-
[QUOTE=Chubistian;4776969]I think Bruce in the DK Trilogy has a much different approach that most of his counterparts in comics. In Christopher Nolan's movies I always got the idea that Bruce wasn't as obsesive with his alter ego as he's in other versions. He could stop being Batman and he didn't think Batman was essential as a constant hero in the city (he thought with his dissapearance in DK Gotham would be better) at least until DK Rises. He finally past on the mantle when he found something better to live for. This doesn't mean that there aren't shapes of obsesion with this version of Bruce, just not as strong as other versions of Batman.
I think it's interesting that, even when Tom King loves Frank Miller's Batman, King's version evolves to admit that he CHOOSES to be Batman, and that his happiness doesn't meddle with his crusade as a hero, while Bruce in the DK Universe ends up consumed by his alter ego, finding only wholeness in the cowl.[/QUOTE]
It's interesting. The big difference with the Nolanverse, besides it being significantly more grounded and contained, is Bruce sees his crusade as winnable, whereas most other versions he is pretty clear that it's a very abstract goal. It comes down to how the supervillains are justified. In the Nolanverse, there aren't really supervillains outside of the League and the Joker, nor are there other superheroes; of course in most other versions, Batman is just one of many costumed people.
So I don't know if the obsession is different, but the way it manifests is different. I think "obsessive" is one of the universal traits depicted in every version of Batman, even 60s TV Batman. In TDKRises, Bruce not being Batman is corrosive to his soul, similar to DKReturns. It's his obsessive destructive qualities turned inward instead of outward.
I think it's the nature of Bane's character to invite the story question of Batman's ending. Or the other way around — thinking of a "last Batman story" would seem to invite an omega character like Bane.
Anyway it's just interesting the way that different writers have approached the question of "Can Batman be happy and be Batman?" with different answers, but I think only Tom King's version answers "yes."
-
Great analysis about Bane's nature as a character and Batman's ending, especially in Knightfall, Tom King's run and Dark Knight Rises. Bruce's mortality is one of the pivotal pieces of King's Batman and it's where many of the big beats of the I Am trilogy rest on. One phrasing I love in I Am Gotham is when Gotham wonders what is a man in a mask and what can this man do when compared to the hell that Gotham city can become . Batman can fail and make mistakes, he's not perfect, but a man doing the best he can to accomplish what he think is right
-
[QUOTE=gregpersons;4777651]It's interesting. The big difference with the Nolanverse, besides it being significantly more grounded and contained, is Bruce sees his crusade as winnable, whereas most other versions he is pretty clear that it's a very abstract goal. It comes down to how the supervillains are justified. In the Nolanverse, there aren't really supervillains outside of the League and the Joker, nor are there other superheroes; of course in most other versions, Batman is just one of many costumed people.
So I don't know if the obsession is different, but the way it manifests is different. I think "obsessive" is one of the universal traits depicted in every version of Batman, even 60s TV Batman. In TDKRises, Bruce not being Batman is corrosive to his soul, similar to DKReturns. It's his obsessive destructive qualities turned inward instead of outward.
I think it's the nature of Bane's character to invite the story question of Batman's ending. Or the other way around — thinking of a "last Batman story" would seem to invite an omega character like Bane.
Anyway it's just interesting the way that different writers have approached the question of "Can Batman be happy and be Batman?" with different answers, but I think only Tom King's version answers "yes."[/QUOTE]
Excellent thoughts, but I especially like the last one - only King answers "yes." Which is amusing, considering that everyone seems to think that King only exists to torment his characters - but I see his run as just revealing the torment which is naturally inherent in those situations, and trying to get past it. If the pain were easy, the victory wouldn't be worth winning. But since the pain is excruciating, Batman's choice to be happy is heroic.
