Gotham will Burn: The Batman Finale Formula

[DUSt]

So, Batman: Arkham Knight was released recently, and is apparently very good (depending on whom you ask). I've looked up some of the Story on the Internet, and I like what I've seen so far (particularly Scarecrow). However, I've been noticing a trend recently among Batman finales since Batman: Eternal concluded, and have just now realised (finales on runs, comic endings, grandiose 'swan-song's, etc.) a pattern formed among stories following Endgame and my reading of Batman, Inc. only solidified my suspicions here. Mind you, these aren't bad things (since tropes are tools and not crutches to avoid), but interesting nonetheless. Be forewarned, this could be quite lengthy and utter nonsense.
Some tropes here might be used in some stories, but not another; these don't apply to every Batman finale, but still appear in most (or at least some).

First off, the main antagonist will try to utterly defeat Batman: not just physically, but mentally and spiritually. They test his resolve and willpower, and do everything in their power to tire and ultimately destroy him and all he holds dear.

Fire is a certain imagery commonly prevalent in the Batman finale. At one point or another, someone might say a variation of the title I have chosen (that being 'Gotham burns'). This is linked with the villain's plan, as flames are notorious for destroying almost anything and everything, leaving very little behind.

These finales might also contain the Joker, or at least his presence is known and serves as a catalyst for other events, such as driving Batman into hiding in 'The Dark Knight Rises', or when the former frames the latter for his suicide in 'The Dark Knight Returns' causing the GCPD to start a manhunt against him.

Also of note, Bruce will hallucinate or have a vision in the story at some point.

Batman himself, or someone close to him, makes an allegiance with his enem[ies] to take down this terrible threat.

All of this builds up to a bombastic climax, where unstoppable objects face down against immovable objects and a battle for the City's soul commences.

Batman, either through sacrifice, falling to another or something else, disappears or might die...

...however, reports of his vanishment would be slightly incorrect. The man behind the suit is still alive and breathing, and the myth of the Batman is eternal.

What do you think of these observations? Thanks to whomever read this, and I hope you have a nice day. Feel free to tell me if I'm incorrect in this assessment.

Bonus points/shot if Jonathan Crane is involved somehow.

[Diggy]

Yea lol, pretty accurate. Just an obvious way to end Batman's story I guess. Now that it's kinda been done to death though I hope we'll see some new versions of the "Bat finale" in the future.

[K. Jones]

That old formula has been the bread & butter of every new Batman writer's thesis ... because they all are trying to write their own Dark Knight Returns.

Seriously before that you didn't see a lot of Gothamageddon. Villains were just trying to commit crimes, live like rebel outlaws, steal jewels and gold, the career criminal dream. Murder, mayhem, escape plans. (Well excepting guys like Ra's al Ghul, or Kobra, who were dealing with Nukes on a regular basis.)

I always liked how Morrison started his run with Batman cleaning up all crime, and ended season one with a Gothamageddon scenario - Batman crushed, Gotham being terrorized by new gangs, Arkham messed with, sidekicks in disarray, and then just jumped into season two ... and then season two ended with a reprise; let's try Gothamageddon again! ... but fancy footwork from Dick, Damian and a time-displaced Bruce and the scenario was averted again ... and then wham, season three, Leviathan attempts Gothamageddon again. And gets into the infrastructure. And shuts the city down. And has a world-killer weapon.

But Batman averts the scenario AGAIN.

[DGraysonWorldsGreatestSpy]

The Gotham burning, Batmaggedon, Battle for the soul of Gotham, Batman greatest test etc. will for me get tiring if another attempt is made at this point. I am fine with all the stories that have done it so far but I have very little interest in another story that threatens to destroy Gotham because it's beyond unoriginal and is closely approaching Camp level foolishness. It cheapens the story when you have another Villian who is trying to destroy Gotham to get at Batman, take over the city, or simply just commit terrorism. Save the world stories are best when they don't occur too often.

I want to see more Detective stories and less War stories and Detective Comics can't fill that void with the way it is structured right now.

I also find Batman stories where he ends the story by being presumed dead, leaving Gotham, or Becoming a Ra's Al Ghul leader to not be true to the core of the character. His oath was to spend his life warring on criminals by becoming a Master Scientist and training himself to absolute perfection where he could perform amazing and almost superhuman feats so him leaving Gotham, faking his Death to live somewhere else, or becoming a shadow warlord does not really make sense. The Dark Knight Returns is a great period piece on Batman but it is almost criminal how that personality of Batman is the one most used in Batman stories. A 55 Bruce Wayne who is estranged from Dick Grayson, when they both swore an Oath to never turn from the righteous path, had Jason die fighting for his cause and basically being in a position where he is worst off than when he started is not a good template for the true character of Batman.

