Is Batman Broken?

[Bl00dwerK]

Prof. Wayne, your class is waiting...

[DevilBat66]

I still dig Batman but the amount of teen sidekicks is ludicrous to me. Especially after the "death" of Jason. That really should have been it for "Robins".

I like having more heroes in Gotham than Batman but I would much rather they were unique characters that stood on their own. I would easily trade The Creeper or Wildcat for the teen brigade.

[JBatmanFan05]

I cannot help but feel that Batman comics have lost their path: that they have become too bogged down with making new sidekicks and have warped the character into a grown adult who spends all of his time fighting crime with a bunch of teenagers. It takes me out of the character and makes me question if this is the same character that got me into comics in the first place or if Batman comics are now a proxy for teenage superheroes.

I am fine with Batman having a teenage sidekick, it is an established part of his mythos, but right now the Batman books are so kid focus that they are nearly unrecognizable to me. I know that this is nothing new and that the Bat-family was still pretty bloated in the '90's and '00's with Cass, Tim, Steph, etc., but this issue has worsened as they continue to add more and more teenage characters to the Batman mythos.

I know that some people believe that a solo Batman has to be a "Bat-Dick" Batman that ignores his allies, but I disagree. I think that Batman can be written well without an entourage of undeveloped sidekicks. I feel as though Rebirth has been a missed opportunity to restore Batman to his more solitary roots, but they continue to push a team teenagers in Detective Comics and Duke in All-Star Batman and possibly King's Batman. It has entirely taken me out of the character and entirely changed my perception of the modern Batman.

I can't say I myself noticed this complaint until this thread was started, but I do think it's a fair complaint and it does seem harder and harder and more annoying to keep up with the new names in the Batfam. Harper, Duke, etc...and I can't say DC is having as much success with them as they might think (how many readers or posters do you know that give much of a care about them really?). Let's face it, a lot of these new sidekicks are just pet projects for writers looking too hard to leave their lasting mark by creating a new character.

To be clear, I'm fine with a Batfam, it's part of the mythos (thanks to the Bronze Age & before). I think the the '90's and '00's added some worthy characters to it (some less than worthy too, but they didn't last long, the lesser ones).

Question: Is the solution more solo less-fam Batman books, or much less Batfam in the Batuniverse via killings or relocations or retirements?

See I think this is more an editor issue of just having more more solo less-fam Batman titles. I think you can leave characters out there and just not use them (but hey, some writer might find some inspired use for them down the road).

It has entirely taken me out of the character and entirely changed my perception of the modern Batman.

I will say though that if you think characters need to be killed or relocated or retired to have you taken back in by Batman, just realistically, you can expect to continue to feel taken out. Because I don't see the Batfam size & composition changing dramatically anytime soon. Creatively and businesswise, DC is gonna continue to allow or even push for new creations in the mythos. Batman comics are so popular that DC will want to see if they can create new popular licensable characters by merely attaching them to Batman.


All in all I'm saying that Batman isn't broken. But the status quo in the comics isn't perfect either (is it ever?). The editors should give solo Batman (I presume the core cast for such comics would be Alfred, Jim, Batman) more attention again. And maybe give some newer lesser Batfam members a rest.

(of course, I say this not knowing precisely how prevalent the Batfam will be in King's Batman and Snyder's All-Star...for all I know, the books could feel quite solo-y)

[Guardian]

This is exactly my main issue with Batman too, I never liked all the sidekicks and Robins. I realize that the Robins and this whole Bat family are important to many readers but I for one was always bored by those stories and liked Batman always more in the Justice League comics or when he was alone. I will still get this new Batman run, at least for a while because I want to see where they are headed.

[Pohzee]

Question: Is the solution more solo less-fam Batman books, or much less Batfam in the Batuniverse via killings or relocations or retirements?

See I think this is more an editor issue of just having more more solo less-fam Batman titles. I think you can leave characters out there and just not use them (but hey, some writer might find some inspired use for them down the road).

