker and the moods are down.

[JohnnyL]

Im sick of johnny depp.He bores me.As does tim burton.Ive never understood what was so great about tim burton.Hes like the king of movies for emo children,thats about it.

ever notice that practically all of his moves have the same formula & setting?

A dark night (only about 5 minutes of sunshine), snowy weather, pale ass-looking people, his wife in the cast, Johnny Depp.
But aside that, his Batman films really re-defined the series.

I agree.  While he took a lot of liberties with the Batman mythos, he was the first director to at least attempt giving the subject matter the respect it deserves.  I don't think his two Batman films completely work as Batman films, but they both work as films.  If you look at it from an historical context, it was a huge step in the right direction from the 1966 t.v. show.