What mainstream Batman idea you personally disagree with?

[Gaius]

I think the only one of the Rogues who have a real approximation of a genuine mental illness is Hatter and Two-Face.

The rest are more a general brand of craziness.

Maybe it’s more of a fan thing but even just branding them as crazy seems to imply it and with writers make Arkham Asylum (the mental asylum) as pretty much the dropping ground for all his villains.

Also another mainstream Batman idea I disagree with, Harley even in the DCAU was not, is not, and will never be sympathetic unless her entire character and premise is reinvented from the ground up ala the Silver Age reinventions of Flash and Green Lantern.

[bat39]

I don't think its that mainstream a notion in general, though I used to see it expressed often on this and other forums, but I don't agree with the idea that Batman necessarily is, or was ever intended to be, some never-ending mission and that he can, or won't, ever quit. It's one of the things I most loved about the Nolanverse - the idea that Bruce had a limited mission as Batman that he actually completed, and was then able to hang up the cowl (only returning to deal with Bane's invasion).

Yeah, I know the way mainstream comics continuity works, Batman can never retire. But he should always work towards the day when he can retire, and its a possibility he always has in mind. And I'm always down for Elseworlds/Black Labels and other adaptations/alternate takes which actually show him retiring.

And yeah, the idea that Batman is some perpetually brooding loner is bullsh#t, but I think over the past decade or two that notion has been debunked pretty thoroughly in the comics and in pop-culture in general.

[Micael]

I don't think its that mainstream a notion in general, though I used to see it expressed often on this and other forums, but I don't agree with the idea that Batman necessarily is, or was ever intended to be, some never-ending mission and that he can, or won't, ever quit. It's one of the things I most loved about the Nolanverse - the idea that Bruce had a limited mission as Batman that he actually completed, and was then able to hang up the cowl (only returning to deal with Bane's invasion).

Yeah, I know the way mainstream comics continuity works, Batman can never retire. But he should always work towards the day when he can retire, and its a possibility he always has in mind. And I'm always down for Elseworlds/Black Labels and other adaptations/alternate takes which actually show him retiring.

And yeah, the idea that Batman is some perpetually brooding loner is bullsh#t, but I think over the past decade or two that notion has been debunked pretty thoroughly in the comics and in pop-culture in general.

Yeah Batman despite the theatrics always seemed to me like a logical person who understands his limitations even though sometimes trough sheer will he's able to overcome them. He knows he can't do it forever especially not at an adequate level if his body and mind because of aging and/or damage accumulation can't perform well. Honestly although some writers like to paint the idea that Bruce never wants any successors and people to continue his crusade I actually believe that's exactly want he want and that's why he has basically recruited an army and formed a huge network of crime fighters in which he can depend on.

[Mutant God]

That Bruce has plans how to take down his friends.

I don't mind it because I don't think he would go through with it or at least some of them.

[Frontier]

Maybe it’s more of a fan thing but even just branding them as crazy seems to imply it and with writers make Arkham Asylum (the mental asylum) as pretty much the dropping ground for all his villains.

Also another mainstream Batman idea I disagree with, Harley even in the DCAU was not, is not, and will never be sympathetic unless her entire character and premise is reinvented from the ground up ala the Silver Age reinventions of Flash and Green Lantern.

They generally don't come off as mentally stable aside from Penguin and Catwoman.

I don't think its that mainstream a notion in general, though I used to see it expressed often on this and other forums, but I don't agree with the idea that Batman necessarily is, or was ever intended to be, some never-ending mission and that he can, or won't, ever quit. It's one of the things I most loved about the Nolanverse - the idea that Bruce had a limited mission as Batman that he actually completed, and was then able to hang up the cowl (only returning to deal with Bane's invasion).

Yeah, I know the way mainstream comics continuity works, Batman can never retire. But he should always work towards the day when he can retire, and its a possibility he always has in mind. And I'm always down for Elseworlds/Black Labels and other adaptations/alternate takes which actually show him retiring.

And yeah, the idea that Batman is some perpetually brooding loner is bullsh#t, but I think over the past decade or two that notion has been debunked pretty thoroughly in the comics and in pop-culture in general.

I think it makes sense in the Nolan movies because, there, he basically "won."

But I'm thinking of I think one of the first issues of Morrison's run where Bruce and Jim are talking and Jim says he picked a never-ending fight with crime and Bruce said "Because I thought I could win."

