Robin

Started by Edd Grayson, Fri, 12 Jul 2013, 03:41

Previous topic - Next topic
The Post-Crisis isn't all that likable but I do like what he brings to the table. First, he demonstrates that Batman on some level needs Robin. Just a few issues before the Post-Crisis Jason started as Robin, Batman fired the Post-Crisis Dick as Robin. Fired him. Kicked him out of the cave. Told him to never come back.

Dick didn't need to "grow" and "become his own man". Not in those issues. That's all revisionist stuff that came later. Dick was relieved of duty because Batman feared for his safety. It was quite the falling out between those two. Batman needs Robin though so he found a new one. And that leads into...

Second, the Post-Crisis Jason demonstrates Batman's fallibility. He chose the wrong kid. He gave him too much responsibility. Jason was way too unstable to do what Batman needs Robin to do. Batman made the wrong decision by recruiting Jason. He should've dropped him off at an orphanage or juvie or something.

Third, the Post-Crisis Jason (before Judd Winnick came along) metaphorically haunted Batman. Batman's poor judgment cost Jason his life. It might've cost other people their lives too depending on how you interpret Jason's actions prior to A Death in the Family.

Batman resisted the idea of finding a new Robin because of Jason's death. He didn't connect the dots that he simply chose the wrong person to serve as his partner. The concept of Robin isn't flawed; the flaw was in who Batman chose to do the job after he fired Dick.

A lot of Batman's most famous stories from the late 80's and early 90's (A Death in the Family, Knightfall/Knightquest and maybe others) are defined by his making piss-poor staffing choices. This ultimately led Batman to become a lot more territorial with who is allowed to operate in Gotham City... which led to other mistakes when No Man's Land hit.

Taken altogether, the Post-Crisis Jason Todd is arguably the opening salvo of what would ultimately become the "Bat-God" that Grant Morrison arguably defined. This is a character who's such a control freak with his myriad plans, contingency plans, backup plans, etc, because of what his mistakes have led to and the tragedies he could've prevented but didn't.

I'm not big on Jason Todd (Pre- or Post-Crisis) but he brings something to the table. Nobody can argue that.

That's essentially what I also think about Jason Todd, colors.

Now, if only filmmakers considered the partnership again, be it with Dick or Tim...

Quote
I like Drake too, and have you seen him in "Return of the Joker" ?

I certainly did. Cool and cocky he was...until he was tortured by the Joker.

Did you know that there was another version of Joker's death scene in that movie? This PG-rated version had Joker accidentally electrocuted to death off-screen, as opposed to the original scene where Tim shot him because the producers were afraid of a child firing a gun would potentially cause a massive backlash among parents.



I prefer the gun scene. It was more shocking and fitting to the Joker's ending.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sun, 29 Nov  2015, 09:00
The Post-Crisis isn't all that likable but I do like what he brings to the table. First, he demonstrates that Batman on some level needs Robin. Just a few issues before the Post-Crisis Jason started as Robin, Batman fired the Post-Crisis Dick as Robin. Fired him. Kicked him out of the cave. Told him to never come back.

Dick didn't need to "grow" and "become his own man". Not in those issues. That's all revisionist stuff that came later. Dick was relieved of duty because Batman feared for his safety. It was quite the falling out between those two. Batman needs Robin though so he found a new one.

Yes. I suppose you could say that Batman had a knee jerk reaction when he nearly killed an injured Robin by accident, while trying to stop Joker from making his getaway in Batman #408 - Did Robin Die Tonight?. Their lives are constantly in danger every time they go out on duty, but I guess that close call was too much for Batman to bear, and decided to let the public believe that Robin had died. Which was something he had to repeat when Jason died too.

That issue was also the first Batman comic that I read where it makes nods to having Robin as a sidekick would realistically be classified as endangering the welfare of a child. Gordon was relieved when Batman confided in him that he's secretly still alive, and always thought having Robin involved was questionable in the first place.



I see your point about the retconning. In issue #408, Dick was unhappy with Bruce for banning the Robin identity, but he seemed to accept the decision. But in Batman #416 - White Gold & Truth, the scene was rewritten where Dick was heartbroken as Batman walked away without even saying a final goodbye, and Dick deciding to leave Wayne Manor to fend for himself. That issue had this great confrontation between Nightwing and Batman, where Bruce was questioned why he suddenly adopted Jason as the new Robin. Dick not only dared Bruce to unmask and explain himself, but he even called out on Bruce's bullsh*t when he tried to use Jason's poor background as an excuse to save him. So Bruce, never used to having to justify himself honestly to one of his (former) sidekicks before, angrily admitted that he missed having Dick around...before kicking him out. Very strange.

Another odd psychological pattern about Batman is he took down all photographs of Jason and pretended that he never existed following his death in Batman: Year Three. Does Batman suffer from some kind of emotional anxiety disorder or something?
QuoteJonathan Nolan: He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

Source: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Mon, 30 Nov  2015, 13:07
Quote
I like Drake too, and have you seen him in "Return of the Joker" ?

I certainly did. Cool and cocky he was...until he was tortured by the Joker.

Did you know that there was another version of Joker's death scene in that movie? This PG-rated version had Joker accidentally electrocuted to death off-screen, as opposed to the original scene where Tim shot him because the producers were afraid of a child firing a gun would potentially cause a massive backlash among parents.



I prefer the gun scene. It was more shocking and fitting to the Joker's ending.



I agree. And I thought Batman Beyond was a good show, actually a favorite of mine in its original run here, where it was called "Batman of the Future".

Mon, 28 Dec 2015, 02:40 #24 Last Edit: Mon, 28 Dec 2015, 02:52 by The Laughing Fish
I'm going back to Jason Todd again after reading more comics of him before his behaviour worsened in the late 1980s.

