Batman: Zero Year vs. Frank Miller's Year One

[rhymeswithparc]

I agree with a lot of those that said Zero Year dragged on but I don't know where exactly Snyder could have cut his story to make it flow better; it's pretty clear to me that this should have been an OGN or something that wasn't released over 12 months because many of the finer details were things I had completely forgotten by the time the payoff came around. I really didn't like Zero Year at all (while I've enjoyed pretty much everything else Snyder has done on Batman) because I thought it was either showing me things relating to other things I had forgotten about or showing me things that weren't interesting enough in the context it was presented for me to call back to it when I was supposed to; like those little images put at the openings of those early issues (I imagine if I go back, it'll make sense and have a pretty good meaning but I shouldn't have to go back to them).

My biggest problem with it though was that Snyder was trying to modernize the themes in Year One while also trying to modernize the story and I don't think those two things can be done together (or I don't think he pulled it off at least). Year One was so perfect for me because it so effectively established an atmosphere and tone that fit so well with Batman. It defined Gotham in that story and it defined it for the stories that followed too (including the ones told by Snyder) and while doing this, it paralleled New York in the 70s. Snyder was trying to show that his Batman was facing modern fears in a modern day New York-Gotham but the Gotham in modern Batman comics is still that 70s New York from Year One. The city he showed in Zero Year felt completely different than the one in almost any Batman comic being published; it also seems like Gotham got way worse (and I mean significantly worse) between Zero Year and current day so I think that aspect doesn't fit with the fact that this is an origin.

Just overall, Year One was way better for me. I think if I re-read Zero Year in one go, I'll probably like it more.

[Kid A]

I dunno, I like the idea of Gotham being more in line with today's NYC. In a way, it's weird because NYC isn't nearly as dangerous as it was in the 70s/80s (Hell's Kitchen for instance is basically a tourist site now), but you don't need to make it a literal translation. There's still room to make Gotham more nuanced than being a monotonously dull city of noir cliches, and the villains would be more eccentric and bombastic than the crime mobs roaming the street.

[rhymeswithparc]

I dunno, I like the idea of Gotham being more in line with today's NYC. In a way, it's weird because NYC isn't nearly as dangerous as it was in the 70s/80s (Hell's Kitchen for instance is basically a tourist site now), but you don't need to make it a literal translation. There's still room to make Gotham more nuanced than being a monotonously dull city of noir cliches, and the villains would be more eccentric and bombastic than the crime mobs roaming the street.

I always liked the idea that Superman operated in a Metropolis that was inspired by a modern day New York. That's why he doesn't need to worry so much about random crimes and serial killers but more the larger scale financially backed super-crimes. I like the idea behind Zero Year but it's way too dissonant with what Batman is in current comics.

[Dragolord09]

Give me No Man's Land over Year Zero, Year One, and that idiotic laugh-fest of a TPB TDKR any day.

[nepenthes]

Give me No Man's Land over Year Zero, Year One, and that idiotic laugh-fest of a TPB TDKR any day.

What is it about DKR that makes it an idiotic laugh-fest over Year One?

Try to keep it on topic please everyone.

[Rafa-Rivas-2099]

What is it about DKR that makes it an idiotic laugh-fest over Year One?

Try to keep it on topic please everyone.

I don't think you can take an opinion like that seriously.

I have read YO and seen the anime film and still did not like it. It just wasn't a favorite. As for the original post I made, someone mentioned TDKR in an earlier and I replied. Sorry for any bad feelings.

Read the reviews. Not that you should think as reviewers tell you, but perhaps you might bump into what other people find so great. Not that YO is a modern Quixote, but I don't think any batman story is as sophisticated (yet simple).

And I'm serious WHY ZERO YEAR? How can it be 0 if it's the first?

[Tupiaz]

And I'm serious WHY ZERO YEAR? How can it be 0 if it's the first?

Just like a baby isn't one year old when it is born neither is Batman. Yes, it is Batman's first year as Batman but that it's the point calling it Zero Year (and not to confuse it with Year One). I remember seeing a video (I believe it was on Comic Vine) however I can't find it at the moment.

[Naked Bat]

Batman: Zero One is now being hailed as the greatest Batman story ever told, better than Miller's. Many are saying that they're still having trouble saying that because Miller was such a part of their childhoods, or at least the first great Batman saga they recalled. What's you're take on the two sets: Zero Year, vs. Miller. Is one really better than others? One thing's for certain: they really (tried?) to pull out all the stops with Zero Year. They said that they were determined to make the greatest Batman story of all-time, a story that would be hard to top for comic book writers in the future. A bold statement. Did they succeed?

the greatest batman story ever told? Who could say that? except people who have never read a batman story in their whole life?

[exile001]

Why is it called Zero Year, anyway? I'd think that it is because Bruce doesn't wear the cowl, but I wouldn't be surprised if the team was stupid enough to have him as Batman already.

Several reasons, many spelled out in the books.

Firstly, it was because DC heroes had been around for five years (shortly before Justice League: Origins). That was editorial mandate. Only, it didn't work for Batman fitting in the 4 Robins, a year alone, etc. To get around this, Snyder decided to set his origin in the year before JLO, so 5 years +1.

