Robin OYL = Batman Begins?

[Mary Nelson]

I just bought the Robin OYL books. I dont read much comics so I dont know much about Batgirl. From what Ive read I think I might have liked her book and this sounds like they did something really crummy with the character. But thats not what bothered me about the story.

Did anyone else notice that the story ended with a rip off of Batman Begins? Bruce Wayne is surrounded by the League of Shadows, Robin is surrounded by the League of Assassins. Bruce is told by his friend Ducard to kill a murderer and join the League. Robin is told by his friend Batgirl to kill a murderer and join the League. Bruce refuses and gets away by starting a bunch of explosions and a fire. Robin refuses and gets away by starting a bunch of explosions and a fire. there were alot of diffrences, but that many things being the same seems fishy too me.

[The Foreigner]

Yes, there were a lot of differences, and vague allusions in the structure of one scene are hardly enough to call it a "ripoff."

Besides, how can DC rip themselves off?

[Constantine Drakon]

I wouldn't call it a rip off. But it does show a lack of imagination. Honestly I know I've seen that "now kill the bad guy, hero" bit before, and I'm sure I'll see it again. Batman Begins did it well, and the fallout was interesting. How it was resolved in Robin, I didn't like. But I don't think the writer was conciously ripping off Batman Begins.

Still though, it's more than a little weird that both stories are about Ra's al Ghul's League and both have the hero being pressured to kill a murderer. Maybe there was some subconcious inspiration going on.

Besides, how can DC rip themselves off?

Although I don't believe this was a true ripoff, that's a ridiculous question. You may as well say that an artist working for a record label can't rip off another artist working for that record label because they both have the same record label. The fact that two people work for the same company doesn't mean that one of them can't rip off the other.

[mattx110]

i've always loved how bruce's answer to having to kill one guy is set off explosives and leave a bunch of people to die including the guy he was supposed to kill.

i know it didn't really go as planned, but it's still silly.

[Kaos]

lol that is actually joke.

[Kaos]

lol that is actually joke.

[The Foreigner]

Although I don't believe this was a true ripoff, that's a ridiculous question. You may as well say that an artist working for a record label can't rip off another artist working for that record label because they both have the same record label. The fact that two people work for the same company doesn't mean that one of them can't rip off the other.


Your record label analogy doesn't really work. The difference is that artists still own the rights to their own music-- Rotation comic writers and artists don't own the characters they work on, and Christopher Nolan and David Goyer don't own Batman. DC decides how their characters are used, no matter the medium, so even if the Robin OYL scene was intended as an allussion to Batman Begins, if DC says its okay it can't be a ripoff.

By your logic, David Goyer could sue the Robin OYL writer for plageurism of his work. Yeah right.

That's like saying the Spider-Man movie ripped off the comics by tossing Mary Jane off a bridge, or Mark Millar ripped off Stan Lee when he did the same thing in his MK Spider-Man run.

So no, as long as DC gives the okay, they can't rip themselves off.

[The Foreigner]

i've always loved how bruce's answer to having to kill one guy is set off explosives and leave a bunch of people to die including the guy he was supposed to kill.

i know it didn't really go as planned, but it's still silly.

I don't think it was silly at all. He let the situation get out of hand because he wasn't being careful. Notice how he recklessly plows through everything in the Batmobile when Rachel is in trouble, destroying massive ammounts of property and potentially killing the cops after him. He lets his emotions get the best of him, and things go out of control. I think it's just a good indication that Bruce is still learning the ropes of being a hero.

[mattx110]

see, it makes sense when you say it like that. it also wasn't really a situation with an easy answer. i still don't like the "i don't have to save you" logic, but i'll grant a pardon so that bats has a(n) "in case of genocidal warlord with legions of loyal ninjas" contingency. it's nice to have a batman that wouldn't risk other peoples lives to save the joker (i'm pretty sure there was a comic where he almost got lois poisoned to save the joker... or did he just refuse to let the joker die in order to save lois?, either way, i woulda let the clown fry)

and to the plagiarism thing, WB/DC has more to worry about than suing itselft, especially over small business like comics... the licensing for the characters for underwear makes more money than the comics ever will so i don't think they're worried about incestual ripoffs.

the writer might have seen BB and wanted to put his own spin the on the rational for risking life and limb to prevent the murder of a criminal/ why the batfamily doesn't kill.

[Damo]

Your record label analogy doesn't really work. The difference is that artists still own the rights to their own music-- Rotation comic writers and artists don't own the characters they work on, and Christopher Nolan and David Goyer don't own Batman. DC decides how their characters are used, no matter the medium, so even if the Robin OYL scene was intended as an allussion to Batman Begins, if DC says its okay it can't be a ripoff.

By your logic, David Goyer could sue the Robin OYL writer for plageurism of his work. Yeah right.

That's like saying the Spider-Man movie ripped off the comics by tossing Mary Jane off a bridge, or Mark Millar ripped off Stan Lee when he did the same thing in his MK Spider-Man run.

A poor analogy. The Spider Man movie was an adaptation of the Stan Lee story. This is not an adaptation. I'm not sure myself, but I can understand why someone would look at this story and say "he wasn't sure what to do, so he just stole a scene from a popular movie, substituted the characters he was writing about, and hoped it would work". Maybe he can't be sued for plagarism, but if that is what he did it was still ripping off another artist's work. He might be legally safe, but it reflects poorly on him that his book includes what appears to be a poor man's version of a scene from a very popular movie. And if he deliberately took that scene from the movie, and tried to pass it off as his own (and I'm not saying that he did), then he may be legally safe, but it still reflects very poorly on him, creatively and morally.