King Batman Run: Analysis and Enjoyment Thread

[millernumber1]

Hopefully he takes a measured approach and doesn't 1) date his work and 2) lose the point of his story.

Rucka's initial WW run pre52 was amazing because he wasn't reacting to others within the story, but Rebirth era not so much and you can see it in the story

Yeah, that's what I'm worried about - that it'll become about something different and dated, instead of something timeless and accessible by more than just people who agree with him.

I actually love both of Rucka's WW runs, but I was really disappointed by how narrow his Lois Lane has been.

[Katana500]

millernumber1 will you make an enjoyment/analysis thread for Tynions run aswell? Because its nice having somewhere positive to talk about the new issues when they come out!!

[millernumber1]

millernumber1 will you make an enjoyment/analysis thread for Tynions run aswell? Because its nice having somewhere positive to talk about the new issues when they come out!!

I dunno - do you think the normal discussion threads will be really negative? The only reason I made this thread was because it was impossible to have any kind of discussion without constant negativity. If that becomes the case, I definitely will.

[David Walton]

Question that's slightly off topic, but I think it's relevant:

I feel like post-Knightfall, nearly every major Batman writer has a story in mind where they break Bruce (in different ways, mind you) and then rebuild him so that he's a well-adjusted human being. Most of the major events have promised to get Bruce back to a contemporary take on the Bronze Age, where he's incredibly driven but still capable of healthy relationships as well as having something of a civilian life. Knightsend concluded on a hopeful note where Bruce took the mantle of the Bat back from Jean Paul Valley by 'stepping into the light,' both figuratively and literally. Prodigal was Bruce's attempt to heal his fractured relationship with Dick after choosing Jean Paul Valley as his successor, and post-Troika Bruce tried to regain Tim's confidence.

Contagion/Cataclysm/No-Man's Land achieves the same effect on a larger scale, with Gotham City falling to a series of natural disasters and being abandoned by the federal government before a period of growth and renewal.

After that there's Bruce Wayne: Murderer and Bruce Wayne: Fugitive, where Bruce almost wholly abandons his civilian life and pushes away his closest allies. By the story's end, he realizes his mistake and how his enemies exploited his isolation, and he vows to rebuild his relationships again.

It seems like whenever Bruce is set up as a more balanced, healthy figure the creative team that did so leaves and the next one takes it as an opportunity to deconstruct the previous team's work on that front. You could argue that's just the nature of a dramatic serialized story. But it's also seemed to me several times like DC was initially sincere in attempting to push a status quo where Bruce is a mature, well-adjusted human being, but it never stuck.

It seems to me like King is moving Bruce in that direction again, helping him to realize that he can balance his life's work and family, and this will actually make him better at his mission. The real question is, if King does get Bruce to that point, will he get an opportunity to show us what that kind of Bruce Wayne looks like, or will that be the conclusion of his Bat/Cat run?

And could King be the one to make a character change like that stick?

[charliehustle415]

Question that's slightly off topic, but I think it's relevant:

I feel like post-Knightfall, nearly every major Batman writer has a story in mind where they break Bruce (in different ways, mind you) and then rebuild him so that he's a well-adjusted human being. Most of the major events have promised to get Bruce back to a contemporary take on the Bronze Age, where he's incredibly driven but still capable of healthy relationships as well as having something of a civilian life. Knightsend concluded on a hopeful note where Bruce took the mantle of the Bat back from Jean Paul Valley by 'stepping into the light,' both figuratively and literally. Prodigal was Bruce's attempt to heal his fractured relationship with Dick after choosing Jean Paul Valley as his successor, and post-Troika Bruce tried to regain Tim's confidence.

Contagion/Cataclysm/No-Man's Land achieves the same effect on a larger scale, with Gotham City falling to a series of natural disasters and being abandoned by the federal government before a period of growth and renewal.

After that there's Bruce Wayne: Murderer and Bruce Wayne: Fugitive, where Bruce almost wholly abandons his civilian life and pushes away his closest allies. By the story's end, he realizes his mistake and how his enemies exploited his isolation, and he vows to rebuild his relationships again.

