Your DC-Only controversial opinions...

[ed2962]

DC should bring back Paradox Press and Minx, but these lines should totally ignore traditional superhero comic book fans. Go after casual book readers...people who read young adult novels, maybe fans of web comics, alternative comics, etc

Promote them outside of normal comic book web sites

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

That's why it's controversial opinion. Check the title of this thread.

Anyway my point stands. I promise you that writers are FAR more reluctant to kill their own characters than to kill those created by other writers. They almost never kill their own creations.

Morrison had no qualms about killing Damian Wayne. As a matter of fact, it was his intention all along to kill him. When asked about Damian's possible resurrection, Morrison stated quite emphatically that if (Damian) does return, it won't me (Morrison) who does it. However, Morrison did say he wouldn't be opposed to Damian coming back if someone really had a good idea for it."It's certainly not going to happen in my story. So all the people that are hoping for a happy ending for Damian can forget it."
http://comicbook.com/blog/2013/03/19...an-wayne-back/

[Trey Strain]

Morrison had no qualms about killing Damian Wayne. As a matter of fact, it was his intention all along to kill him. When asked about Damian's possible resurrection, Morrison stated quite emphatically that if (Damian) does return, it won't me (Morrison) who does it. However, Morrison did say he wouldn't be opposed to Damian coming back if someone really had a good idea for it."It's certainly not going to happen in my story. So all the people that are hoping for a happy ending for Damian can forget it."
http://comicbook.com/blog/2013/03/19...an-wayne-back/

Damian Wayne was created by Mike Barr and Jerry Bingham. Anyway, even if Grant Morrison had created him and killed him, it wouldn't invalidate what I said about writers tending to resist killing their own creations. See my signature.

[Sacred Knight]

Nolan's Batman trilogy is not aging well.

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

Damian Wayne was created by Mike Barr and Jerry Bingham. Anyway, even if Grant Morrison had created him and killed him, it wouldn't invalidate what I said about writers tending to resist killing their own creations. See my signature.

Let's understand what we're talking about here. That unnamed infant in the (Elseworlds) tale Batman: Son of the Demon ( considered out of continuity) was placed into an orphanage and later adopted. Now Grant Morrison took that plot device and created an entire history/background for the child and brought his creation into continuity. Damian Wayne/Robin is on record as a Grant Morrison creation. ( See Batman #655–658). Point being, the notion that creators are reluctant to kill their own characters is disputable. In fact, killing off the protagonist/or an important character is often an integral part of the story. Now, how the writer felt emotionally about killing his/her character is unknown--unless he or she provides that information. Anyway, moving on . . .

[t hedge coke]

Damian Wayne was created by Mike Barr and Jerry Bingham. Anyway, even if Grant Morrison had created him and killed him, it wouldn't invalidate what I said about writers tending to resist killing their own creations. See my signature.

No... if we're playing that route, they just decided that Huntress was a boy and had a different mother.

Or, more reasonably, they created a child for an out-of-continuity story that inspired Morrison to create an in-continuity glass-womb variation on.

Regardless, Morrison has a history of killing his own creations that goes back to before he even wrote for DC. He kills characters he created in Seven Soldiers, JLA, Zenith, Kill Your Boyfriend, The Invisibles, The Filth, New X-Men, The Multiversity, and elsewhere.

Many, many creators kill their own characters, in comics and in other mediums. They do it, often, more than willingly. Some are created to die. Sometimes they just decide it's the best way to go. But, from Jack Kirby to Warren Ellis, there have been creators unafraid to kill characters they've created.

If they couldn't readily bring themselves to kill a character they created, it'd be so much harder to set up any murder mystery without borrowing someone else's character for the decedent.

"I wanted to kill _____ in issue ____ but I chickened out because I love them too much," is a much rarer proposition.

Even though there's textual "evidence" for Jolly Roger surviving in The Invisibles, Morrison maintained, for awhile at least, that she was dead and the art was just wonky. (The art isn't wonky; she lives! Or, so says I, because in what I read, she lived! and the author is wrong.)

