What is the difference between Snyder's approach to writing Batman compared to Morrison's approach?

[miss_terry]

I had this topic up and was looking for it, when I just saw the forums rule that the whole forum was rebooted by the owner.

I hope there are new members that can share their opinion about this. Thank you.

[Penguin Truth]

Morrison's run leaned heavily on a holistic "everything happened" attitude towards continuity (as long as he didn't have to remember what ACTUALLY happened in those old comics) and his writing style is very breckneck and with agency, using a lot of artists that splash the narrative across the page as if it was haphazardly thrown from a bucket, which creates a sort of psychedelic effect at times.

Snyder's Batman is reverent of the past, too, but he prefers to emphasize horror elements and take time building toward a climax (for better or worse), pouring over the details in the narrative, and carefully constructing an intricate picture. His characters are awfully verbose, sometimes to their detriment. His storytelling style is pretty conventional, but it makes it easier for him to weave his tales into.

Personally, I'm more of a fan of Snyder's Batman. Morrison's run seemed a little haphazard and I disagreed with a lot of the ideas he used. I admire his ambition. He was the most ambitious Batman writer of this generation. However, I'm really not a fan of his Batman run overall.

There. I was civil, damn it.

[oasis1313]

Heart versus Soul?

[Penguin Truth]

Heart versus Soul?

[LASERlips]

Snyder writes too many words, plainly spelling out everything he wants the reader to know. I think he goes too far with this, like the dialogue in Nolan's movies explaining all the themes as if we're too stupid to figure it out ourselves.

Morrison just writes the things that happen, with much of the relevant information obscured or missing. I prefer his style, but I'd be lying if I said I could always follow what the heck is actually happening.

[Kingcrimsonprog]

I think that Morrison's run is a bit like the tv show Lost. Lots of hints and vagueness and things-are-bigger-than-they-seem atmosphere.
Snyder's run is more like the movie Zodiak.

It took me a while to enjoy Morrison's run, and some of it is not to my specific tastes, but it is very good.
Snyder's work is all instantly likeable to me, apart from the failed promise feel of DOTF.

[The Celtic Batman]

Grant's run was mind-blowing in it's scale. It was underpinned by Grant squaring up to the Universal mythology of Batman, the kind of stuff he expanded on in his Supergods book. But throughout it was also a thrilling Detective story. Awesome.

Scott Snyder's work is also thrilling. Pre-flashpoint he produced some wonderful stories, but, imo, post-Flashpoint he's taken it to another level. His Owls storyline blew me away, but I think it suffered from DC trying to cash in on it a tad TOO much and milking it beyond what should have been its natural conclusion.
With Zero Year my jaw has rarely been off the floor. His inventiveness with retelling the origin for 'our time' has been nothing short of genius. Played straight though.

Both amazing authors, but if I could only read one, hands down it's Grant for me.

[SpideyZERO]

Morrison is all about mind screw

Snyder is all about monologues

Both are great writers, I prefer Snyder's style more

[manduck37]

One of the big differences I noticed was in their treatment of Batman himself. Morrison's Batman was the perfect man, disciplined, hard working, had a plan for everything. Snyder's Batman is much more flawed, his ego gets in the way, he makes mistakes, he pushes people away. Snyder's Batman was caught off guard by the Court of Owls because he thought they were a myth. He never saw them, so they couldn't exist. I find that I like Snyder's treatment of Batman as more of a flawed hero over Morrison's perfect man. Morrison also works more in themes, like death or ultimate good vs ultimate evil, or divorce. Snyder works more in character studies. How Batman reacts to a situation, deal with other members of the Bat-family, build a relationship with Gordon and police. Snyder's Batman is more grounded while Morrison's is more mythical. I respect Morrison's grand plan and the sheer scope of what he did with Batman, but my preference is Snyder's more grounded approach. I always liked that Batman was the peak of human achievement, but still attainable. So Snyder's treatment appeals more to the version of Batman that I enjoy. Morrison's work with themes and abstract ideas works better for a more mythical character like Superman, in my opinion.