It seems like whenever Bruce is set up as a more balanced, healthy figure the creative team that did so leaves and the next one takes it as an opportunity to deconstruct the previous team's work on that front. You could argue that's just the nature of a dramatic serialized story. But it's also seemed to me several times like DC was initially sincere in attempting to push a status quo where Bruce is a mature, well-adjusted human being, but it never stuck.

It seems to me like King is moving Bruce in that direction again, helping him to realize that he can balance his life's work and family, and this will actually make him better at his mission. The real question is, if King does get Bruce to that point, will he get an opportunity to show us what that kind of Bruce Wayne looks like, or will that be the conclusion of his Bat/Cat run?

And could King be the one to make a character change like that stick?

This is the nature of corporate superhero comics; the last writer that had Bruce as a Bronze Age Hero was Morrison. However, the New 52 completely scuttled his characterization and Bruce has slowly been coming back to that status quo. King may be moving that way, but his Bruce is still very melodramatic.

Morrison's Bruce was a loving man and really good humored; for example, Bruce used to troll online forums with conspiracy theories about Batman & Bruce Wayne to throw off the scent of their relationship, that juxtaposed with King's suicidal Bruce means he still has a long way to go.

[Gotham citizen]

Question that's slightly off topic, but I think it's relevant:

I feel like post-Knightfall, nearly every major Batman writer has a story in mind where they break Bruce (in different ways, mind you) and then rebuild him so that he's a well-adjusted human being.
[…]

Yesterday I "read" Knightfall and I had your same feelings.

[…]
It seems like whenever Bruce is set up as a more balanced, healthy figure the creative team that did so leaves and the next one takes it as an opportunity to deconstruct the previous team's work on that front.
[…]

I think we should talk about destruction of the previous team's works and of the character.

[…]
It seems to me like King is moving Bruce in that direction again, helping him to realize that he can balance his life's work and family, and this will actually make him better at his mission. The real question is, if King does get Bruce to that point, will he get an opportunity to show us what that kind of Bruce Wayne looks like, or will that be the conclusion of his Bat/Cat run?

And could King be the one to make a character change like that stick?

King said Batman/Catwoman will be the conclusion of his Batman run, but how can he end his run after the start of the Tynion's run? Anyway if King's purpose was make Bruce Wayne a more balanced character, he has choosen the worst way to do: destroying the character (another time) and his family.

[David Walton]

This is the nature of corporate superhero comics; the last writer that had Bruce as a Bronze Age Hero was Morrison. However, the New 52 completely scuttled his characterization and Bruce has slowly been coming back to that status quo. King may be moving that way, but his Bruce is still very melodramatic.

To a certain extent, sure, it's corporate superhero comics--but so were the various Silver and Bronze Age takes on Batman. There's no logical reason why a less obsessive Batman couldn't take hold again, if that's what creative teams truly want. And sometimes it seems like they do very much want that, but for whatever reason, it just never sticks. It could be that every writer wants the opportunity to deconstruct obsessive Batman in their own way.

Morrison's Bruce was a loving man and really good humored; for example, Bruce used to troll online forums with conspiracy theories about Batman & Bruce Wayne to throw off the scent of their relationship, that juxtaposed with King's suicidal Bruce means he still has a long way to go.

I do think Morrison's Batman was generally better-humored, though BATMAN, INC. was closer to end of his vision for the character. So he was at a different point there than when he began.

[millernumber1]

Question that's slightly off topic, but I think it's relevant:

I feel like post-Knightfall, nearly every major Batman writer has a story in mind where they break Bruce (in different ways, mind you) and then rebuild him so that he's a well-adjusted human being. Most of the major events have promised to get Bruce back to a contemporary take on the Bronze Age, where he's incredibly driven but still capable of healthy relationships as well as having something of a civilian life. Knightsend concluded on a hopeful note where Bruce took the mantle of the Bat back from Jean Paul Valley by 'stepping into the light,' both figuratively and literally. Prodigal was Bruce's attempt to heal his fractured relationship with Dick after choosing Jean Paul Valley as his successor, and post-Troika Bruce tried to regain Tim's confidence.