[Vinsanity]

Nolan's Batman trilogy is not aging well.

I don't think any Batman movie has. (live-action)

[Sirzechs]

Damian Wayne was created by Mike Barr and Jerry Bingham. Anyway, even if Grant Morrison had created him and killed him, it wouldn't invalidate what I said about writers tending to resist killing their own creations. See my signature.

Damian Wayne the character was created by Grant Morrison, what Mike Barr created was a unnamed son of Bruce, story wasn't even canon.

[ed2962]

I don't think any Batman movie has. (live-action)

I saw Burton's Batman Returns on broadcast TV a couple months ago. I saw it in the theater when it came out and thought it was seriously flawed, but I actually appreciate it more now.

[Vinsanity]

I saw Burton's Batman Returns on broadcast TV a couple months ago. I saw it in the theater when it came out and thought it was seriously flawed, but I actually appreciate it more now.

It's probably the one that has aged the least for some reason.

[ed2962]

It's probably the one that has aged the least for some reason.

Plot wise it makes no sense, but questionable script aside, it has a very striking visual look to it and then there's the sexual and emotional subtext...

[t hedge coke]

The bat-movies I didn't love at first have actually grown on me since then. Batman and Robin, I had to watch with little kids to get into. TDK is still overlong, but it's good, too. Rises has some nice bits.

Batman, Returns, and Forever still work for me on several levels. Not the greatest movies ever, but they look good, there's some good lines, the action is fun, and they've all got some interesting psychosexual subtexts right out in the open.

[Trey Strain]

No... if we're playing that route, they just decided that Huntress was a boy and had a different mother.

Or, more reasonably, they created a child for an out-of-continuity story that inspired Morrison to create an in-continuity glass-womb variation on.

Regardless, Morrison has a history of killing his own creations that goes back to before he even wrote for DC. He kills characters he created in Seven Soldiers, JLA, Zenith, Kill Your Boyfriend, The Invisibles, The Filth, New X-Men, The Multiversity, and elsewhere.

Many, many creators kill their own characters, in comics and in other mediums. They do it, often, more than willingly. Some are created to die. Sometimes they just decide it's the best way to go. But, from Jack Kirby to Warren Ellis, there have been creators unafraid to kill characters they've created.

If they couldn't readily bring themselves to kill a character they created, it'd be so much harder to set up any murder mystery without borrowing someone else's character for the decedent.

"I wanted to kill _____ in issue ____ but I chickened out because I love them too much," is a much rarer proposition.

Even though there's textual "evidence" for Jolly Roger surviving in The Invisibles, Morrison maintained, for awhile at least, that she was dead and the art was just wonky. (The art isn't wonky; she lives! Or, so says I, because in what I read, she lived! and the author is wrong.)

But Grant Morrison blah; blah, blah.

Again, read my signature.

[Lorendiac]

Damian Wayne was created by Mike Barr and Jerry Bingham. Anyway, even if Grant Morrison had created him and killed him, it wouldn't invalidate what I said about writers tending to resist killing their own creations. See my signature.

Let's understand what we're talking about here. That unnamed infant in the (Elseworlds) tale Batman: Son of the Demon ( considered out of continuity) was placed into an orphanage and later adopted. Now Grant Morrison took that plot device and created an entire history/background for the child and brought his creation into continuity. Damian Wayne/Robin is on record as a Grant Morrison creation. ( See Batman #655–658). Point being, the notion that creators are reluctant to kill their own characters is disputable. In fact, killing off the protagonist/or an important character is often an integral part of the story. Now, how the writer felt emotionally about killing his/her character is unknown--unless he or she provides that information. Anyway, moving on . . .

Damian Wayne the character was created by Grant Morrison, what Mike Barr created was a unnamed son of Bruce, story wasn't even canon.

I have to go along with Sirzechs on this one. Morrison made so many changes that he was essentially building a new character from scratch!