[QUOTE=Chubistian;4779252]Great analysis about Bane's nature as a character and Batman's ending, especially in Knightfall, Tom King's run and Dark Knight Rises. Bruce's mortality is one of the pivotal pieces of King's Batman and it's where many of the big beats of the I Am trilogy rest on. One phrasing I love in I Am Gotham is when Gotham wonders what is a man in a mask and what can this man do when compared to the hell that Gotham city can become . Batman can fail and make mistakes, he's not perfect, but a man doing the best he can to accomplish what he think is right[/QUOTE]
Something else that I like about Batman is the thing exemplified in Annual #4, as well as earlier pieces like the Batman Black and White piece ([url]https://youtu.be/Z5Kbh84rBgA[/url]) - Batman views his mission as a job. Not a joyride, but something he has to do to make the world better, a little bit every day. It's like life - you can't "win" at life, because you keep living it, and you keep having new challenges. But you can stop crime (your own selfishness, flaws, immaturities) every night.
-
Nice vid! I liked the script and Sale's pencils, though I'm not a fan of motion comics. Is the video animated from a Black and White short story comicbook or is it straight to video?
I think the ending to Tom King's run, even with Alfred's death, is the happiest ending I've read done by him. I finally read Omega Men (I loved it), and comparing that book, The Vision, Mr Miracle and Batman, the latter has the character evolve through his problems and obstacles, overcoming them, while (Huge Spoilers of the other comics) [spoil] The Vision has the protagonist again experimenting with artificial life; in Omega Men every member of the group has fallen into the same vicious cyrcle of violence and corruption they tried to destroy (and Kyle may follow the same path) and in Mr Miracle it seems that Scott choose to be trapped in the Anti-Life Equation instead of going back to "reality" (though the concepts of what's real are put into test in the story) [/spoil]
-
[QUOTE=Chubistian;4779388]Nice vid! I liked the script and Sale's pencils, though I'm not a fan of motion comics. Is the video animated from a Black and White short story comicbook or is it straight to video?
I think the ending to Tom King's run, even with Alfred's death, is the happiest ending I've read done by him. I finally read Omega Men (I loved it), and comparing that book, The Vision, Mr Miracle and Batman, the latter has the character evolve through his problems and obstacles, overcoming them, while (Huge Spoilers of the other comics) [spoil] The Vision has the protagonist again experimenting with artificial life; in Omega Men every member of the group has fallen into the same vicious cyrcle of violence and corruption they tried to destroy (and Kyle may follow the same path) and in Mr Miracle it seems that Scott choose to be trapped in the Anti-Life Equation instead of going back to "reality" (though the concepts of what's real are put into test in the story) [/spoil][/QUOTE]
It is from a short story - it was a bonus in the Black and White trades, recollected in Tim Sale's Batman book.
I think you're right, interestingly enough. I am looking forward to finding the foundations for this happy ending in this reread!
-
[QUOTE=millernumber1;4775233]Simpson Flanders - apparently a Moench creation, but Dixon used him most. I think Dixon, though not as strong a writer as Miller, is clearly drawing from the same wells of pulp that Miller adores, and thus him being inspired/imitating Miller also makes sense. I'm not as much a detractor of the 90s Batman stuff as Miller is - I think most of it is fun, though not necessarily timeless - but that's the truth of most eras of comics. I particularly liked the way the Simpson Flanders stuff was handled in the Knightfall radio drama - had a lot of humor.[/QUOTE]
I love the 90s stuff, warts and all.
Miller was a bit ahead of the curve in portraying the 24-7 news cycle. The Simpson Flanders stuff is cut from the same cloth, especially the concept of a repeatedly interviewed expert with questionable judgment, but with the format adjusted for a contemporary audience given the explosion of daytime talk shows. It is possible that something along those lines would have happened without Miller's influence but hard to say...
[QUOTE]This brings up the question for me - what is King's primary genre connection? Unlike Snyder and Tynion, he doesn't draw super heavily from horror, and he doesn't seem to be that directly influenced by the pulps like Miller and Dixon. There's clearly some romance influence in the latter half, which drew a lot of outrage from some fans, I think (I think the genre shift/crossover is an unexamined part of the bifurcated response that King's run has received). There's the war story, which influences a lot of King's work, but it's not as evident in this Batman run.[/QUOTE]
Is 'mature' a genre (as opposed to a content warning)? King explores his characters' reactions to the world they find themselves in a manner worthy of the label.
