I've always assumed that the absolutely worst thing about the Dungeons And Dragons movie is the fact that it exists in the first place.

It's hard to fault Marlon Wayans' acting in that movie in any way, if only because it's perfectly clear that there isn't a single actor in that movie (some of whom have shown they're capable of much better, and Jeremy Irons has won like half a dozen major awards for God's sake) who managed to transcend the utter garbage they were given to work with and produce even a mediocre performance. Marlon Wayans could have been a Royal Shakespearean actor with decades worth of acting training and skill, and not been able to turn that sack of crap role into anything more than it was.

I dunno, the curls that you're making such a big deal about look just painted onto the figure to me, rather than being actually a part of the mold.

Except that Keaton was a pretty MEDIOCRE Batman. The only ones who think he was decent are the people who were introduced to Batman through Burton's film, and the people who like Burton's films out of blind love induced by nostalgia.
Therefore I'm 100% positive that turning Wayans into a decent Robin is beyond Burton's skills.

"Thank god they switched directors? Did you actually SEE Schumacher’s two steaming dungheaps?"

So? Batman Returns was a POS, too.

From Neal Adams interview - http://www.comicsbulletin.com/features/111112125162770.htm

OFFENBERGER: On your website you have a redesign for Batman. Is this something related to your Batman project at DC or was this all on your own?

ADAMS: That was me just messing around. I have had this stuff in my head for a while. I worry about people not solving problems that can be solved in a reasonable way. Like Robin. The problem with Robin came up when the movie company wanted to do Robin in the movies. So they said to DC, “We have to redesign Robin.” They couldn’t use Robin the way he was. And DC was stuck with the problem of what to do. So they called me — a very smart thing to do in my humble opinion — and they said, “Can you do some new designs for Robin?” I said, “Are you asking me to redesign Robin?” They said, “Yeah, we are asking you to redesign Robin.” I said fine and I started to work.

Then I heard through the grapevine that they asked 12 or so other people to redesign Robin. So I had my daughter, Kris, call DC and say, “This redesign thing is going to cost you some money if you want Neal to do it.” They said, “We want Neal to do it.” They ask how much money. She tells them. She said, “What’s happening now is, you’re casually asking Neal to redesign Robin, you’re not telling Neal why. We have a feeling something is going on. You’re not telling Neal it is important or that you’re getting other people to do redesigns, and that he is in competition with other people.” They said, “Oh, no, we don’t have to tell Neal that.” She said, “No you don’t, but on the other hand since Neal is going to win the competition, Neal is not going to sit there with the other 12 guys and just do designs until the cows come home. We are going to charge you professionally, the way we would do it for an advertising agency, if you want Neal to work on it.” They said, “Well, we want Neal to work on it.”

They wanted me to work on it because the film company was saying they would change it. So I started to submit some designs. The most important thing that I did was realize the character had to remain Robin, but had to be a new Robin, and there were some things that were really wrong. Like his legs were bare, that didn’t make any sense. He wore these little elf boots, that didn’t make any sense. His colors were too bright — yellow and red — and he was going to be out at night, it doesn’t make any sense.

So how do you solve all those problems and still not change Robin? Aren’t you talking about designing Batman Jr.? So I started to solve problems as much as I could. I didn’t care about what the others guys were doing. I have done this before on a professional basis. I have designed costumes for stage plays and other stuff. I was solving problems and applying them to a costume. They were just designing costumes. Which was fine, but that was not what the problem was. The problem was how do you make this Robin valid? Turn the boots into ninja boots, cover the legs, deepen the colors on the costume so they were more in [line] with the Batman, put packet things on the sleeves to carry weapons, redesign the mask, redesign various things. Anyway, after a few designs I came up with what I think is the key important design to the Robin costume, and that is that the cape is yellow on the inside and black on the outside.

OFFENBERGER: So that he blends in at night with Batman.

ADAMS: That’s right. At the same time when he stands with his cape thrown back, it’s still yellow and he is still Robin; justifying the yellow cape. So he can actually be Robin, he can have the Red vest; he can have the yellow cape over his shoulders. So we have saved the Robin. That, of course, was the costume that the film company loved. They said, “This is terrific. This solves all of our problems. There were problems they didn’t explain to me, but they were problems I already know because I know this shit. I know this shit because I am supposed to be a professional. So, I had done it. Then they asked DC, “Could you have your designer go one step further? Have him give Robin a darker costume, closer to Batman’s costume.” So, I did. I created another Robin costume. Then I had Kris get on the phone with DC Comics and she said to them exactly what I am going to say to you. “Neal is going to send over a Robin costume. We recommend that you do not show it to the film company. You will sort of like it. It’s not Robin, it’s a dark costume. They will love it because they want a dark Robin. You have already shown them a successful Robin. If you show them this costume they will buy this costume and you will destroy your licensing for Robin forever. We are going to send it over, but we recommend that you do not show it to them. [Make up whatever excuses you can to not show it to them. You can say, ‘You know, we have gone far enough. We have changed the Robin costume enough. We have cooperated enough. We are not going to go any further we are not going to do any more designs.’ We recommend you not show it because it looks too good. Do not show it.”