Contagion/Cataclysm/No-Man's Land achieves the same effect on a larger scale, with Gotham City falling to a series of natural disasters and being abandoned by the federal government before a period of growth and renewal.

After that there's Bruce Wayne: Murderer and Bruce Wayne: Fugitive, where Bruce almost wholly abandons his civilian life and pushes away his closest allies. By the story's end, he realizes his mistake and how his enemies exploited his isolation, and he vows to rebuild his relationships again.

It seems like whenever Bruce is set up as a more balanced, healthy figure the creative team that did so leaves and the next one takes it as an opportunity to deconstruct the previous team's work on that front. You could argue that's just the nature of a dramatic serialized story. But it's also seemed to me several times like DC was initially sincere in attempting to push a status quo where Bruce is a mature, well-adjusted human being, but it never stuck.

It seems to me like King is moving Bruce in that direction again, helping him to realize that he can balance his life's work and family, and this will actually make him better at his mission. The real question is, if King does get Bruce to that point, will he get an opportunity to show us what that kind of Bruce Wayne looks like, or will that be the conclusion of his Bat/Cat run?

And could King be the one to make a character change like that stick?

That's a fascinating question. And part of the problem of Batman - because there are always at least two other major comics being published that are expected to be important at all times (Batman and Detective), so any story, even by a bestselling writer, is going to be working uphill. Just look at how Scott Snyder's characterization of Batman was kind of overwritten by King and Tynion when he was doing All Star Batman - that comic sold a lot, but it didn't seem to really impact the status quo or arcs of the other writers.

[David Walton]

Yesterday I "read" Knightfall and I had your same feelings.

I feel like Knightfall is the Batman franchise's "Born Again"--and that's not intended as a criticism, just an observation. We've gotten a lot of great comics driven by that model.

I think we should talk about destruction of the previous team's works and of the character.

King said Batman/Catwoman will be the conclusion of his Batman run, but how can he end his run after the start of the Tynion's run? Anyway if King's purpose was make Bruce Wayne a more balanced character, he has choosen the worst way to do: destroying the character (another time) and his family.

It's a good question. Tynion has said that Bruce Wayne will be a focal point of his work, so maybe that will be a direct result of Bruce's character growth in King's run.

[millernumber1]

I feel like Knightfall is the Batman franchise's "Born Again"--and that's not intended as a criticism, just an observation. We've gotten a lot of great comics driven by that model.

It's a good question. Tynion has said that Bruce Wayne will be a focal point of his work, so maybe that will be a direct result of Bruce's character growth in King's run.

Could you elaborate a bit on how Knightfall is Born Again for Batman? I know you mentioned how it created a pattern of "break Batman down and build him back up again" - is that what you mean?

Tynion's default Batman is a lot more well adjusted than either Snyder or King's Batman - witness how he often writes Batman hugging his partners. So I think it might be hard to make a conclusive argument that he's changing his characterization. The things we know from his newsletter are that Bruce is cut off from his past with the death of Alfred, so that will be an interesting twist, I think.

[David Walton]

That's a fascinating question. And part of the problem of Batman - because there are always at least two other major comics being published that are expected to be important at all times (Batman and Detective), so any story, even by a bestselling writer, is going to be working uphill. Just look at how Scott Snyder's characterization of Batman was kind of overwritten by King and Tynion when he was doing All Star Batman - that comic sold a lot, but it didn't seem to really impact the status quo or arcs of the other writers.

Very true.

I also think that, for a variety of reasons, the 80s characterization of major characters tends to stick in a way that others don't. When it comes to escaping the potentially oppressive influence of Year One and The Dark Knight Returns, the only way out is through--which, in turn, only increases their perceived influence. Because even if you want a more healthy, well-adjusted Bruce Wayne, you have to explain how he gets there.