[QUOTE]The idea that Batman is an act of suicide or self death runs through a lot of runs - Miller, Snyder (Zero Year and Superheavy are the clearest statements of that), and of course King's I Am Suicide, though I think that King is attempting to have Batman grow past that as part of the long term goals of the arc.[/QUOTE]
Absolutely. Miller and Snyder's conclusions strike me as somewhat nihilistic, certainly when compared to King's work.
-
[QUOTE=Chubistian;4776019]I Am Gotham definitely has that frenetic start to it, and it's interesting how a cool phrase, "would they be proud", becomes so important going forward into the run. I think I Am Gotham has that advantage to it. I don't think it's a solid beginning, but it does gain a lot when you see how much foreshadowing there was for the rest of the story.[/QUOTE]
Am I alone in thinking that "I Am Gotham" is the strongest debut by any long-term Batman writer? The story is damned near flawless in my opinion.
[QUOTE]I wonder if maybe the storyarc could have worked better just with Claire instead of having Gotham as the pivotal character and Gotham Girl feeling sometimes as an afterthought.[/QUOTE]
But Hank is the driving force for Claire's heroic journey, so removing him would be akin to taking Uncle Ben out of AMAZING FANTASY #15.
Also, Hank's tragedy pretty much kicks off all the major thematic concerns in King's run. There's even a striking parallel between Hank and Flashpoint Thomas, given that they both become obstacles to the heroes they inspired.
[QUOTE]I think my favorite issue from this first arc was issue #6, not only from a visual standpoint (I like Ivan Reis way more than I do David Finch. Maiolo and Bellaire are both amazing), but it's also where I think King finally showed this sentimental and hurt side of Bruce Wayne which he deepened in I Am Suicide and in the rest of the run, and we have the moment where Bruce states that he still talks to his mother, a moment that was important in I Am Bane.[/QUOTE]
The "I Am Gotham" epilogue is one of the most powerful Batman comics I've ever read. I cry every time. (And again, without Hank's deeply felt influence and absence, the emotional core is gone.)
[QUOTE]I think that, though I'm not always a fan of David Finch, he did some of his best work in Rebirth, and that I Am Gotham has interesting moments in it (e.g when Gordon says that wearing a mask may itch, which turns out to be the downfall for Gotham since he took away his mask for that reason after he thought he had killed all the guards). I regard it as some of King's weakest arcs in the title on itself, but an interesting and fitting start when we look at the whole picture[/QUOTE]
I tend to think "I Am Suicide" and especially "I Am Bane" are weaker than "I Am Gotham" (though I love them too and they are not without brilliant moments).
-
[QUOTE=gregpersons;4776432]I think this is right. Interestingly his run has a lot of similarities between another DKR, as well — I rewatched The Dark Knight Rises on cable and was struck by a number of similarities.
[LIST][*]Batman, Catwoman, and Bane are the central characters. [*]Bane locks Batman underground while he takes over the city.[*]Bane takes over Gotham, completely, even being federally recognized as independent. [*]Bane breaks Batman's back and heals from it like it's kinda no big deal. [*]Bane is being manipulated by someone with a personal connection to Bruce who wants to humiliate Batman to his core. (Talia / Thomas)[*]The story poses the question "is it possible to be Batman and be happy?" with Catwoman being the answer.[*]Before Batman can defeat Bane, he has to climb out of a deep pit in the desert and find Catwoman.[*]Bruce loses Alfred.[*]Bruce is prepared to die in a plane crash to save Gotham, but doesn't need to.[/LIST][/QUOTE]
If memory serves, isn't there even some kind of flashback where Thomas gives Bruce a variation on the "what do we do when we fall, Bruce" line from Nolan? I think he says something to the effect of, "Waynes always get back up again," maybe in "The Button"?
-
[QUOTE=David Walton;4779725]I love the 90s stuff, warts and all.
Is 'mature' a genre (as opposed to a content warning)? King explores his characters' reactions to the world they find themselves in a manner worthy of the label.
Absolutely. Miller and Snyder's conclusions strike me as somewhat nihilistic, certainly when compared to King's work.[/QUOTE]
I just read Batman Legacy for the first time, and enjoyed it a lot more than the reviews and mentions I've had in conversation led me to think. It's clearly a mashup of the Ebola panic and Indiana Jones/James Bond stuff, but it was a lot of fun.
