Batman 3..... ***POSSIBLE SPOILERS***

[Mouseferatu]

Sidekick, in the usuall sense? I don't see it coming. But after seeing untrained citizens donning capes and trying to be Batmen, I'd see Bruce training someone to pick up when he can't. God knows there were dozens of moments in TDK when Batman would benefit of having a clone somewhere else to help him.

You're a writer, Rodent! Make it work!

I don't want to make it work.

Sure, there are ways to make the concept fit, but I dislike the concept itself, at its very core. Batman is--and, IMO, should always be--a loner. He has allies, like Gordon and Alfred, but he should never have a partner.

 

[Klaus]

I don't want to make it work.

Sure, there are ways to make the concept fit, but I dislike the concept itself, at its very core. Batman is--and, IMO, should always be--a loner. He has allies, like Gordon and Alfred, but he should never have a partner.

If you show Batman as being the only "hero" in the world, then sure (and Nolan has hinted that his Batman wouldn't work in a JLA universe). But Bruce Wayne got his surrogate father (Alfred), brother (Gordon) and crazy-uncle-with-toys (Lucius). Let's see him become the mentor and get a surrogate son and daughter (Robin and Batgirl). I think there are ways to make that work in the current movie universe.

But mind you, you have to avoid all semblance of campy left from the TV series and the previous movies.

 

[Darth Shoju]

But, it's part of the gritty, (semi) realistic tone Nolan is going for. Anything much in the way of powers would shatter that. X-Men, Spiderman, and Superman can get away with it because superpowers are part and parcel of their identities. Not so with Batman and doubly not so for the Nolan vision of Batman.

Personally I think that Bane would make a great villain in a Nolan Batman flick. Someone who wants to destroy Batman and rule Gotham and uses self-enhancing drugs to get there seems like it would be a perfect fit.

I understand *why* he's taken that stance, I just don't really like it. Batman is a comic book character in a comic book universe. If Nolan thinks that is so lame, why didn't he just make a gritty detective movie or something? Perhaps it's because that wouldn't have made him exceptionally rich?

For the record, Nolan's Batman movies are my favorite Batman movies by far. I just don't think sidekicks or superpowers are the albatrosses he seems to think they are.

 

[Darth Shoju]

Guh! No! No Robin! No Nightwing! No sidekicks in Nolan's Bat-verse! Ever!



I can't begin to tell you how much I hate the idea of Catwoman ever appearing in this series, either. (Though I'd sooner accept that than Robin.) I want my Batman villains evil, and I've long despised the whole "Batman/Catwoman hostile love interest" thing. Hate, hate, hate.

Also, hate.

Frankly I find those characters more interesting than Bruce Wayne a lot of the time. Some writers can't seem to get past the murder of Bruce's parents and end up milking the angst until I feel like screaming "Just get over it already!". My favourite Bat stories are the ones where they deal with him as the World's Greatest Detective, not the World's First Emo Superhero.

 

[Darth Shoju]

To clarify, I do think it would be difficult to properly work a sidekick into the Nolan Batman movies. While I like the opportunity for character development provided by Bruce having an orphan as his ward, I've never been comfortable with Batman taking a *child* out to fight dangerous psychopaths and super-villains. It's really a concept that works better in a TV series or comic, where the sidekick can grow into the role as a superhero (as an adult).

I just don't like the "No Robin character ever!" idea. I'm certainly not pounding the tables demanding they put him into the Nolanverse movies, but it would be possible to have Bruce take on a young Dick Grayson as his ward. They wouldn't have to have him be Robin, just use the "orphan adopts an orphan" idea, then hint that Dick would someday take up crimefighting.

That's my take on it anyway.

 

[fba827]

But I just have one question........WHAT IN THE HELL IS "MULTI - QUOTE"?!?!

multiquote = a little flag you set, so in a thread, set the multiquote button on all the posts you want to quote. then when you hit the quote button it will do a "quote block" for every post that you flagged with multiquote.

As an example, in this post that i'm responding to, you have a quote block for both myself and Klaus. If you used multiquote, you would click on multiquote in my post (and any additional ones you wanted a quote block for) and then clicked the quote button for Klaus and you'd end up with a quote block for each of us (similar to the way you manually did it this time).

 

[fba827]

Batman is--and, IMO, should always be--a loner. He has allies, like Gordon and Alfred, but he should never have a partner.

Agreed, at least for this movie franchise setting, a sidekick wouldn't work well. He definitely needs to be the loner with allies to provide support, not someone running around with him.

Also, another argument against a sidekick for this movie setting, so far (at least it appears) that this setting it trying to maintain continuity from one movie to the next; the second had many references back to the first.

For a sidekick, once you put it in, it would require a recurring role. And once you tell the crux of the secondary story character, it is often dificult to make an exciting continuing story for them because they can't steal the spotlight away from the title character (they are just secondary characters after all). Thus, they often become damsels in distress so that they have a reason to be there, or they become the angsty talk-backer or 'that guy' with all the jokes, or some other exaggerated personality just to keep them somewhat interesting, or they just become personality-less figures on the screen that just follow the main guy around.

Note I said "difficult" to do, I didn't say "impossible." but at the moment I can't think of any 'secondary recurring character' that didn't fall in to such a trap - the previous movie robin because the wisecracker, MJ Watson and Aunt May always seemed to be the damsels in distress, Harry Osborne is always the angsty guy full of hate, several of the xmen in the later movies really just became onscreen figures with little personality or character development, etc etc.


all my opinion anyway.

 

[Remathilis]

Agree on Robin/Nightwing, but disagree on Catwoman. She could be done right, but I fear that Halle Barry movie (that didn't get made) ruined her potential selling point.

What about the Penguin?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Maybe one should forget the "sidekick" part to Robin and make him a second Vigilante? Maybe he can give Batman a tip and vice versa. He could have a more specific goal - hunt down who killed his family, probably - and might turn up something useful for Batman, or Batman might aid him.

I like the Catwoman as romantic interest story. But that doesn't have to happen.

I definitely want to see more of the "Detective" side of Batman. So someone like Riddler seems a good choice.

I don't know about the Penguin. Maybe a mafia don or corrupt businessman? Batman might need to figure out the Penguins contacts and/or dirty past.

 

[Traycor]

I have two sources on this topic. I spoke with one of them last night, and he backed off his previous claim that he knew The Riddler was going to be the villain.

You source backing off makes sense in light of this new story:
BATMAN-ON-FILM.COM - Chris Nolan and BATMAN 3: FAR from a done deal? (June 16, 2009)