Robin's portrayal in Batman & Robin

[The Laughing Fish]

I don't think there was misogynism  what I'm saying is you run that risk whenever you have a male protagonist and female antagonist. For instance had batman or robin kicked her into a plant the way Batgirl did, there'd be complaints. Though they easily could have had batman or robin have her plants defeat her or simply arrest her. I'm not sure the truth to the rumour but I've heard the cancelled third Burton film ended with Keaton kissing Catwoman before hearing the click of handcuffs so Batman could turn her into the police, they could have easily used that idea here. 

You know, now that I think of it, it could be possible that BR faced criticism over Batman fighting Catwoman, regardless if he was defending himself or not. Him knocking her off the building right after getting clawed in the stomach, and her cheating death thanks to luckily falling into a truck full of cat litter, might've met accusations of sexism from commentators who were already troubled by the sexual undertones and bleak context the movie had.

If this was what critics were saying, then maybe you have a point. It's quite possible Schumacher wanted to save face and that might've been the reason why he chose Batgirl to beat Poison Ivy.

[Wayne49]

I don't think there was misogynism  what I'm saying is you run that risk whenever you have a male protagonist and female antagonist. For instance had batman or robin kicked her into a plant the way Batgirl did, there'd be complaints. Though they easily could have had batman or robin have her plants defeat her or simply arrest her. I'm not sure the truth to the rumour but I've heard the cancelled third Burton film ended with Keaton kissing Catwoman before hearing the click of handcuffs so Batman could turn her into the police, they could have easily used that idea here. 

You know, now that I think of it, it could be possible that BR faced criticism over Batman fighting Catwoman, regardless if he was defending himself or not. Him knocking her off the building right after getting clawed in the stomach, and her cheating death thanks to luckily falling into a truck full of cat litter, might've met accusations of sexism from commentators who were already troubled by the sexual undertones and bleak context the movie had.

If this was what critics were saying, then maybe you have a point. It's quite possible Schumacher wanted to save face and that might've been the reason why he chose Batgirl to beat Poison Ivy.

I think from the moment Schumacher decided to have Poison Ivy in the script, Batgirl was in place to play foil to her plans. Schumacher wanted to add a female hero to the Batman theatrical franchise so this was his opening. I do find it odd that Schumacher never explained how Batman could distance himself from the alluring effects of Poison Ivy's gas. I think he should have offered a more feasible response than Batman's own will power or maturity. That sure didn't help Commissioner Gordon in the least. LOL!

[The Laughing Fish]

I think from the moment Schumacher decided to have Poison Ivy in the script, Batgirl was in place to play foil to her plans. Schumacher wanted to add a female hero to the Batman theatrical franchise so this was his opening.

Yes, if you're going to go for colourful, whacky villains and cite Adam West as your inspiration, what else is a better time to introduce a sassy Batgirl? Whether one likes it or not, Schumacher did grab a perfect opportunity there.

I do find it odd that Schumacher never explained how Batman could distance himself from the alluring effects of Poison Ivy's gas. I think he should have offered a more feasible response than Batman's own will power or maturity. That sure didn't help Commissioner Gordon in the least. LOL!

On one hand, you could argue that Batman not being affected by Poison Ivy is a perfect example of willpower to overcome obstacles in the comics.

On the other hand, it's definitely a huge oversight by Batman to not share his secret when dealing with Ivy. Definitely would've done a lot of good for Gordon and Robin. 

[riddler]

The fact that Commissioner Gordon was willing to turn over the key to the bat signal when under the influence of the Ivy dust implies me to believe that Batman should have had more of an effect. Though maybe he does, as silly as the bidding war ending the Bat credit card are, that scene is important to the plot because Batman and Robin are clearly acting out of character by openly broadcasting they're rich like that in public.

The way I see it, during his first encounter with Ivy, Batman doesn't know she has bad intentions. It's possible that once he sees her as a bad guy, that gives him the willpower to overcome his urges.

[thecolorsblend]

I suppose Batman was able to resist because he knew the risks of letting Poison Ivy kiss him. I don't care how, ahem, in the mood a guy might be, nothing is worth that kind of risk.

[The Dark Knight]

I think it's the fact Batman knew it was dust she blew in his face, especially upon recalling the situation afterwards. Robin allowed the ecstasy of that mood to envelope him continually, whereas Batman checked himself just in time and didn't become her pawn. Ivy charmed Batman once at the ball, but that was it. Robin didn't care about logic in those moments. He loved that mood and wanted more of it. He perpetuated the lie just as much as Ivy did. He wanted to believe he was Ivy's exclusive lover. It was a big deal for Robin to realize Batman was right and not just a jealous rival.

[riddler]

I suppose Batman was able to resist because he knew the risks of letting Poison Ivy kiss him. I don't care how, ahem, in the mood a guy might be, nothing is worth that kind of risk.

Yeah that's the simplest and easiest explanation. Once Batman (and possibly Robin) knew what the effects of Ivy's dust caused, their sense of reason was restored. Gordon followed his lust because he had no idea he was under a spell.

[Andrew]

I thought Robin's portrayal was pretty good in BF but in B&R he was too annoyingly over-the-top. He seems too unreasonable in complaining Batman may never trust him for wanting him to train more after he nearly did get himself killed and in insisting that Batman just wants Poison Ivy for himself when, aside from in the initial auction Batman always seems pretty stoically in-control and not-tempted, also that he's so in love with and trusting of Ivy even though she often seems pretty clearly really evil.

[The Laughing Fish]

I once suggested that casting a young adult like Chris O'Donnell as Robin might have been conscious choice made by the producers to avoid unwanted criticism of Batman committing child endangerment.

But nowadays, I don't think critics and audiences have a leg to stand on any more because of their overwhelming praise of Spider-Man: Homecoming. In that movie, a teenage Peter Parker continues as Tony Stark's protege and wishes to join the Avengers, but Stark decides to confiscate Peter's suit and even admitted that he couldn't risk Peter getting killed on his conscience. Well, if you stop and think about it for a second, Stark should've thought about that before getting Peter involved in the hunt for Bucky in Civil War; never mind inviting him to join the Avengers. It doesn't help since we're in the Sokovia Accords-era.

If a future Batman film decides to feature a teenage Robin fighting alongside Batman, there better not be any complaints. But considering the constant double standards lots of people have for Batman when it comes to a specific tone and killing people, I won't hold my breath.

[riddler]

I once suggested that casting a young adult like Chris O'Donnell as Robin might have been conscious choice made by the producers to avoid unwanted criticism of Batman committing child endangerment.

But nowadays, I don't think critics and audiences have a leg to stand on any more because of their overwhelming praise of Spider-Man: Homecoming. In that movie, a teenage Peter Parker continues as Tony Stark's protege and wishes to join the Avengers, but Stark decides to confiscate Peter's suit and even admitted that he couldn't risk Peter getting killed on his conscience. Well, if you stop and think about it for a second, Stark should've thought about that before getting Peter involved in the hunt for Bucky in Civil War; never mind inviting him to join the Avengers. It doesn't help since we're in the Sokovia Accords-era.

If a future Batman film decides to feature a teenage Robin fighting alongside Batman, there better not be any complaints. But considering the constant double standards lots of people have for Batman when it comes to a specific tone and killing people, I won't hold my breath.

We're in a different age now with the internet. Soccer moms complaining about what they see in movies is a thing of the past. With the internet having websites dedicated to parental suggestions in movies and technology allowing for parental restriction, the onus is on the parents to ensure their children are watching appropriate content, not the film makers any more. The child in the Jungle Book encountered some dangerous situations without facing much backlash.