[Micael]

They generally don't come off as mentally stable aside from Penguin and Catwoman.

I think it makes sense in the Nolan movies because, there, he basically "won."

But I'm thinking of I think one of the first issues of Morrison's run where Bruce and Jim are talking and Jim says he picked a never-ending fight with crime and Bruce said "Because I thought I could win."

Morrison's Batman was essentially trying to "win" with that Batman inc initiative and letting Dick remain as batman pre New 52. I believe he was already planning to retire and only serve in advisor capacity to his allies.

[godisawesome]

They generally don't come off as mentally stable aside from Penguin and Catwoman.

Not being “mentally stable” does not automatically equal criminally insane in the sense of not being responsible for their actions, and there wouldn’t exactly be anything lost by making it clear that the crooks are, by and large, criminals who happen to have a disorder as well, rather than allowing any of the old “criminals because they have a disorder” fallacy.

Joker, Scarecrow, Riddler and most of the others show they’re in complete control of their actions in all their best stories, even if they have twists to their behavior that are atypical. And most of them had that admitted in the bulk of their history - the Asylum only really became a thing in the late 80s. It was a nice gothic trope to employ, but it’s been overused more than anything.

[Frontier]

Morrison's Batman was essentially trying to "win" with that Batman inc initiative and letting Dick remain as batman pre New 52. I believe he was already planning to retire and only serve in advisor capacity to his allies.

I never really got the sense he was planning to retire. He was just evolving the war on crime to the next level, especially with Leviathan in tow.

Not being “mentally stable” does not automatically equal criminally insane in the sense of not being responsible for their actions, and there wouldn’t exactly be anything lost by making it clear that the crooks are, by and large, criminals who happen to have a disorder as well, rather than allowing any of the old “criminals because they have a disorder” fallacy.

Joker, Scarecrow, Riddler and most of the others show they’re in complete control of their actions in all their best stories, even if they have twists to their behavior that are atypical. And most of them had that admitted in the bulk of their history - the Asylum only really became a thing in the late 80s. It was a nice gothic trope to employ, but it’s been overused more than anything.

Well, with Crane and Nigma I'd say they definitely have these crazy compulsions that drive them to commit crimes (and in Riddler's case, sabotage himself) but I also think to some extent Arkham is used nowadays not just as an insane aslyum but because it's seen as a Supervillain prison that can contain the worst Gotham has to offer. That's why Croc and Bane get sent there now.

[adrikito]

I disagree with the belief that the mantle of Batman lives and dies with Bruce Wayne.

Same here. Dick is a good successor. Batman can´t die with Bruce.

Batman Brave Bold Dick and Damian.jpg

[godisawesome]

I never really got the sense he was planning to retire. He was just evolving the war on crime to the next level, especially with Leviathan in tow.

Well, with Crane and Nigma I'd say they definitely have these crazy compulsions that drive them to commit crimes (and in Riddler's case, sabotage himself) but I also think to some extent Arkham is used nowadays not just as an insane aslyum but because it's seen as a Supervillain prison that can contain the worst Gotham has to offer. That's why Croc and Bane get sent there now.

Admittedly, a lot of my opinion here is taste, but I prefer it when Crane doesn’t have a compulsion to cause fear, but is rather just a sadistic sociopath in control fo himself, making him more loathsome for his decision to feed his sadism. It’s not even his sociopathy “driving” him to villainy - he’s still choosing to do so and is completely responsible for his actions.

With Riddler, I’m always a little bit weird, because I actually want him played more controlled and “cooler”; his compulsion for leaving riddles could be a real problem, but I like to think that everything else about his criminality is strictly professional law-breaking.

…And as much as I’m looking forward the Matt Reeves movie, I find myself rolling my eyes at another attempt to make Riddler a serial killer type, even if the Zodiac inspiration is a good take on it. Frank Gershwin inspired a lot of the character’s popularity, but most creators seem to want to take him down Gorshin’s “rival to the Joker” route as opposed to Gorshin’s “stylish mastermind” route… which, since Joker has crept more an more into movie-monster serial killer type, means that most creators get more obsessed with trying to make Riddler “scarier” than the Joker, when really, he should just be smarter,

[Frontier]

Admittedly, a lot of my opinion here is taste, but I prefer it when Crane doesn’t have a compulsion to cause fear, but is rather just a sadistic sociopath in control fo himself, making him more loathsome for his decision to feed his sadism. It’s not even his sociopathy “driving” him to villainy - he’s still choosing to do so and is completely responsible for his actions.

