is Batman: The Dark Knight (New 52) really that bad?

[Forever Knight]

I'm going to be reading this series soon but I've heard many bad things about it. Was it cancelled and what was so wrong about it compared to the other Batman titles (Batman, Detective Comics, Batman & Robin)?

[taylortexas]

Yeah, it was cancelled after a fairly long run. I don't remember it being all that terrible, just inferior to all of the other Batman books at the time. It really wasn't good enough to justify having a fourth book dedicated solely to Batman. It largely revolved around updating some B-list villains' origins for the New 52 and I do remember appreciating that even if it wasn't always the most compelling stuff. It has dumb moments: creating a new villain that seems like it's going to matter but never does, a really underdeveloped love interest for Bruce that I felt nothing for, and perhaps worst of all... ONE-FACE.

It's not anything offensive but it's also not particularly memorable at all. It was just that other other Batman book and if you're just looking for something new to read it's fine enough. Someone may have a stronger opinion about it.

[MajorHoy]

I'm going to be reading this series soon but I've heard many bad things about it. Was it cancelled and what was so wrong about it compared to the other Batman titles (Batman, Detective Comics, Batman & Robin)?

It was a book that got off to a bad start, then seemed to flounder for a bit. As for what was so wrong about it and why it was cancelled, part of the problem was focus and lack of history. "Detective Comics" and "Batman" were previously long-established titles, and "Batman &* Robin" could focus more on Damian. "Batman: The Dark Knight" was low man on the totem pole, and it also became a problem when DC was going to have Batman Eternal as a weekly Bat-title.
(And, personally, I wasn't that thrilled by the work Gregg Hurwitz did as the writer on his first arc with Scarecrow.)

[WillieMorgan]

Well, it had an inauspicious start. The first seven or eight issues (not sure exactly) were written by David Finch and Paul Jenkins. It's an extremely underdeveloped plot that at it's heart involves villains and Arkham inmates being infected by a new serum that's a cross between the Scarecrows' fear toxin and Venom. We also get a mysterious (and rather gratuitous!) protagonist lurking behind the scenes called the White Rabbit who MAY be linked to a new love interest of Bruce Wayne. None of it makes much sense and, to be honest, the title at this stage was more of a showcase vehicle for Finch's artwork than anything else. One of the issues ends on one of the corniest cliff-hangers in Batman history:



Shudder. The title improved after a 'Night Of The Owls' crossover. Gregg Hurwitz took over the writing duties, discarded everything established in the title so far (not much), and repurposed the comic into a number of story arcs that reimagined and retold the origins of different members of Batman's Rogues Gallery (The Scarecrow, Mad Hatter and Clayface with a little Man-Bat thrown in also). This is a much better run on the comic, although not exactly essential. Some of the later issues were superbly drawn by Alex Maleev if I remember correctly. The title was doomed the minute that DC greenlit 'Batman Eternal'.

Unless you're a completist you may want to skip the first trade and start from Volume 2.

[Nite-Wing]

It wasn't that bad
I remember really liking it because it was very much the book where all of Batman's villain could show up.
It also had some nice moments littered around
People tend to judge the whole book based on the finch art and crazy first arc

[t hedge coke]

I had quite a lot of fun until Finch and Jenkins were both gone. It was, while unusually violent, especially, sometimes, in cover alone, it also had one of the most human DCnU Batman portrayals. He dated. He hugged kids. He talked to people.

But, even while I was having fun, something would happen that would bug me. The amount of editorial sabotage and silliness going on explains a lot.

"Batman can't sit."

"Batman doesn't save people."

Et cetera.

[Forever Knight]

Thanks. I will give the first 2 volumes a shot for now to see the differences.

[Timber Wolf-By-Night]

Wait, wait, wait. "Batman doesn't save people."

How on earth was that piece of alleged logic justified?

[TheNewFiftyForum]

It was a book that got off to a bad start, then seemed to flounder for a bit. As for what was so wrong about it and why it was cancelled, part of the problem was focus and lack of history. "Detective Comics" and "Batman" were previously long-established titles, and "Batman &* Robin" could focus more on Damian. "Batman: The Dark Knight" was low man on the totem pole, and it also became a problem when DC was going to have Batman Eternal as a weekly Bat-title.
(And, personally, I wasn't that thrilled by the work Gregg Hurwitz did as the writer on his first arc with Scarecrow.)

It was conceived as a vanity title for David Finch to both write and draw as a way to lure him from Marvel, but never really found a stronger raison d'être than that. The issues pre-Hurwitz were not very good and storywise often hastily thrown together comics that only offered thin strands of story to connect cool looking scenes that Finch wanted to draw, while the rest of it had it's moments but invariably went too long and gory.

[t hedge coke]

Wait, wait, wait. "Batman doesn't save people."

How on earth was that piece of alleged logic justified?

I don't think any of the editorial diktats were "justified," or that there was even much attempt. Jenkins and Finch walked off the comic. Who walks off a Batman gig? People can't have Batman sit down or save people. Or, who're told that the Flash can guest star, but then drawing an arbitrary line as to where and when he can run really fast.

Considering how annoying making that comic must have become, I'm glad they got as much quality - even shaky quality - as they did.

[Majesty]

Is the New52 Still doing that whole "Batman can't remember who he is and Alfred refuses to tell him he was Batman" lost memory, fish out of water, crap?

[MajorHoy]

Is the New52 Still doing that whole "Batman can't remember who he is and Alfred refuses to tell him he was Batman" lost memory, fish out of water, crap?

It will wrap up soon. (Issue #50 is the conclusion of that arc.)

[Majesty]

It will wrap up soon. (Issue #50 is the conclusion of that arc.)

Good to hear. I wonder if it will cause a huge fallout between him and Alfred.

[batnbreakfast]

Good to hear. I wonder if it will cause a huge fallout between him and Alfred.

Hopefully not. Been there, done that pre N52 (in the movies as well). Alfred is integral and one of the mythologies best parts.

[Forever Knight]

So post issue 50 will Bruce return to being Batman or what?

I expect issue 50 of Batman and of Justice League to be over-sized issues.