[JasonTodd428]

Morrison's run leaned heavily on a holistic "everything happened" attitude towards continuity (as long as he didn't have to remember what ACTUALLY happened in those old comics) and his writing style is very breckneck and with agency, using a lot of artists that splash the narrative across the page as if it was haphazardly thrown from a bucket, which creates a sort of psychedelic effect at times.

Snyder's Batman is reverent of the past, too, but he prefers to emphasize horror elements and take time building toward a climax (for better or worse), pouring over the details in the narrative, and carefully constructing an intricate picture. His characters are awfully verbose, sometimes to their detriment. His storytelling style is pretty conventional, but it makes it easier for him to weave his tales into.

Personally, I'm more of a fan of Snyder's Batman. Morrison's run seemed a little haphazard and I disagreed with a lot of the ideas he used. I admire his ambition. He was the most ambitious Batman writer of this generation. However, I'm really not a fan of his Batman run overall.

There. I was civil, damn it.

I agree with everything in this post. It outlines my thoughts on both very nicely. Both of them are amazing writers and there are things about both that I admire as far as writing styles go but I prefer Snyder's way of telling a story over Morrison's.

[InformationGeek]

One of the big differences I noticed was in their treatment of Batman himself. Morrison's Batman was the perfect man, disciplined, hard working, had a plan for everything. Snyder's Batman is much more flawed, his ego gets in the way, he makes mistakes, he pushes people away. Snyder's Batman was caught off guard by the Court of Owls because he thought they were a myth. He never saw them, so they couldn't exist. I find that I like Snyder's treatment of Batman as more of a flawed hero over Morrison's perfect man. Morrison also works more in themes, like death or ultimate good vs ultimate evil, or divorce. Snyder works more in character studies. How Batman reacts to a situation, deal with other members of the Bat-family, build a relationship with Gordon and police. Snyder's Batman is more grounded while Morrison's is more mythical. I respect Morrison's grand plan and the sheer scope of what he did with Batman, but my preference is Snyder's more grounded approach. I always liked that Batman was the peak of human achievement, but still attainable. So Snyder's treatment appeals more to the version of Batman that I enjoy. Morrison's work with themes and abstract ideas works better for a more mythical character like Superman, in my opinion.

Yeah. Basically all of this.

[swing kinker]

Morrison is all about the big picture whereas Snyder seems more like he's working in self contained arcs that may have some worldly connection but aren't essential knowledge. Morrison's take is like a modern version of the go!den age where its wacky and colourful and crazy whereas Snyder plays it like a more modern 80s-present style with noir monologues and dark themes. One thing I don't hear much which makes me feel perhaps I'm alone here but Morrison is obsessed with batman the character and Snyder is obsessed with Gotham the character

[Diamond]

Morrison doesn't write so many scenes where Batman remembres his parents and talks about Gotham's soul and the darkness and the... xD

[Orpheus]

Personally I'm not a fan of either. Morrison had a mission of validating every Batman story while taking Batman back to his globetrotting, James Bond days. I feel like Snyder's Batman stories are more traditional, one of my only real pet peeves with him is that everything has to be so dang meaningful. For me, that gets tiring real fast. Both are obviously good writers but I don't like either writer's take on Batman, I preferred the days when it more like a street crime book like Training Day or Southland.

[son of booyah]

I see Morrison as writing more about the substance of Batman. It seems kind of dry at times to me for this reason, and somewhat constrained by how Batman has already been written. He's really writing Batman stories, formed around other Batman stories, instead of stories that happen to feature Batman.

Snyder writes vibe. I love the feel of his book, the style, and it reads great issue to issue, usually. Doesn't hold up quite as well in binge reading, however; except for the Black Mirror so far. (Nu52) Batman 14, the first DotF issue, is one of my favorite single issues of the character, ever, for example. The event as a whole had its problems. Snyder imo is style over substance, but it's getting better as the run progresses.

If I had to read a single issue, I'd pick one by Snyder. An arc, or even a giant mega-arc like he ended up writing, I'd pick Grant.