With Riddler, I’m always a little bit weird, because I actually want him played more controlled and “cooler”; his compulsion for leaving riddles could be a real problem, but I like to think that everything else about his criminality is strictly professional law-breaking.

I guess, for me, the more deranged they are, the better. Like, maybe not 100% insane but pretty manic even if they project otherwise.

…And as much as I’m looking forward the Matt Reeves movie, I find myself rolling my eyes at another attempt to make Riddler a serial killer type, even if the Zodiac inspiration is a good take on it. Frank Gershwin inspired a lot of the character’s popularity, but most creators seem to want to take him down Gorshin’s “rival to the Joker” route as opposed to Gorshin’s “stylish mastermind” route… which, since Joker has crept more an more into movie-monster serial killer type, means that most creators get more obsessed with trying to make Riddler “scarier” than the Joker, when really, he should just be smarter,

I've seen people praising that costume but I kind of hate it because it looks nothing like The Riddler.

[Aahz]

I think the only one of the Rogues who have a real approximation of a genuine mental illness is Hatter and Two-Face.

There are a a lot more the Ventriloquist, Victor Zsasz, the Preston Payne version of Clayface, Maxie Zeus...

[LifeIsILL]

I hate in the Arkham games or even Injustice he seems to have no emotion.

He's just one-note, deadpan with generic dialogue such as "where is he?" "follow me" "tell me now!"

That's not Batman at all.

[Tzigone]

The notion that vigilantism in general is some sort of juvenile or stunted response to emotional trauma is also a load of crap within the context of the DCU. Characters in-universe seem to state something to that effect all the time despite it not making a bit of sense from their frame of reference.

Agreed.

I don't like the dark gritty realistic portrayal of Batman. It's fine in adaptations and I have enjoyed those, but the main comics have kid sidekicks, aliens, and sci-fi techs and they want to keep it, and if they want to keep it, it's not a concept that can fit the dark gritty realism.

Agreed.

2. That Batman can’t be happy, sure his life can be rough but I sincerely doubt he’s never been happy with all that he has in life.

Agreed.

Not really directly Batman himself (though he falls under this sometimes) but I don't care for the interpretations of his villains as stand-ins for mental-illnesses.

Agreed.

I disagree with the notion that Bruce has to be the absolute, bestest at everything ever. He should be the world's greatest detective, he doesn't also have to be the world's smartest man, greatest fighter, richest dude on earth, best scientist, and best at everything else.

Definitely agree.

I don't think its that mainstream a notion in general, though I used to see it expressed often on this and other forums, but I don't agree with the idea that Batman necessarily is, or was ever intended to be, some never-ending mission and that he can, or won't, ever quit.

So very much agree. This really does go back to disliking the idea of Bruce not being a real identity or Bruce being mentally/emotionally unhealthy. In his early days, retirement was always in the plan one day. Though for me, then other heroes under their own mantles, which are just as important and meaningful as his take up the fight. I like the idea they aren't always living the role he created, but that each hero creates their own legend. That Dick would no more abandon Nightwing for another title than Bruce would Batman. Especially Dick, really, given the original story (forced though it was by Jason's invention) of him becoming Nightwing.

That Bruce has plans how to take down his friends.

Agreed. It goes back to the dark and gritty and the Batman being the best at everything. Not only should he not have such plans, but he shouldn't be capable of taking them all down.

For something a bit more controversial - I don't care for Alfred as part of Bruce's childhood or raising him. It ties in way too much with Bruce's historically emotionally unhealthy state in the modern era, and I think it is an unhealthy dynamic in his adulthood as well. It reframes his actions/choices around taking Dick (with some versions even having him have to be schooled by Alfred to take an interest) and to me displaced quite a bit of Dick's role as the most-trusted to Alfred.

[Restingvoice]

The plans to take down their friends I'm fine with as a safety precaution considering how many times they got brainwashed in New 52 alone, but it should happen because the others also agree because they all know the danger of their great power and their great enemies

Although Bruce has been defined for so long as being unbearable that the moment I wrote that it sounds like something Titans would do and not him... actually... Titans did have training sessions fighting each other