In the "Son of the Demon" version, we had this:

1. Batman and Talia spent several months living together (at a headquarters facility being used by Ra's, who had persuaded Batman to work with him on one very important project), and apparently regarding themselves as a romantic couple who were very much in love. Talia explicitly stated she regarded Batman as her husband -- she referred in dialogue to a previous event (in a story scripted by Denny O'Neil way, way back in the 1970s) in which Batman had woken up aboard Ra's al Ghul's yacht and was informed that Talia had accepted him as her husband while he was out cold, which was apparently "legal" according to the rules of some of her ancestors.)

2. During their time together, Talia became pregnant with Bruce's child, and Bruce knew this, and was looking forward to seeing the little whippersnapper get born.

3. Toward the end of the graphic novel, however, Talia indicated to him that she had lost the child (miscarriage or stillbirth was implied, although I don't think she used either word). Batman believed it -- and for some reason this tragedy suddenly broke up their romantic relationship.

4. On the final page, we saw a very happy married couple bringing home their adopted son, which was heavily implied to be the biological child of Talia and Bruce Wayne. The idea appeared to be that Talia had decided that neither she nor her "beloved," living the lifestyles that they did, were really the best choices to give an innocent child a nice, safe, nurturing home environment, in which neither parent was likely to get killed off suddenly, and so she'd decided to make sure the kid had a "normal upbringing" instead with a carefully-screened young couple who, for some reason, couldn't have kids of their own.

That was the Mike Barr version of "Batman's child by Talia."

Now let's move on to the "Batman and Son" version. The following was stated or implied in the way Morrison wrote the first story arc of his big Batman run:

1. Batman had never lived with Talia in anything resembling a "husband and wife" relationship.

2. Batman had never had any reason to think that he could possibly have gotten Talia pregnant.

3. Something had been done by Talia, without Batman's conscious knowledge and consent at the time (he may have been drugged so that he wouldn't remember anything), which allegedly caused her to get pregnant with his child. This something happened in a desert setting after Batman had rejected Talia's suggestion that he voluntarily participate in what he describes as "some depraved eugenics experiment."

4. Instead of the child being put up for adoption to grow up "normally" in a happy, non-violent family environment, the child knew all along that he was Talia's son and Ra's al Ghul's grandson, and was raised in accordance with the proud family tradition of being ready to use lethal force at the drop of a hat to get whatever you wanted. In other words, from a very tender age he was receiving intensive "League of Assassins" training, and he excelled at it.

That was the Grant Morrison version of the concept of "Batman's child by Talia."

To me, that sounds like two different characters, each with a different origin story to explain how he had come into existence in the first place, and with different answers to the basic question of who was entrusted with the responsibility of raising each little rascal from the cradle after Talia had given birth!

What confused the issue (back around 2006) was that it was announced in advance that Grant Morrison would, in fact, be dusting off the baby from the Mike Barr graphic novel . . . and then, when the humongous contradictions became apparent in the published material, Morrison said something to the effect that he actually hadn't bothered to reread the graphic novel in ages and had been "winging it" in a way which contradicted all sorts of details from the material which he had (rather carelessly) claimed to be his inspiration for Damian.

So the way it turned out, I'm inclined to say: "Grant Morrison created a whole different character, who had virtually nothing in common with Mike Barr's version except for the basic point of 'Talia is the mother, and Bruce Wayne is allegedly the father' -- but Grant Morrison did this almost by accident, apparently not even realizing, at first, that he was essentially creating a whole new character!"

[SiegePerilous02]

Plot wise it makes no sense, but questionable script aside, it has a very striking visual look to it and then there's the sexual and emotional subtext...

I've always thought that Returns is a mess (mostly in the middle section), but it's such a fascinating mess that I find it the most compelling of the live action Bat movies by far. Plus it has a Siouxsie and the Banshees song in it, so it automatically trumps the Nolan films for that alone. Gonna have to watch it again this Christmas for sure.