It will probably sound like an entitled complaint (something like: "If I don't want it, no one can have it!") but I do believe that their existence changes Batman himself. It doesn't matter if they are alive or dead, active or retired, used or unused, well utilized or written poorly. There is very little that can be done about it now. I used the word "broken" in the title of this thread not because I dislike the direction of Batman comics and want it changed, but because I believe that the circumstances of this continuity have altered Batman as a character from what has made him so popular in the mainstream. The fact that Batman has taken in and associates with so many kids changes the very perception of the character. Nothing short of a retcon would change this.

I get that this new Batman is not for me and I probably won't read it. I don't expect DC comics to move Heaven and Earth to fit my perception of their fictional character, but I do believe that Batman has been fundementally changed as a character by this mass creation of teenage sidekicks. I don't mind the Bat-Family, I enjoy a smaller, more focused one, it is this glut of teenage characters has really turned me off of the Bat-Line.

[JBatmanFan05]

I used the word "broken" in the title of this thread not because I dislike the direction of Batman comics and want it changed, but because I believe that the circumstances of this continuity have altered Batman as a character from what has made him so popular in the mainstream. The fact that Batman has taken in and associates with so many kids changes the very perception of the character. Nothing short of a retcon would change this.

There's a good deal I could say about this, but I would caution you to not be so sure about what makes Batman popular in the mainstream. I might have to say you're perhaps too focused on Nolan's films and BvS and ignoring all the other popular media showing the Batfam (Batman within a Batfam (of teen sidekicks))...from pre-Nolan films to animated films, animated shows (BTAS was very popular), very popular video games, 60s show, of course the comics, etc. I have no evidence to back this up, but I think over time you'll see more and more popular fan desire for including Robins and etc into the movie blockbusters and live action shows.

So what I mean to say is that what makes Batman so popular in the mainstream might not be a black and white thing where solo Batman is the answer.

I get that this new Batman is not for me and I probably won't read it. I don't expect DC comics to move Heaven and Earth to fit my perception of their fictional character, but I do believe that Batman has been fundementally changed as a character by this mass creation of teenage sidekicks. I don't mind the Bat-Family, I enjoy a smaller, more focused one, it is this glut of teenage characters has really turned me off of the Bat-Line.

I guess I'm confused because you seem to being saying the BatFam has not fundamentally changed Batman (you like the Bat-Fam) and also that it has....chiefly based on the size. What's the line? The size changes a bit a good deal. I feel like a fam is a fam and if a fam alone doesn't fundamentally change Batman then a larger or smaller one doesn't really "fundamentally" change Batman either. "Fundamentally" should really mean a lot I should think. By adding Tim or Damian...was Batman fundamentally changed forever? I don't think so myself.

[Pohzee]

There's a good deal I could say about this, but I would caution you to not be so sure about what makes Batman popular in the mainstream. I might have to say you're perhaps too focused on Nolan's films and BvS and ignoring all the other popular media showing the Batfam (Batman within a Batfam (of teen sidekicks))...from pre-Nolan films to animated films, animated shows (BTAS was very popular), very popular video games, 60s show, of course the comics, etc. I have no evidence to back this up, but I think over time you'll see more and more popular fan desire for including Robins and etc into the movie blockbusters and live action shows.

So what I mean to say is that what makes Batman so popular in the mainstream might not be a black and white thing where solo Batman is the answer.

Batman '66, B:TAS,and the Arkham Games used a smaller Bat-Family. In TAS, there were two Robins (one introduced in the final season) and a Batgirl. In the Arkham games, there were three Robins (one presumed dead) and a Batgirl. All of whom were adults, even Robin. I'm not arguing against a Bat-Family, I'm arguing against a bloated one comprised mainly of kids. Robin is a staple to the Batman franchise, as are probably Nightwing and some form of Barbara Gordon (Batgirl, Oracle, or otherwise.) Spoiler, Lark, Red Robin, etc. are not. Most of them depend more on the popularity of Batman than he benefits from it. Individually, they may be interesting, but taken as a whole they subtract from the image of Batman.

