Batman's Best (and Worst) Decade?

[godisawesome]

50’s-early 60’s were the worst.

And I’d say the 00’s were the best, though in two distinct phases with a brief nadir between them.

The decade began with the twilight of O’Neill-directed Bat Office that had exploded the Batfamily and nailed several successful crossover in the 90’s - and that decade is a strong #2 in terms of quality in my opinion. But because the 00’s started out from that high point, you had a few years of residual greatness from that era for its beginning - Batgirl with Cassandra Cain, Bruce Wayne: Murderer, the end of Dixon’s runs on Nightwing and Robin, etc. Then the wheels fell off for a bit when O’Neill retired and other from the era also left, and we got botched stuff like Wargames or sprinkled with stuff like Hush, Gotham Central, and Brubaker’s Catwoman underneath. There were some growing pains when OYL happened, but eventually we settled into the RIP/INC era, which wasn’t as cohesive as O’Neill’s era, but saw a super star stable explode everything.

[Vordan]

Am I wrong that the Batman from the first 65 years of his history is not the same Batman once Morrison took over? It seems that Morrison's Gothic, JLA and Arkham: Serious House Batman is pretty much in the same vein and is not the same Batman from his actual run. I just see such a contrast, such a stark difference between the guy that was in Brave and the Bold with Aparo art or Grant/Breyfogle or Denny O or Englehart/Rogers worked on compared to the Batman of the last 15 years. Am I wrong? Why is it such a shift?

The Pre-Frank Miller Batman and the Post Frank Miller Batman are the real demarcation I’d say. Even at his darkest Pre Miller Batman was still a much more upbeat kinda guy who was genuine friends with Superman. But then after DKR and DITF Batman became much more dark and downright nihilistic even.

[Jim Kelly]

Yeah, for me, I'd say the dividing line is Frank Miller. Not that I blame Frank entirely--since most of his Batman work could be viewed as not canon. It's really on editor Denny O'Neil for choosing to remake Batman in Frank Miller's image and ignoring most of the previous history.

And if someone only got into the comics after that happened, it makes sense that for them that's Batman, so all the stuff before it is "bad" because it doesn't fit with the concept they were sold on.

[godisawesome]

Yeah, for me, I'd say the dividing line is Frank Miller. Not that I blame Frank entirely--since most of his Batman work could be viewed as not canon. It's really on editor Denny O'Neil for choosing to remake Batman in Frank Miller's image and ignoring most of the previous history.

And if someone only got into the comics after that happened, it makes sense that for them that's Batman, so all the stuff before it is "bad" because it doesn't fit with the concept they were sold on.

I’d say the earliest Golden Age stuff needs to be separated as well - the earliest Batman stories owed more to the ruthlessly stern Shadow that inspired them, and would arguably qualify as darker even then Miller’s Batman.

[sunofdarkchild]

I'd say 70s for best and 30s for worst.

While Batman was created in the very late 30s, there's very little content and what little there is is really bad. The writing in those very first Batman stories is horrible and it took a while for the character and writing to settle. The 2000s and 2010s would be my other contenders for worst decade. They told the same god-awful story again and again throughout the first half of the 2000s with Officer Down, Murderer/Fugitive, and then War Games. Things did get better when Morrison came in, but the 5 years before his run were so bad it would make any decade a contender for the worst. Also, the 2000s had Batman Begins and TDK. This past decade never got as bad as the worst of the 2000s, but it's been so bland from start to finish, and I will forever hate the New 52 for cutting short the Morrison run and replacing it with the far inferior Snyder run, ruining Tim and getting rid of Steph and Cass.

The very late 60s and 70s is where the modern darker Batman started, but it kept a balance between darker and lighter elements. Stories from this era hold up remarkably well and are a joy to read, and this is also where the bulk of the inspiration for BTAS comes from. The 80s and 90s are also great decades, with the 80s having seminal works like DKR ands Year 1 and the 90s having BTAS and expanding the family with Nightwing and Robin series, Birds of Prey, Azrael, and introducing Cass at the end. It did see the first inklings of the trends that ruined Batman comics in the early 2000s, so I hold that against it. Also, I think Dixon's Robin was better than his Batman.

[K. Jones]

I'll cheat a little, or maybe not. I think the best decade is from 1987 to 1996. Frank Miller, TKJ, great Grant and Moench runs, Death in the Family, Batman '89, Batman Returnsmany neat GNs, The Animated Series, and Knightfall. Plus scads of Action Figures and merch and Nintendo games.

I don't consider any of that stuff my favorite or even the strongest decade in storytelling but it's impossible to deny all that impact.