I don’t think they did. I don’t think they showed it. I think they made the argument and they probably got it through, or they showed it and said, “You are going to destroy our licensing if you do this.” Whatever it is they decided to go with the one before that, with the black on the outside and the yellow on the inside, and that became the Robin costume. And they paid the price for it. Of course they used something I would do. I don’t think it is any kind of arrogance to say that if I do this professionally for other things I should know what I am doing, and I am the right person to go to. It is not meant as a criticism or slight to any of the other guys, because they were really not given the full information. They weren’t explained the problem, they were just saying give us a new Robin costume. So they filled the book with those Robin costumes, and you can see them, but it was not problem solving.
-------

And while I'm here- How is hair 'short' when it is as high from the hairline to the top, as the space between his eyes and the hair line? Get a ruler and check out both the comic page you provided and the figure. Both are the same. I think 'choppy' was a bit of an ask of toy making at the time. And the little curls on each side of his forehead are shown on the page provided too. Thanks.

I just think a Robin wasn't visualised for the movie, so they just used the current comics version (hair and all in my opinion - but just my opinion).

And yes, the costume itself it is almost guaranteed to not be the actual look that Burton was going to use for the movies.

The only way it COULD be based on the movie is if you think the head was meant to be a black guy, which I'm open to believing is true.

I can't see Burton wanting anything to do with undies on the outside.

Actually I know the Breyfogle boards. I'll ask him.

Why would the movie costume designers copy Breyfogle's designs? They didn't. Breyfogle copied the movie designs. Or, more accurately: Breyfogle helped design the movie costume so the one in the comics would look like the one seen in the movie. It's like the X-Men stating to wear black leather costumes after their movie came out, only more direct...

2. Answer me this how many 'HI-TOP FADE ' hait cuts had little Dick Grayson-esque curls on each side? They're on the figure.

3. Why would movie costume designers identically copy Breyfogle's design to the letter? Are you high? There not really earning their paycheck there..

So, Uh, yeah really.

p.s- whoah impressive photoshop job on the toy. lol

You can see it as being meant to be a black face before being repainted - only if your really trying to see somthing not meant to be there. This has nothing to do with Marlon Wayans not the costume design and not even the hair. look at how lyle and grummet drew the hair exactly like that.

Uh, no, not really. They drew his hair like this and this - short, straight and choppy. The figure's hair, in addition to being in A HI-TOP FADE (I just find that so sublimely ridiculous that I must capitalize it) is noticeably tight and curly - it's African American hair.

It's not a question of looking for something not meant to be there, it's a question of seeing where that toy began its life and what the original intention was.

Another last-minute Batman-related change that was revealed by the tie-in toys was Batman + Robin's Batgirl: originally she was supposed to wear a full cowl, but it was changed to the "hair out" version fairly far along in the process, which is why the toy doesn't show any hair...

Basically, Pete Morisi had a deal with Charlton that he'd get the rights back to his character if they went under. A deal that no one else went out of their way to make. (PAM being a lot more legal savvy than many of his contemporaries.) DC wasn't aware of that deal when they acquired the Action Heroes at first, and thus had to license Peter Cannon from Morisi instead of purchasing the character from him.

And Ben, Nightshade is still Nightshade, just in a new costume. (And personality.)

By the way, Black Bat WAS a pulp-like novel magazine in the 60s and 70s, but this new publication seems to be paperback.

Ripchord IIRC was an American Indian Joe and unlike Sprit was understated and not a walking cliche.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OU10KI1ouGw

There is no bat signal in that film. Rather, the silhouette of a moth on a car's headlight projects an enlarged silhouette.

To answer Steve's question about how the rumor was started: as I said, it came from an old interview with Jim Shooter. I'm almost 100% positive that it was in the Comics Journal- I can't imagine where else it could have been- but I haven't been able to locate that interview again. It's a crying shame that the Journal doesn't have an archive of their old interviews readily available online. Does anyone have any idea about the interview I'm talking about?