In part, its also a joke. Zero year (or year zero/0) does not exist in our calendar. We go from 1 B.C. to 1 A.D., so we have a year that doesn't exist.

In the final arc, when Riddler has taken over a severely damaged Gotham, he refers to this new era as Gotham's Zero Year.

It sounds like you're knocking a book you haven't even read. Maybe you should try it before decrying how bad/stupid it and its creators are?

the greatest batman story ever told? Who could say that? except people who have never read a batman story in their whole life?

Its as perfectly valid an opinion to think that Zero Year is the best Batman story ever, as it is to say Year One is the best Batman story ever.

IMO, neither are the best or without issues (get it?).

What is it about DKR that makes it an idiotic laugh-fest over Year One?

Try to keep it on topic please everyone.

Maybe he meant TDKSA? Kidding!

[steeplejack2112]

I'm definitely going to go with Batman: Year One. It was a great story told in four issues. Zero Year was way too long for me, and lost it's importance before the end. Again....this is how I felt.

[Naked Bat]

Several reasons, many spelled out in the books.

Firstly, it was because DC heroes had been around for five years (shortly before Justice League: Origins). That was editorial mandate. Only, it didn't work for Batman fitting in the 4 Robins, a year alone, etc. To get around this, Snyder decided to set his origin in the year before JLO, so 5 years +1.

In part, its also a joke. Zero year (or year zero/0) does not exist in our calendar. We go from 1 B.C. to 1 A.D., so we have a year that doesn't exist.

In the final arc, when Riddler has taken over a severely damaged Gotham, he refers to this new era as Gotham's Zero Year.

It sounds like you're knocking a book you haven't even read. Maybe you should try it before decrying how bad/stupid it and its creators are?



Its as perfectly valid an opinion to think that Zero Year is the best Batman story ever, as it is to say Year One is the best Batman story ever.

IMO, neither are the best or without issues (get it?).



Maybe he meant TDKSA? Kidding!

it is definitely a valid opinion, if one has read every batman stories ever written. And I don't think there are a lot of people who did.

[exile001]

it is definitely a valid opinion, if one has read every batman stories ever written. And I don't think there are a lot of people who did.

Ah, re-read your post with that in mind. I now realise you were saying that in relation to it being the greatest Batman story ever, rather than comparing it to YO.

I have actually tried to read every Batman comic (mostly throughout my 20s) and have got through an awful lot of it. I hope to finish one day.

[ImprobableQuestion]

Year One: Great James Gordon story, okay Batman story, zzz Catwoman origin.

Secret City: Excellent retelling of Red Hood/ambiguous Joker origin, pretty good Batman origin, controversial but solid Riddler origin.

It's important to note that Zero Year proper is not an equivalent to Y1 nor should it be considered as such. The first act is the only real "origin" Batman gets, and I feel like comparing Y1 to Dark and Savage City is not entirely accurate.


I think a trend is that telling a straight origin for Batman is rather boring, and shouldn't be son much the focus of your origin story (unless it's thebl shorter original story). Batman '89, Begins, Y1, and SC don't really focus on the processor Batman's origin for all that long (though Secret City and Begins certainly are the more in depth of the four listed).

[Rafa-Rivas-2099]

Just like a baby isn't one year old when it is born neither is Batman. Yes, it is Batman's first year as Batman but that it's the point calling it Zero Year (and not to confuse it with Year One). I remember seeing a video (I believe it was on Comic Vine) however I can't find it at the moment.

I think it might be an ESL problem I am having. Let's see if this is true, then:

The clear one is "on year two, Batman is one year old"
And I'm guessing that the title comes from saying "On year one, Batman is zero year old" (no one uses zero that way, but wouldn't that be "Zero Years").

However, that's really odd to me. I'd call "Year Zero" the 12 months right before Batman debuts, or "Year One BB" (Before Batman).

If Snyder wanted a different title, how about "First Year"?

Let me know if you find the video.

Several reasons, many spelled out in the books.

Firstly, it was because DC heroes had been around for five years (shortly before Justice League: Origins). That was editorial mandate. Only, it didn't work for Batman fitting in the 4 Robins, a year alone, etc. To get around this, Snyder decided to set his origin in the year before JLO, so 5 years +1.

In part, its also a joke. Zero year (or year zero/0) does not exist in our calendar. We go from 1 B.C. to 1 A.D., so we have a year that doesn't exist.

In the final arc, when Riddler has taken over a severely damaged Gotham, he refers to this new era as Gotham's Zero Year.

It sounds like you're knocking a book you haven't even read. Maybe you should try it before decrying how bad/stupid it and its creators are?

Ooooh. That makes sense. Not the Riddler part, knowing the common era system, he'd call it something else, like the year before Riddler's Gotham or so.

I said "I wouldn't be surprised if..." not that I know and they are.

[Carabas]

I'm thinking the title comes from a conversation along these lines:

Editor 1: Whatever will we do for our next event?
Ediitor 2: Hmmm. Batman's New 52 origin?
E1: Good plan. We'll call it Batman: Year One.
E2: Eh, there already is a Batman: Year One. Frank Miller did it? We made a cartoon of it and all?
E1: Oh. Eh... How about Year Zero then?
E2: Splendid. I'll go tell the writers.

We are putting considreably more thought into this than anybody at DC did.