The Dark Knight Saga/Headscratchers/In General: Difference between revisions

** They don't have to actually keep them all on salary. If the mob knows that most cops will change testimony or destroy evidence for an envelope full of cash, then it has the same effect. And its demoralizing to the remaining cops.

* It kinda bugs me why Nolan refused to incorporate Robin in the trilogy. I mean, yes, I do understand that the addition of Robin will add some light-heartedness that Nolan is trying to avoid. However, I recall that there are some serious contents that can be done with Robin and they can still make it 'With sidekick, but STILL gritty'. For instance, the first instance of Dick Grayson quitting as Robin (due to injury) can be incorporated. So let's say for the next part, Robin is featured and is eager to be Batman's sidekick, but Batman kept refusing his offers. He lets up, and lets Robin join the climax battle... only for Robin to be gravely wounded (might be in a bizarre way) and in the end of the movie, Batman told him to quit, Robin reluctantly agrees and they go separate ways, Batman resumes being solo again, and now with knowledge that "It's dangerous to take sidekicks". How is that 'light hearted'?

** To be honest though, there was actually only one movie about [[Batman Begins]].

** And Nolan has a point. Bruce Wayne is still fairly young, Dick Grayson is still in kindergarten somewhere. I don't want Robin to be in any Batman movie just 'cause the audience expects it to be a package deal. If the director thinks Robin would be a meaningful addition to the plot, and they've found the right actor to pull it off, more power to them, but until then stop demanding a character be shoehorned in.

** Think about this: in the first two movies, almost every incident Bruce has been involved in has ended with him being suffering from at least one serious injury. He's been set on fire, beaten severely, dangled underneath a train, been dosed with fear toxin, mauled by a dog, thrown into a support beam in a parking garage, had his vehicle destroyed, was thrown off the other vehicle he used and was shot. Now, considering how screwed up Gotham is at this point (the Joker may be gone, but most of Arkham's inmates are on the loose), would you ''really'' want to introduce a young kid or teenager trying to fight crime into this mix? If anything, any interpretation of Robin should (at the very least) be outfitted in the same body armor Bruce wears.

* As interesting a character as some of the Robins can be, I have always thought them an unnecessary and emotionally/thematically stifling addition to the Batman mythos. Think about it: criminals are a cowardly, superstitious lot. He must become a creature of the night: black, fierce, terrible...with this twelve-year-old, wisecracking, wholesome fellow in brightly-colored circus clothes flipping about nearby!

** While I respect Nolan for pursuing his own vision of the series and for only including characters he feels he can use well, this argument -- the argument that Robin ''must always'' be tonally inconsistant with a darker Batverse -- is a minor pet peeve of mine. I consider it the [[War On Straw|Straw Robin]] argument. In a reboot where [[Darker and Edgier|every element of the mythos is being reinterpreted to create a darker and more "realistic" tone]], why assume Robin would have to be a [[Lighter and Fluffier|garish little ray of sunshine that spews bad puns and wears pixie boots]]?

*** I always liked the explanation for Robin from New Frontier - that Batman had him help with situations where there were kids in peril/involved, because having Robin around made him seem more approachable and kept the ''children'' from running away in terror, when he only wanted the criminals to. Another thing that always helped me deal with the idea of Robin was the very, very crucial concept that ''Robin does not go along for every mission''. With regards to his effect on Batman's own dark and formidable image, that's easily explained by the differences in mentalities between kids and adults. Kids see Batman hanging around with another kid and find him less scary, since, obviously, he doesn't mind kids. Adults see Batman assigning a ''child'' to ''fight crime'' and assume that he is too cold to care what happens to him. Also, the brightly colored thing - well, by the time Robin turns up in Gotham, I think most Gothamites (honest or otherwise) would find bright and cheerful colors ''much more terrifying'' than simple black. Still don't think he should be in Nolan's movies, though. Robin is (usually) a sign that whatever he's in is kid-friendly.

*** I think Batman took a Robin not because he needed him for something but essentially to give Dick a chance at having his own revenge. He saw this kid who had his parents killed by criminals in front of him, only without Bruce's resourses, and decided that, like him, the boy deserves a payback. Besides, Batman probably realises that he isn't an immortal and doesn't want his accomplishments to die with him, so he raises himself a replacement who needs to 'practice'.

* It bugs me that Christopher Nolan has arbitrarily ruled out a [[Justice League of America]] crossover movie even though he's now working on both Batman and Superman franchises.

** Because, canon or not, some people are bugged by rational characters like Jim Gordon and the other Gotham cops living in the same universe as Superman and Wonderwoman. The "realism" Nolan is trying to establish conflicts with anything with super-powered characters. Granted the Nolanverse is still really darn unrealistic, but compared to previous incarnations of Batman and anything with superpowered heroes ... you can finish this for me right? Metropolis is a great world, and the Justice League comics are fantastic, but it doesn't bug me that we have at least a few incarnations of Batman that are separate from the rest of the DC universe.

*** Sure he can, and does, but reasons for Nolan not wanting to do a crossover (realism and whatnot) were already extensively discussed.

** Another reason is the concept of Batman in the Nolanverse.

** 110 individual pieces doesn't mean they're all separate all the time. He was probably referring to 110 different panels of armor in the suit.

* Bruce Wayne's hair. He's got this thick, slicked-back business hairdo, but that's gotta be annoying under his helmet/mask. Why doesn't he have something more practical? I'm not asking for an army-issue buzzcut, just something that would work in both Bruce-mode and Bat-mode.

** In the comics at least, Batman gets around this by reminding people that if he did kill someone no one would ever know about it because he's just that good.

 

{{reflist}}

[[Category:Headscratchers]]

__NOTOC__