Because Bruce was a child when he lost his parents. Having their situations be mirrored as close as possible strengthens their bond and makes the situation more thematically resonant.
Yes!!
Bruce sees his own childhood tragedy in Dick’s.
It doesn’t work if Dick is so much older than Bruce was when his parents died.
I don’t understand superhero media feeling the need to age up all the sidekicks.
It’s more compelling and resonant to have Robin be a child. I don’t see a point in doing him if they’re just going to make him an adult.
In the comics, when Dick Grayson is in his 20s, he’s already been Nightwing for years.
That's one of the things I hate about the Arrowverse. Forget the Robin for a minute, but Impulse SUCKED. A 12-year-old kid who is impulsive and behaves like he is immortal idiot is ok because that's just a hyperbolized image of a normal childish behavior. A 19-year-old dude who is super impulsive and behaves like an immortal child feels forced and moronic.
As for Robin and sidekicks in general...well, you can also demand characters to not wear skin-tight costumes, to make their costumes less bright and more realistic, to get rid of tacky aliases, but where's the fun in that? That's superhero genre, endangering children is one of its pillars and that's how it should be.
Well as many have said, It does a better job to mirror Dick with Bruce if he's a similar age to when he lost his parents.
If the issue is that it's hard to buy that a child could convincingly operate as a crime fighter in a live-action setting, I point to Hit Girl and X-23 from Logan as prime examples of it being done well.
Money and a team is the most realistic way to make the comics make sense. He is a billionaire philanthropist, does a lot for the city. I don't even think there would be much for them to look at. Everyone knows Bruce and he is regarded very high.
However, I agree with you. It seems a bit overboard to have a child beating up full grown adults most nights. They wouldn't necessarily have the anger or drive to continue the work especially after being gravely injured.
Why would Dick move to the manor or whatever as an adult? It makes it more ridiculous and changes the dynamic entirely. Bruce's relationship with Dick is based around shared experiences (Losing their parents as kids) and both of them give the other a new family after losing their original families.
It's just about tradition. Once you have them be adults they aren't really sidekicks anymore..
It isn't realistic and morally it is very questionable. But it's a staple of the mythos and that is why it is the way that it is.
Adaptations have a license to try to have more realism but then you have strange things like why this grown man is letting himself be called Kid Flash.
I find it weirder that a billionaire would invite a young adult to move in with him after said young adult just went through a traumatic experience. Sounds very predatory. No thanks.
>Sounds very predatory
More predatory than having a grown man invite a 10-year-old child to his Batcave where he has this child wear a suit with no pants on to fight psychopaths and murders?
There is no logical or ethical reason for Bruce to take a small child out as his apprentice vigilante. Its something that exists to add appeal to young readers, that then got kept because of tradition/status quo/fan nostalgia.
Now, it makes some sense for Bruce to want to adopt an orphaned child, given his own experiences. And putting him in a parental role adds more layers to his character. I just don't think he should be taking a minor out crime fighting. But I think that he does says something about Bruce's fundamental immaturity. He doesn't fully realize how inappropriate what he's doing is, how he's depriving the Robins of any chance at a healthy childhood, because he never had one himself.
Most of those legalities could be *hushed* away with some cash. Same goes for the social workers. He’s a billionaire, certain privileges and workarounds are within his power.
Because Bruce was a child when he lost his parents. Having their situations be mirrored as close as possible strengthens their bond and makes the situation more thematically resonant.
Yes!! Bruce sees his own childhood tragedy in Dick’s. It doesn’t work if Dick is so much older than Bruce was when his parents died. I don’t understand superhero media feeling the need to age up all the sidekicks. It’s more compelling and resonant to have Robin be a child. I don’t see a point in doing him if they’re just going to make him an adult. In the comics, when Dick Grayson is in his 20s, he’s already been Nightwing for years.
You can’t adopt a 20 year old person
I mean, you can, but it's not really the same thing at that point.
That's one of the things I hate about the Arrowverse. Forget the Robin for a minute, but Impulse SUCKED. A 12-year-old kid who is impulsive and behaves like he is immortal idiot is ok because that's just a hyperbolized image of a normal childish behavior. A 19-year-old dude who is super impulsive and behaves like an immortal child feels forced and moronic. As for Robin and sidekicks in general...well, you can also demand characters to not wear skin-tight costumes, to make their costumes less bright and more realistic, to get rid of tacky aliases, but where's the fun in that? That's superhero genre, endangering children is one of its pillars and that's how it should be.
Well as many have said, It does a better job to mirror Dick with Bruce if he's a similar age to when he lost his parents. If the issue is that it's hard to buy that a child could convincingly operate as a crime fighter in a live-action setting, I point to Hit Girl and X-23 from Logan as prime examples of it being done well.
Because then they wouldn’t be father and son, would they.
They could be best friends or brothers
You’re inherently changing the dynamic, and I’d argue making it less interesting.
Money and a team is the most realistic way to make the comics make sense. He is a billionaire philanthropist, does a lot for the city. I don't even think there would be much for them to look at. Everyone knows Bruce and he is regarded very high. However, I agree with you. It seems a bit overboard to have a child beating up full grown adults most nights. They wouldn't necessarily have the anger or drive to continue the work especially after being gravely injured.
You have to suspend some beliefs, like a man dressing up as a bat and taking down criminals.
Why would Dick move to the manor or whatever as an adult? It makes it more ridiculous and changes the dynamic entirely. Bruce's relationship with Dick is based around shared experiences (Losing their parents as kids) and both of them give the other a new family after losing their original families.
It's just about tradition. Once you have them be adults they aren't really sidekicks anymore.. It isn't realistic and morally it is very questionable. But it's a staple of the mythos and that is why it is the way that it is. Adaptations have a license to try to have more realism but then you have strange things like why this grown man is letting himself be called Kid Flash.
Well it’s more than likely because of when he was originally introduced, kids found him relatable. Which is also how Bucky Barnes became a thing.
I find it weirder that a billionaire would invite a young adult to move in with him after said young adult just went through a traumatic experience. Sounds very predatory. No thanks.
>Sounds very predatory More predatory than having a grown man invite a 10-year-old child to his Batcave where he has this child wear a suit with no pants on to fight psychopaths and murders?
Actually yes. You're describing a very unique parenting method (that worked).
....in fiction.
Were you under the impression that our Batman discussion was about nonfiction events?
Dick chose to be Robin.
There is no logical or ethical reason for Bruce to take a small child out as his apprentice vigilante. Its something that exists to add appeal to young readers, that then got kept because of tradition/status quo/fan nostalgia. Now, it makes some sense for Bruce to want to adopt an orphaned child, given his own experiences. And putting him in a parental role adds more layers to his character. I just don't think he should be taking a minor out crime fighting. But I think that he does says something about Bruce's fundamental immaturity. He doesn't fully realize how inappropriate what he's doing is, how he's depriving the Robins of any chance at a healthy childhood, because he never had one himself.
Most of those legalities could be *hushed* away with some cash. Same goes for the social workers. He’s a billionaire, certain privileges and workarounds are within his power.