I can see people wanting a Robin, Batgirl, Nightwing, and maybe a Red Hood in other media, but not much more than that. Movies certainly can't support 11 characters in one film, though a TV show might, though with 10 teenagers it would end up more cluttered and melodramatic than Arrow.

[JackDaw]

Don't agree with the original premise that Batman has always been a dark brooding forbidding figure. Several versions have been nothing like that.

For example, the blessed Batman of the Bob Haney/ Jim Aparo wonder years was basically an affable and friendly guy. And the Adam West tv version was soft as a pussy cat. And both were successful.

And does size of family really stop anybody being dark and menacing? Plenty of Mafia guys have large families!

Present version of Batman is not one I like...but it transparently works. The comics sell well, and average story quality is good.

[Darkspellmaster]

There's a good deal I could say about this, but I would caution you to not be so sure about what makes Batman popular in the mainstream. I might have to say you're perhaps too focused on Nolan's films and BvS and ignoring all the other popular media showing the Batfam (Batman within a Batfam (of teen sidekicks))...from pre-Nolan films to animated films, animated shows (BTAS was very popular), very popular video games, 60s show, of course the comics, etc. I have no evidence to back this up, but I think over time you'll see more and more popular fan desire for including Robins and etc into the movie blockbusters and live action shows.

So what I mean to say is that what makes Batman so popular in the mainstream might not be a black and white thing where solo Batman is the answer.

Agreeing here. As someone who grew up reading during the time of Tim as Robin and there being several additional people in the bat family I tend to feel the more characters you have around Bruce the less Brooding and overly angry the character is and the more interesting you can make him in regard to interacting with others. The problem with a Batman that is a solo character is that you always have to have him have no connections. He has to always feel that he's failing in some way, that he never makes a difference, that he can't be "Normal" in a sense. Over time that sort of batman brings down the readers, that's why Tim was brought in, because Fans at the time were becoming annoyed with "MY PARENTS ARE DEAD! MY GIRLFRIEND IS DEAD! MY SIDEKICK IS DEAD! DICK LEFT ME! BABS IS IN A CHAIR! THE COMMISIONER IS MAD AT ME! I FEEL PAIN!!!!!" type of Batman. Tim said it best that he wanted to be around to pull Bruce out of that darkness because after some time he wouldn't have been able to cope with his own feelings. This is why I think people like a larger family. Bruce is some what relatable, but not always, and because of that you need people like Dick, or Babs, or Kate, or Steph, or tim, or Cass, or Duke, or Damian, or Harper, or Luke, or whomever wants to help out being in the picture. It gives him a focus away from the "BAT-PAIN" that he's supposed to feel, and also for viewers or readers someone who's not in a state where they need a lot of therapy.

I guess I'm confused because you seem to being saying the BatFam has not fundamentally changed Batman (you like the Bat-Fam) and also that it has....chiefly based on the size. What's the line? The size changes a bit a good deal. I feel like a fam is a fam and if a fam alone doesn't fundamentally change Batman then a larger or smaller one doesn't really "fundamentally" change Batman either. "Fundamentally" should really mean a lot I should think. By adding Tim or Damian...was Batman fundamentally changed forever? I don't think so myself.

Confuses me too and I agree. The only differences is that it gave Bruce some Hope, unless people really love depressed and needs to be popping pills to keep him self going Batman, then I guess that would annoy them.

[JBatmanFan05]

I'm not arguing against a Bat-Family, I'm arguing against a bloated one comprised mainly of kids.

I see what you mean. I myself won't go as far to say the sometimes/oftimes bloated nature of the Batfam has "fundamentally" changed the character, because he's long had multiple teens in the fam starting with Dick and Babs (then Jason). I can agree the bloating may hurt the character, but not fundamentally change him (requiring retcons).

And I definitely wouldn't need retcons to fix Batman's status quo...just not using characters and writing some out would be fine with me. The ebbs and flows in his past of more and less characters in the Batfam is fine and marks each period for us.


