Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I dunno if Robin will be in any of the new batman films but if he was who could play him? I reckon maybe Zac Efron could do it but thats just my opinion

Why him?

If Robin does appear in another movie, he's probably going to be played by Shia LaBeouf. Not that I would like it, but it would probably still happen.

No one...

I would think it'll be a younger kid, someone around 12-14, to play a young Dick Grayson. I don't think they're going to go with the whole "Chris O'Donnell 30 year old Robin" again. That was just stupid. I don't care how old he was supposed to be, he looked too old.

I dont know but Zac Efron certainly has a classic Dick Grayson look!
could be so... could be so!

Originally posted by C2theR
I dont know but Zac Efron certainly has a classic Dick Grayson look!
could be so... could be so!

Thats why I chose him He'd be good as Robin

Originally posted by steverules
Thats why I chose him He'd be good as Robin

Yyyiizzzerrr !!!

If/when Chris Nolan introduces Dick Grayson/Robin, I believe he'll be portrayed as a 15-16 year old boy. As to who may play him I have no idea. Are their any 15-16 year old boys out there that can be a young Dick Grayson/Robin?

We dont need Robin.

They should keep it just as Batman.

I agree.

I mean if they add Robin then they wont have a dark flim they did planed on having.

Originally posted by JediSamuraiMRB
If/when Chris Nolan introduces Dick Grayson/Robin, I believe he'll be portrayed as a 15-16 year old boy. As to who may play him I have no idea. Are their any 15-16 year old boys out there that can be a young Dick Grayson/Robin?

*raises hand*

I'm 16...I'll do it

Robin won't be introduced, Bob never wanted him in the first place; we need time to explore the villains, Robin wastes time and has no real significance to Batman stories.

Originally posted by steverules
I'm 16...I'll do it


Do you know the martial arts Steve?

Yes...I also wrestles bears with my own bear hands at weekends

Originally posted by apoc001
If Robin does appear in another movie, he's probably going to be played by Shia LaBeouf. Not that I would like it, but it would probably still happen.

ROFL!

Originally posted by steverules
Yes...I also wrestles bears with my own bear hands at weekends

Originally posted by steverules
Yes...I also wrestles bears with my own bear hands at weekends

It must have been a pain to get them attached... The bear hands, I mean...

I think they could make a reference to Robin, but not ever really use him as Batman's sidekick. Maybe they'll imply in part 3 that the little boy they kept showing in part 1 will become Robin, without actually having it happen of course.

personally i feel they should end the franchise with robin, as in literally have the kid become robin in the last few seconds of the film and don the costume then. then it technically won't be the beginning of batman anymore as he'll have gained so much experience in the field.

Originally posted by freek
personally i feel they should end the franchise with robin, as in literally have the kid become robin in the last few seconds of the film and don the costume then. then it technically won't be the beginning of batman anymore as he'll have gained so much experience in the field.

That's actually a good idea...

By the end of the fourth or fifth movie, there's no reason why a Richard Grayson could not be on film "training" and/or donning the costume in the final seconds (as you said)

But why do we need Robin?

Originally posted by DarthLazious
But why do we need Robin?

We don't.

Originally posted by DarthLazious
But why do we need Robin?

Because he's an essential part of Bruce Wayne's character development...

In Part 1: He's the guy looking for himself and his purpose in the world... He is angry, and Ras Al Ghul takes that anger and morphs him into an avenger of justice

In Part 4: He's established himself... He finds Richard Grayson alone in the world, like he was at his age... He doesn't want him to end up like he did (losing himself in the world), so he takes him in... He senses his anger, and after he goes out alone, Bruce takes Grayson's anger and morphs him into an avenger of justice... Bam! The student of Part 1 has transitioned into the teacher of Part 4...

Character Development, people! His father figure/teacher/guardian status is essential to his story...

He sucks and should take a walk...muahahaha

I would rather they went with the Dark Victory story line and made him younger. It's just dumb to have a 16-20 year old Robin.