I think there is a sense that King is heavily influenced by "literary" fiction - things like Possession, or even The Handmaid's Tale - things which prioritize style, voice, technique, character interiority, development over plot. I don't think he's abandoned genres - he clearly loves superheros and such - but his repeated use of very literary devices like poetic parallels, repeated dialogue, non-chronological narrative, etc show the influence. It's not clearly romance, though he does use a lot of those tropes. The biggest trope that I recognize in romance is the 3/4th breakup, which King shifts to a more or less halfway breakup.
All that to say that I don't think King's Batman run is without genre, but it's definitely very blended.
The funny thing is I don't think Miller or Snyder are trying to be nihilistic in DKR or Superheavy, but it does seem like they lean on Batman as fictional in a metatextual way that means in-universe, Batman cannot really grow or be happy, whereas King clearly wants Batman to grow and be happy in-universe.
[QUOTE=David Walton;4779827]If memory serves, isn't there even some kind of flashback where Thomas gives Bruce a variation on the "what do we do when we fall, Bruce" line from Nolan? I think he says something to the effect of, "Waynes always get back up again," maybe in "The Button"?[/QUOTE]
Well, that's specifically from Batman Begins (my personal favorite Batman film). :)
-
[QUOTE=millernumber1;4779838]I just read Batman Legacy for the first time, and enjoyed it a lot more than the reviews and mentions I've had in conversation led me to think. It's clearly a mashup of the Ebola panic and Indiana Jones/James Bond stuff, but it was a lot of fun.[/QUOTE]
Oh, it's a blast, and probably the most interesting thing that could have been done with Bane post-Knightfall.
[QUOTE]I think there is a sense that King is heavily influenced by "literary" fiction - things like Possession, or even The Handmaid's Tale - things which prioritize style, voice, technique, character interiority, development over plot. I don't think he's abandoned genres - he clearly loves superheros and such - but his repeated use of very literary devices like poetic parallels, repeated dialogue, non-chronological narrative, etc show the influence. It's not clearly romance, though he does use a lot of those tropes. The biggest trope that I recognize in romance is the 3/4th breakup, which King shifts to a more or less halfway breakup.
All that to say that I don't think King's Batman run is without genre, but it's definitely very blended.[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
[QUOTE]The funny thing is I don't think Miller or Snyder are trying to be nihilistic in DKR or Superheavy, but it does seem like they lean on Batman as fictional in a metatextual way that means in-universe, Batman cannot really grow or be happy, whereas King clearly wants Batman to grow and be happy in-universe.[/QUOTE]
With regard to Snyder, I was thinking more of recent developments in [B]Last Knight on Earth[/B]. Keep in mind I haven't read the story but found about the developments second hand. The idea being, if I understand it correctly, that [spoil]the original Bruce Wayne is the villain, and created a clone replacement to defeat himself.[/spoil]
-
[QUOTE=David Walton;4779820]Am I alone in thinking that "I Am Gotham" is the strongest debut by any long-term Batman writer? The story is damned near flawless in my opinion.
But Hank is the driving force for Claire's heroic journey, so removing him would be akin to taking Uncle Ben out of AMAZING FANTASY #15.
Also, Hank's tragedy pretty much kicks off all the major thematic concerns in King's run. There's even a striking parallel between Hank and Flashpoint Thomas, given that they both become obstacles to the heroes they inspired.
The "I Am Gotham" epilogue is one of the most powerful Batman comics I've ever read. I cry every time. (And again, without Hank's deeply felt influence and absence, the emotional core is gone.)
I tend to think "I Am Suicide" and especially "I Am Bane" are weaker than "I Am Gotham" (though I love them too and they are not without brilliant moments).[/QUOTE]
I think some big changes should be made to take away Hank off the story. Claire should go berserk and her parents death would be the big breakdown. But the story works with Hank, I just wished to have more Gotham Girl in the few chapters that start King's run, though since I didn't re-read Night of the Monster Men, I skipped some material with Claire in this re-read of King's run which makes Claire's role seems smaller.