I think a "Year One" set title might be exactly what might appeal to you. I love those myself because they're such solo Batman tales (noticeably different from all the post-Robin stuff we mostly read every month). Maybe Legends of the Dark Knight should be revived (and this time not as a digital short issue thing).

[Pohzee]

I see what you mean. I myself won't go as far to say the sometimes/oftimes bloated nature of the Batfam has "fundamentally" changed the character, because he's long had multiple teens in the fam starting with Dick and Babs (then Jason). I can agree the bloating may hurt the character, but not fundamentally change him (requiring retcons).

And I definitely wouldn't need retcons to fix Batman's status quo...just not using characters and writing some out would be fine with me. The ebbs and flows in his past of more and less characters in the Batfam is fine and marks each period for us.


I think a "Year One" set title might be exactly what might appeal to you. I love those myself because they're such solo Batman tales (noticeably different from all the post-Robin stuff we mostly read every month). Maybe Legends of the Dark Knight should be revived (and this time not as a digital short issue thing).

Woulda been nice if ASB was like this to differentiate itself from the main Batman title, but based on the Duke backups, I don't think that it will be.

I'd be down for stories with Dick as Robin too. There haven't been many good ones for a while.

[Aioros22]

I agree with some of this... but certainly not all.

First, Batman has always been inconsistent with readers. There's this theory that Batman is some lone vigilante... But that's not true. It really was never true. Batman was introduced in Detective Comics 27 1939. Robin was introduced in Detective Comics 38 1940. There were ELEVEN issues with Batman as a lone vigilante...Only eleven months solo... and SEVENTY SIX YEARS with as a part of the Dynamic Duo. There were more issues where Superman couldn't fly then there were of Batman pre-Robin. Not to mention his stints on team books like JSA and JLA.

THAT said... I do believe they went WAY too far. The perfect Batfamily for me, was in the 80's and 90's. Batman. Nightwing. Batgirl/Oracle. Robin (Tim) Honorable mention Alfred... and Jason Todd as a dead memory. There really wasn't any story they couldn't tell with that as a core 'team'. Huntress would occasionally show up, but she was an outsider (not Batman's other team ).

I don`t agree with all your points. This team you just mention at the core can only go in few ways storytelling wise. Think of RPG terms. They don`t bring the gravita, background or tragedy that Jason or Damian do. While I agree that there`s alot of characters to juggle now, let`s recall that Huntress was indeed sort of part of that group, as it was Azrael and Catwoman. You need emotional/psycological variety to add to the good kids. Otherwise they all read the same.

Batman almost surely benefits the most from a smaller staff, since he gets to do the character heavy lifting, which may be your point, but the franchise in contrast suffers from it: how many different books with "Batman" can we take? And how does Gotham expand if you only see it from one lense, even from the side of angels?

Think about the Arrow guys. There`s Canary, there`s Speedy (both male and female), there`s Ollie and Hawke, but there`s also Shado and now her daugther. It`s a family. It won`t work if all think the same way and Barbara, Tim and Dick certainly think too similarly already.

There needs to be a better balance, however. Jason adds a voice the others will never have because not one of them has experienced this life they way he did. But if you ask me about Harper Row, well, you got Tim Drake already. She doesn`t add something new/else.

Robin was all he really needed. Dick started the role, Jason failed the role, Tim learned from both and perfected the role.

Batgirl came later but she certainly filled a niche Dick couldn`t, even with the shaved legs.

What did Jason failed at?

[JBatmanFan05]

Woulda been nice if ASB was like this to differentiate itself from the main Batman title, but based on the Duke backups, I don't think that it will be.

I'd be down for stories with Dick as Robin too. There haven't been many good ones for a while.

I have no idea, but the backups might not relate to the main story in ASB, so you might wait to see if that's the situation and if that is a suitable enough compromise for that title.

[SicariiDC]

Its not something I may have consciously realized but pretty much yes to op. I liked Snyders run and Morrison's before it very very much. But to me, Batman is legends of the dark knight early stories. And the direction his books are moving is the exact opposite.