I like the way Frank Miller describes it... basically he says, Batman couldn't really defend himself when his parents were killed and training a robin around the same age is kind of like giving his inner child a chance to kick butt. I like that mentality, it makes sense for Batman. But honestly, I really hope they don't add Robin until much, much later, and I'd be okay with never.

But still we dont need Robin.

Whoever silly enough to mention Zac Efron clearly does not consider acting ability a priority.

Originally posted by Blind
I would think it'll be a younger kid, someone around 12-14, to play a young Dick Grayson. I don't think they're going to go with the whole "Chris O'Donnell 30 year old Robin" again. That was just stupid. I don't care how old he was supposed to be, he looked too old.

yeah I dont think Nolan would be stupid enough to cast a 30 year old something again for Robin.I totally agree with you,that was the main thing that ruined Batman Forever for me was the casting choice of Chris O'donnel as Robin. That was about the worst casting choice Schumacher could have come up with.Man he really had his head up his ass casting o'donnel as Robin.the person he SHOULD have cast back then is scott weinger for the role.Just do a google search of "pics of scott weinger,"and you will understand WHY he would have been the perfect choice for Robin back then.

Like you said, O'donnel was way too old to be casted for that role.He was way too old to be adopted in that movie.He looked about the same age as Kilmer did so it was a joke when he said to alfred-take care of the kid. not only was he way too old for that role,his acting was just horrible as well. Fred Savage would also have been a much better choice back then. Now if they had Robin in a sequal-and any TRUE batman fan would want that since he is an important part of the batman universe,Now Weinger would be too old for the role so yeah now having Robin in a sequal,I agree that if Zac Efron dyed his hair black again like he did for Hairspray,then he would be a great choice for Robin.

Originally posted by steverules
Thats why I chose him He'd be good as Robin

yeah he would be a great choice.

Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
We don't.

I second that, and fred savage as robin back in the 90s??!!! seriously parker what the F***..

"In Part 4: He's established himself... He finds Richard Grayson alone in the world, like he was at his age... He doesn't want him to end up like he did (losing himself in the world), so he takes him in... He senses his anger, and after he goes out alone, Bruce takes Grayson's anger and morphs him into an avenger of justice... Bam! The student of Part 1 has transitioned into the teacher of Part 4...

Character Development, people! His father figure/teacher/guardian status is essential to his story..."


Please......just stop.

If they ever put Robin in a movie again it'll be Shia LaBeef FTW.

Why not savage back then? ANYBODY would have been an improvement over chris "no acting talent at all" o'donnel who not only was wayyyyyyyy too old to be adopted ,but ALSO did an extremley horrible job of delivering his lines and looked the same age as Kilmer.Well at least you have no problem with my excellent choice of Weinger back then.

The guy who voiced Aladdin?! I dont know who the worst of 2 evils would be , him or o'donnel. They should have never made Batman Forever to begin with...

they should never have made ANY of the other batman movies to begin with.You told me yourself you agreed with me on that before that Begins is the ONLY one thats not a disgrace and doesnt need to be burned remember? your nuts,he would have ROCKED as Robin.He was great on Full House.There were a few episodes in that show that he was in that were serious episodes that involved him and he showed he has good dramatic skills as much as he does good comedy skills in them.People would have at least bought into HIM as Robin.He at least was a lot younger than O'donnel and it wouldnt have been a joke hearing Kilmer saying to alfred-"take care of the kid." since he at LEAST was a kid back then.

Originally posted by Myth
I think they could make a reference to Robin, but not ever really use him as Batman's sidekick. Maybe they'll imply in part 3 that the little boy they kept showing in part 1 will become Robin, without actually having it happen of course.

I hope thats what happens only he IS in there by the fourth film.

It was once rumor that Michael J Fox was consider to be a candidate for Robin in Batman Returns. But the studio decided to introduce Robin in the third installment.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
It was once rumor that Michael J Fox was consider to be a candidate for Robin in Batman Returns. But the studio decided to introduce Robin in the third installment.

That would have been a great choice back in the day...interesting