I think 55-65 are probably the lowest ten years, but once you hit '66 you get a pop resurgence that starts kitsch but quickly transforms into the O'Neil and Adams period within four years rounding out a legendary ten year revival which by '75 is in full swing. '76 to '85 is underrated and overlaps with Super friends and great Bronze Age runs including Englehart.

[phonogram12]

Speaking strictly in terms of comics:

Worst - '90s. I did most of my collecting from the '80s to today, and noticed that the biggest intentional gaps were from the '90s. The comics weren't bad, necessarily. Just forgettable.

Best - '00s on the strength of Brubaker and Rucka simultaneous run alone.

Runners up for best are the '50s and '80s. The latter because of Miller (duh doy ;-)) and the former because Dick Sprang had to be one of the best things that ever happened to Batman.

[Comics N' Toons]

Speaking strictly in terms of comics:

Worst - '90s. I did most of my collecting from the '80s to today, and noticed that the biggest intentional gaps were from the '90s. The comics weren't bad, necessarily. Just forgettable.

Best - '00s on the strength of Brubaker and Rucka simultaneous run alone.

Runners up for best are the '50s and '80s. The latter because of Miller (duh doy ;-)) and the former because Dick Sprang had to be one of the best things that ever happened to Batman.

How do you feel about the Knightfall saga?

[failo.legendkiller]

Best: 90's. Dixon batverse, Legends of the Dark Knight. Knightfall saga, Contagion, Cataclysm, No Man's Land. Everything was consistent and cohesive. Best batfamily period.

Worst: '10. Snyder, King and Tynion. Boring and pretentious runs. I've totally lost interest in the character and his creek.

[The Kid]

The 00s were his best decade. That was the decade we got:
-The first two Nolan Batman movies
-The Arkham Asylum game, the first great Batman video game
-DCAU JL and JLU which were peak Batman
-Brubaker, Rucka, Morrison, and Dini on the Batman books

Literally everything he was in was gold. It’s never been that good before or since imo.

I agree with this. He was on fire in almost every media in the 2000s

[MajorHoy]

I'd say 70s for best and 30s for worst.

While Batman was created in the very late 30s, there's very little content and what little there is is really bad. The writing in those very first Batman stories is horrible and it took a while for the character and writing to settle.

I actually enjoy the 1930s. Things were interesting until into the 1940s, shortly after they added Robin to the mix. Dick as Robin himself wasn't necessarily bad, but they toned down Batman's stories waaaaaaaaay too much.

The 1970s into the very early 1980s were also generally good (at least until they introduced Dick-clone Jason as Robin II).

[williamtheday]

The '50's had dozens of the weird 'imaginary stories' comics where bats and Robin would go to outer space or to Mars or Batman would have an insect head.

Alfred wrote imaginary stories about Batman marrying Batwoman and their son becoming the new Robin, with Dick becoming the new Batman after Bruce retired. But the outer space and dimenisonal aliens adventures actually happened, at least maybe untill COIE.

[Jim Kelly]

Actually Batman is and always has been a science fiction character, much like Doc Savage. The concept is really the marriage of science fiction and horror for a detective story. So all of these science things keep coming up in the comics. "The Case of the Chemical Syndicate" already has a science fiction slant. And Batman uses advanced scientific methods of detection. All the gadgets he develops are cutting edge or futuristic. The utility belt (especially when it was compact and slick and not a bunch of bulky pouches) is the kind of James Bond technology that came to define the Batman.

He very quickly encounters both science fiction and horror figures--Doctor Death is science fiction, but he comes back from the dead. Hugo Strange uses science. Even the Duc d'Orterre is a science minded character--and he seems to use L.S.D. on Bruce. While the Monk and Dala are vampires that change into wolves. The 1940s are full of science fiction stories and the Dynamic Duo even travel through time and meet aliens.

So I don't really think that science fiction was on the rise in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Remember, there were often three stories in an issue, so for every over the top science fiction story with aliens, there were several stories that didn't go in that direction. It's just that the Comics Code prevented them from using anything too horrific or too violent--so they had to find other ways to tell an eye-catching story. Aliens and science allowed for the creation of monsters that weren't on the list of banned supernatural characters. They couldn't have vampires, but they could have bat-winged people from another world.

And in the early 1960s, Jack Schiff was starting to bring back the old foes that had been in limbo for some years, like Mad Hatter, Penguin, Dr. Double-X, Mirror Man. Even Catman is a way of bringing back Catwoman--and Kathy Kane poses as Catwoman in a couple of stories. While Clayface II revives the name of a villain from the early 1940s.

Then Julie Schwartz tried to make Batman more grounded--yet, because he had a background in science fiction, the villains often used science. I don't see Batman becoming less science fiction oriented after the Crisis. I think it's more, because the villains have become so super-powered and they use all kinds of science. Batman has travelled through time, developed sophisticated science to kill all the Justice League, seen his partners come back to life through weird science.