[Scott Taylor]

There is this thing that happens when a parental figure dies where the first born assumes their mantle. Its seen in films such as Lion King, and dozens of other forms of media and literature. And its for certain a real-life happening. I've seen people transform in subtle ways after their mom or dad passes.

So for Alfred's death, I am hoping we see some of this happen. Batman won't become his own Alfred, thats not what I am saying, but Alfred served as a check and balance on Batman's obsessiveness. So Alfred's death would help the maturity stick in this case. In a similar way that Aunt May's absence help's Spider-Man to mature - we saw that in the books within the past few years, where he felt less like a man-child as Aunt May got married and developed a life of her own.

But "stick"? Sorry, I'm not seeing anything permanent coming out of King's run. Too many writers love to write Alfred and Batman together to allow them to be apart for long. And Alfred's return will necessitate a bit of immaturity on Batman's part. I'll just be happy if Bat-Dad goes away permanently after this run - really thinking the big heads at DC have other plans for him, though.

[Gotham citizen]

[…]
So Alfred's death would help the maturity stick in this case. In a similar way that Aunt May's absence help's Spider-Man to mature
[…]

I could agree with you, if Bruce Wayne were a young man like Peter Parker, but since the very first issue he is a grown up man, a man who ended his own journey toward the maturity. So (in my humble opinion) if the Bruce Wayne of today need to become the mature man he already was during the golden, the silver and the bronze age, then I think something incredibly wrong happened with the modern Batman's writers.
Obviously I don't criticize your opinion, on the contrary I'm using your opinion to criticize habit to describe Bruce Wayne like a men always on the edge of a PTSD.

[…]
Sorry, I'm not seeing anything permanent coming out of King's run. Too many writers love to write Alfred and Batman together to allow them to be apart for long.

I agree.

And Alfred's return will necessitate a bit of immaturity on Batman's part. I'll just be happy if Bat-Dad goes away permanently after this run - really thinking the big heads at DC have other plans for him, though.

I don't agree: like I said during the past ages Bruce Wayne wasn't an immature man at all and yet he had always Alfred on his side.

[charliehustle415]

To a certain extent, sure, it's corporate superhero comics--but so were the various Silver and Bronze Age takes on Batman. There's no logical reason why a less obsessive Batman couldn't take hold again, if that's what creative teams truly want. And sometimes it seems like they do very much want that, but for whatever reason, it just never sticks. It could be that every writer wants the opportunity to deconstruct obsessive Batman in their own way.



I do think Morrison's Batman was generally better-humored, though BATMAN, INC. was closer to end of his vision for the character. So he was at a different point there than when he began.

Ah, I mean returning the character to a popular status quo; however, I get your point Bruce was at the end of Morrison's run but even he had to return Bruce back to the popular status quo.

King's Bruce has not shown any growth, he's always on the backfoot even though he has the qualities of Batgod Batman. Which is weird because King's Batman run is literally like night and day. Bruce is a broken hollow man, but his Batman is at his mythic height. Take for example the I am Suicide arc, Batman went through like 100 soldiers single handedly but Bruce himself is so fallible that he constantly asks Alfred for validation like in the Batman Secret Files issue: "Am I Enough?"

[Scott Taylor]

I could agree with you, if Bruce Wayne were a young man like Peter Parker, but since the very first issue he is a grown up man, a man who ended his own journey toward the maturity. So (in my humble opinion) if the Bruce Wayne of today need to become the mature man he already was during the golden, the silver and the bronze age, then I think something incredibly wrong happened with the modern Batman's writers.
Obviously I don't criticize your opinion, on the contrary I'm using your opinion to criticize habit to describe Bruce Wayne like a men always on the edge of a PTSD.



I agree.


I don't agree: like I said during the past ages Bruce Wayne wasn't an immature man at all and yet he had always Alfred on his side.

Anyone can become more mature through passing through various life events. It should not be read as "they were immature before" just because that happens. Batman being dependent on Alfred is less mature than him not depending on Alfred.