I understand that the history behind A Death in the Family had editors setting up a telephone hotline for fans to call in and vote to kill off Jason or keep him alive. But what caught my attention was that writers were teasing with the idea of Jason dying before A Death in the Family.

In Detective Comics #571 - Fear for Sale, Batman was poisoned by the Scarecrow with a toxin that removed the ability to feel fear; causing victims to feel overconfident and take dangerous and potentially lethal risks. Scarecrow kidnapped Robin and set up death traps for Batman, but Batman survived and rescued Jason by focusing heavily on the one thing he most feared that could happen.



In Detective Comics #573 - The Mad Hatter Flips His Lids!, Batman and Robin stopped the Mad Hatter from escaping, but Robin got gravely injured in the heat of the moment...



...which led to this front cover of Detective Comics #574 - My Beginning... and My Probable End, where Batman goes to Crime Alley and seeks Dr. Leslie Thompkins' help to aid Robin.



And similar to Dick Grayson's reaction in Batman #416, Leslie does not believe that Batman adopted Jason to save him from a life of crime, but Bruce continuing his "selfish" desire to take his anger out on the wrong side as a way of getting revenge for his parents' murders. Fortunately for Bruce, Jason came out of his coma and lived to fight another day.

Again, my guess is that the idea of killing off Jason was planned some time long before A Death in the Family was created.

By the way,  I noticed that Jason Todd had a happy-go-lucky attitude in these comics before his behaviour worsened in 1987-88, like a traditional Robin. He used to crack lames puns and jokes as you can see in this example in #573.



I guess this reaffirms my earlier point that Jason's inability to cope with a more violent and corrupt Gotham City, as well as struggling to cope with his own demons lead him towards a doomed, and even self-destructive, path.
QuoteJonathan Nolan: He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

Source: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei

While I do not agree with his Red Hood persona, it's good that Jason was a well-written and layered character.

Reading these comics that I sourced in my previous posts, you can see definitely see how important it is for Batman to adopt a sidekick like Robin.

In these comics in the 1980s, Batman was becoming aware that he's getting older and he can't do everything all by himself anymore. He needs a partner to cover him when he gets distracted and whenever he lets his guard down. One of the things that used to bother me about The Dark Knight Returns was that Batman immediately recruited Carrie Kelley as Robin. In the past, I thought he didn't learn anything after Jason Todd was killed ten years earlier. But afterwards, I realized that not only Batman was fighting a war against the Mutants, he was an aging man who was extremely lucky that Carrie saved him from getting killed. No matter how confident he may be mentally, his body can't cope with beating up ten or twenty crooks like he could in his prime. And to fight this war, he had to get as many reinforcements he needed to stop this massive crime rate in Gotham City.

There's also an issue surrounding Batman's loneliness; without someone like Robin, being on patrol all alone takes a toll. This is what he explained in A Death in the Family, and what he reluctantly admitted to Dick Grayson in Batman #416; which is why he realized that banning Dick from being Robin ever again when he nearly died was a mistake. Of course, let's remember that Bruce shares a family bond and a link with nearly every Robin he had: Jason, Tim, and Dick were all orphans like Bruce. As supportive as Alfred is, the company of these three Robins ensured that Bruce didn't feel alone in this bleak world.

That being said, there were plenty of moments where the writers seemed self-aware that having a child hero like Robin around is dangerous, e.g. the screenshot that I posted of the TV presenter condemning Batman of committing "child abuse" when rumours of Robin's death spread in Batman #408. Even Dr. Leslie Thompkins in Detective Comics #574 slammed Bruce for putting Jason out on duty -  even went far by asking him if Dick's near death experience back in Batman #408 taught him anything. Although I appreciate the realism in these comics, it becomes a little conflicting if it keeps emphasizing that Batman might be guilty of child endangerment.
QuoteJonathan Nolan: He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

Source: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei

If you can tell me, why is it that Batman needed a new "Robin" and the old one left from time to time? I know Dick Grayson became Nightwing and we all know what happened to Jason...

Quote from: Max Shreck on Tue, 29 Dec  2015, 16:03
If you can tell me, why is it that Batman needed a new "Robin" and the old one left from time to time? I know Dick Grayson became Nightwing and we all know what happened to Jason...

Dick Grayson gave Jason his blessing to become Robin in Batman #368 - A Revenge of Rainbows. By that stage, Dick had joined the Teen Titans, but interestingly he commented that he hadn't adopted a new identity yet. Which might have meant he didn't become Nightwing until much later. Keep in mind that this comic was published in 1984, which was two or three years before some history got revised so Batman and Nightwing had that tense confrontation in Batman #416. What's funny about this particular issue is when Jason inherited the Robin identity, he was mistakenly targeted for revenge by a villain called Crazy-Quilt, who unknowingly had a deep grudge against the Dick Grayson Robin. In the end of the issue, Jason was badly beaten and presumably left for dead.



Seriously, if I was growing up in the 1980s reading these comics, I wouldn't be shocked by Jason's eventual demise in A Death in the Family.

As for why Tim Drake adopted the Robin persona? I haven't got around to reading that definitive issue yet, but my guess is that Tim was a huge fan of Batman and Robin, and followed their adventures closely. When Tim's parents had died, he wanted to become Robin himself, much to Batman's resistance - until Tim proved himself by rescuing Batman when he was captured by the Scarecrow in Batman #457 - Master of Fear. At that stage, the Robin identity no longer belonged to Dick. It was a mantle that could be passed onto anybody who is capable.
QuoteJonathan Nolan: He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

Source: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei

I understand now.  :)