I guess the reason that people think the late 1950s/early 1960s were ridden with science fiction is because the art looks kind of goofy--Sheldon Moldoff was drawing in that mannered Bob Kane style. And the aliens couldn't look too frightening--they were aiming for a younger readership. So those stories may look a bit silly, but when you strip away the artifice the basic plots are the same as now.

[TheBatman]

Am I wrong that the Batman from the first 65 years of his history is not the same Batman once Morrison took over? It seems that Morrison's Gothic, JLA and Arkham: Serious House Batman is pretty much in the same vein and is not the same Batman from his actual run. I just see such a contrast, such a stark difference between the guy that was in Brave and the Bold with Aparo art or Grant/Breyfogle or Denny O or Englehart/Rogers worked on compared to the Batman of the last 15 years. Am I wrong? Why is it such a shift?

Yeah, I'd say you're wrong, and that your posts often seem eager to paint Morrison as the downfall of the franchise, when there are much bigger, blatant examples of a shift in Batman's portrayal.

[bat39]

Actually Batman is and always has been a science fiction character, much like Doc Savage. The concept is really the marriage of science fiction and horror for a detective story. So all of these science things keep coming up in the comics. "The Case of the Chemical Syndicate" already has a science fiction slant. And Batman uses advanced scientific methods of detection. All the gadgets he develops are cutting edge or futuristic. The utility belt (especially when it was compact and slick and not a bunch of bulky pouches) is the kind of James Bond technology that came to define the Batman.

He very quickly encounters both science fiction and horror figures--Doctor Death is science fiction, but he comes back from the dead. Hugo Strange uses science. Even the Duc d'Orterre is a science minded character--and he seems to use L.S.D. on Bruce. While the Monk and Dala are vampires that change into wolves. The 1940s are full of science fiction stories and the Dynamic Duo even travel through time and meet aliens.

So I don't really think that science fiction was on the rise in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Remember, there were often three stories in an issue, so for every over the top science fiction story with aliens, there were several stories that didn't go in that direction. It's just that the Comics Code prevented them from using anything too horrific or too violent--so they had to find other ways to tell an eye-catching story. Aliens and science allowed for the creation of monsters that weren't on the list of banned supernatural characters. They couldn't have vampires, but they could have bat-winged people from another world.

And in the early 1960s, Jack Schiff was starting to bring back the old foes that had been in limbo for some years, like Mad Hatter, Penguin, Dr. Double-X, Mirror Man. Even Catman is a way of bringing back Catwoman--and Kathy Kane poses as Catwoman in a couple of stories. While Clayface II revives the name of a villain from the early 1940s.

Then Julie Schwartz tried to make Batman more grounded--yet, because he had a background in science fiction, the villains often used science. I don't see Batman becoming less science fiction oriented after the Crisis. I think it's more, because the villains have become so super-powered and they use all kinds of science. Batman has travelled through time, developed sophisticated science to kill all the Justice League, seen his partners come back to life through weird science.

I guess the reason that people think the late 1950s/early 1960s were ridden with science fiction is because the art looks kind of goofy--Sheldon Moldoff was drawing in that mannered Bob Kane style. And the aliens couldn't look too frightening--they were aiming for a younger readership. So those stories may look a bit silly, but when you strip away the artifice the basic plots are the same as now.

Excellent points!

Early Batman was essentially a pulp character - hell, the superhero genre evolved from pulp! The superhero concept is a marriage of science fiction and the supernatural with the crime thriller or detective genres, and Batman was no exception to that.

In the early stories, before Robin, Batman solves a murder case, takes on a ring of diamond thieves, and fights a bio-terrorist, vampires, a mad scientist, and a would-be dictator with a futuristic ray gun! Batman's actual 'Year One' is nowhere near as grounded, street-level or 'realistic' as what Frank Miller and other writers from the 80's onwards imagined it as.

And yes, with Robin coming in, the tone lightened up a bit, and in the 50's, the tone lightened up a lot. But the basic concepts have remained - reinvented for every new decade with a new aesthetic and new tone.

The idea of Batman as this winged avenger of the night, fighting crime in the shadows and cleaning up a corrupt cesspool of a city, really started to take shape in its present form in the 70's. And by the 80's, the idea of Batman as a fundamentally 'dark' character began to really take hold. But even so, the fantastic science fiction and supernatural elements, and the pulpy origins of the character, have persisted. Which is really what Morrison's run was about - he was celebrating the entirety of the character, not just the stuff 'modern' writers wanted to focus on. He saw the Batman in 'Knightfall' as the same Batman from 'The Case of the Chemical Syndicate', who in turn was the same guy from 'Robin Dies at Dawn'. And his work was about creating a unified vision of the character that encompassed these stories and more.