[QUOTE=David Walton;4779827]If memory serves, isn't there even some kind of flashback where Thomas gives Bruce a variation on the "what do we do when we fall, Bruce" line from Nolan? I think he says something to the effect of, "Waynes always get back up again," maybe in "The Button"?[/QUOTE]
Yes, you're right. But that issue was written by Joshua Williamson, so I don't know if King came up with the phrase and I don't remember if he used it in the post-wedding stuff, but it really felt like a Batman Begins reference
I think it's interesting to compare Miller and Snyder's conclusions as you did, David, especially considering that both gave us a Bruce that needs Batman and goes on in his crusade overcoming even a natural ending. If we take DK Master Race into account, though it seems that one was more Azzarello than Miller, Bruce [spoil] becomes younger and able to keep on in his crusade even longer[/spoil] and in Snyder's Batman, though I haven't read All Star nor Last Knight, his Batman has backup plans to make clones that take on the mantle and keep Batman going on forever. Tom King seems more concerned about the legacy side of Batman (something more similar to Morrison's take with both Dick Grayson and Damian Wayne taking the cowl for themselves, though with some radical differences from King's vision), in a future where Bruce can live a normal life in his last years and get a natural death
-
[QUOTE=David Walton;4779863]With regard to Snyder, I was thinking more of recent developments in [B]Last Knight on Earth[/B]. Keep in mind I haven't read the story but found about the developments second hand. The idea being, if I understand it correctly, that [spoil]the original Bruce Wayne is the villain, and created a clone replacement to defeat himself.[/spoil][/QUOTE]
Ah. Well, I don't think Snyder intends what he's doing with Batman in either Metal/Batman Who Laughs/Last Knight on Earth to be nihilistic, but there certainly seems to be something strange going on with all the evil Bruce's he has consistently structured his stories around for three years.
-
[QUOTE=Chubistian;4779871]I think some big changes should be made to take away Hank off the story. Claire should go berserk and her parents death would be the big breakdown. But the story works with Hank, I just wished to have more Gotham Girl in the few chapters that start King's run, though since I didn't re-read Night of the Monster Men, I skipped some material with Claire in this re-read of King's run which makes Claire's role seems smaller.[/QUOTE]
Claire isn't a very active presence in "I Am Gotham" until the epilogue but I think that's in keeping with her journey. Hank's death pushes her out of his shadow, or, as she later puts it, "Hank wanted to be a hero but I just wanted to be Hank."
[QUOTE]Yes, you're right. But that issue was written by Joshua Williamson, so I don't know if King came up with the phrase and I don't remember if he used it in the post-wedding stuff, but it really felt like a Batman Begins reference[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I don't know. Did King co-plot "The Button"?
[QUOTE]I think it's interesting to compare Miller and Snyder's conclusions as you did, David, especially considering that both gave us a Bruce that needs Batman and goes on in his crusade overcoming even a natural ending. If we take DK Master Race into account, though it seems that one was more Azzarello than Miller, Bruce [spoil] becomes younger and able to keep on in his crusade even longer[/spoil] and in Snyder's Batman, though I haven't read All Star nor Last Knight, his Batman has backup plans to make clones that take on the mantle and keep Batman going on forever. Tom King seems more concerned about the legacy side of Batman (something more similar to Morrison's take with both Dick Grayson and Damian Wayne taking the cowl for themselves, though with some radical differences from King's vision), in a future where Bruce can live a normal life in his last years and get a natural death[/QUOTE]
Maybe nihilism isn't the right word, but I get the impression that Snyder's Bruce Wayne sees himself as a man who will eventually need to be stopped and an idea that needs to continue.
Whereas King's Bruce Wayne isn't as concerned with the idea of Batman as the purposes he serves.
-
Yes, King co-plotted The Button and wrote the first part. He was supposed to come back for the third issue, but he couldn't make it (I think for overload of work), so Joshua took care of three fourths of the story. That's why there's the chance that King came up with that particular scene and passed it on to Joshua, but there's no way of knowing (though I recall a post in Twitter by King saying that #22 was all Joshua)
-
1 Attachment(s)
Good News Troops!
[url]https://www.bleedingcool.com/2020/01/13/tom-king-is-working-on-a-catwoman-special/[/url]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]91615[/ATTACH]
Does this mean Helena is confirmed?