[William300]

I really don't understand have a problem with this as the the finale of big Batman stories. Batman is dedicated to protecting Gotham, he's not like Superman or GL and protects the entire Earth, he's focused on Gotham, it makes complete sense for the big Batman stories to be about the main villain trying to tear Gotham down and Batman having to stop him. His entire mission is to save Gotham. It makes sense to me, and each version of the "Gotham is burning" story has been different enough to satisfy me. That kind of story is the biggest a Batman story should get, unless Ra's is involved.

[DUSt]

I really don't understand have a problem with this as the the finale of big Batman stories. Batman is dedicated to protecting Gotham, he's not like Superman or GL and protects the entire Earth, he's focused on Gotham, it makes complete sense for the big Batman stories to be about the main villain trying to tear Gotham down and Batman having to stop him. His entire mission is to save Gotham. It makes sense to me, and each version of the "Gotham is burning" story has been different enough to satisfy me. That kind of story is the biggest a Batman story should get, unless Ra's is involved.

I don't have a problem with this either, these were just some stray observations I had made that I had also thought would be fun to discuss. I don't think these detract from any of the stories they are utilised in.

And yes, they're not all the same: for example, motivation for trying to crush Batman is different from tale-to-tale, as is method and the enemy Baman allies himself with or becomes.

[bat39]

Yeah, the OP is pretty much right on the money as far as this being the typical form of the 'Batman finale'.

Though there are some significant exceptions. Take Batman Beyond for instance. Bruce's career as Batman ends not with Gotham burning, not with some grand sacrifice, but simply with Bruce being too old and weak to stop a simple kidnapping and being forced to break a lifelong vow and use a gun. I think as far as a finale to Batman goes, its probably the most psychologically powerful one. It isn't some master villain who ends Batman, its simply time and old age, and his own weakening body and spirit. Granted, that kind of ending only works because its actually the beginning of a different story, namely, Terry's.

Its also worth noting that the Earth 2 Batman's ending subverts this formula as well (granted, the Earth 2 Batman's entire career, including the story of his death, precedes DKR, which started the whole "Batman finale" formula). He gets married to Selina, has a kid, gradually phases out of crime-fighting into a normal life and career in law enforcement, and then during one last fight with a villain, is killed in action. No Gotham burning, no end to the Batman legend, no arch-villain tearing down Batman...none of it. Then again, it fits in perfectly with the original Golden Age conception of Batman as a pulp-style adventurer and not this brilliant but disturbed man on a dark and obsessive crusade against injustice (an idea which, while it has its roots in the earliest version of the origin story, has only really been explored and evolved in relatively more 'modern' comics).

[Dark_Tzitzimine]

I really don't understand have a problem with this as the the finale of big Batman stories. Batman is dedicated to protecting Gotham, he's not like Superman or GL and protects the entire Earth, he's focused on Gotham, it makes complete sense for the big Batman stories to be about the main villain trying to tear Gotham down and Batman having to stop him. His entire mission is to save Gotham. It makes sense to me, and each version of the "Gotham is burning" story has been different enough to satisfy me. That kind of story is the biggest a Batman story should get, unless Ra's is involved.

The problem is when we have many of those stories in a row (Snyder's current run is the biggest offender) since it takes the impact of it and starts straining the suspension of belief in the readers.

[Radix]

The problem is when we have many of those stories in a row (Snyder's current run is the biggest offender) since it takes the impact of it and starts straining the suspension of belief in the readers.

That is the biggest part of it. If we had Batmeggedon every 10 years or so to finish a big run, sure. But as of now we have had: Zero Year; the Night of Owls; Endgame; Eternal; Arkham War; and probably others i have missed. And that is just in the past 3 years. I mean Endgame and Eternal were happening simultaneously for Doom's sake. It really cheapens the danger when Gotham is always in danger of being completely destroyed. Superman doesnt have it as often and if anyone is justified with these stakes, its him.

[William300]

Yea the "War over Gotham" events do need to be spaced out, I've loved Snyder's run, but a little breathing room would be nice.