I thinks that's why I'm most interested in All-star and Tom king, while many people look forward to 'tec...idk, it's just stupid to me. I like the eternals but it doesn't have to be constantly like that. I'm hoping for something more like original Batman comes along

[phantom1592]

There were periods throughout Batman's history where he operated alone. In the Bronze Age (the best set up, IMO), Robin and Batgirl were recurring characters that mostly featured in back up stories while Batman was by himself in the main feature. B:TAS was heavily modeled after this period, which is why many of the episodes didn't feature Robin at all until Timm and co. were forced by the network to put him in more often. Plus, there was the Tim Burton films and the Batmania of that period, and Burton ultimately rejected putting Robin in. And it killed it at the box office, with Batman's reputation as being a darker character finally being restored. Nolan refused to use any sidekicks as well, and the Dark Knight was still a phenomenon.

Not really from the late 60s when Dick went of the collage untill the early 80s when Jason appeared, Batman was for the most part a solo hero.
And Stories were Bruce and Tim act as Dynamic Duo are very rare, especially after Knightfall.
And Bruce and Damian hardly ever act as Dynamic Duo, even in "Batman and Robin" Damian was mostly working alone, and in most other Batman titles Damian hardly ever appears.

This is true. there are always writers trying to go back and push the lone vigilante concept. However my point was that, that claiming this was his 'core principle' was a falsehood. For just as long as there has been Batman... there has been 'Batman and Robin'. The terms themselves are like peanut butter and Jelly. It's not like Superman/Supergirl or Krypto... it's not like Aquaman and Aqualad... Robin was a MAJOR part of Batman's history, and even when the comics did have him go to college in the 70's, he was still a back up strip, in the Titans, and all over the cartoons.

I can't say I myself noticed this complaint until this thread was started, but I do think it's a fair complaint and it does seem harder and harder and more annoying to keep up with the new names in the Batfam. Harper, Duke, etc...and I can't say DC is having as much success with them as they might think (how many readers or posters do you know that give much of a care about them really?). Let's face it, a lot of these new sidekicks are just pet projects for writers looking too hard to leave their lasting mark by creating a new character.

To be clear, I'm fine with a Batfam, it's part of the mythos (thanks to the Bronze Age & before). I think the the '90's and '00's added some worthy characters to it (some less than worthy too, but they didn't last long, the lesser ones).

Question: Is the solution more solo less-fam Batman books, or much less Batfam in the Batuniverse via killings or relocations or retirements?

See I think this is more an editor issue of just having more more solo less-fam Batman titles. I think you can leave characters out there and just not use them (but hey, some writer might find some inspired use for them down the road).



I will say though that if you think characters need to be killed or relocated or retired to have you taken back in by Batman, just realistically, you can expect to continue to feel taken out. Because I don't see the Batfam size & composition changing dramatically anytime soon. Creatively and businesswise, DC is gonna continue to allow or even push for new creations in the mythos. Batman comics are so popular that DC will want to see if they can create new popular licensable characters by merely attaching them to Batman.


All in all I'm saying that Batman isn't broken. But the status quo in the comics isn't perfect either (is it ever?). The editors should give solo Batman (I presume the core cast for such comics would be Alfred, Jim, Batman) more attention again. And maybe give some newer lesser Batfam members a rest.

(of course, I say this not knowing precisely how prevalent the Batfam will be in King's Batman and Snyder's All-Star...for all I know, the books could feel quite solo-y)

Honestly, I'm not a huge fan of bloodbaths... however, I REALLY think there should be some sidekick deaths... and KEEP them dead. Jason was such a wonderful win for Joker. It propelled him up far and away to the #1 spot in villandom. It created a terror for the other sidekicks. It created a burning hatred in Batman. It made everything personal.

Downside... Anyone they killed now, I either would REALLY miss (Dick, Tim, Barbara) or Not care at all about (Harper, Duke, etc.) Damian was already killed... Jason was killed, Steph was killed... they all came back. Honestly, i'd like to see someone OTHER then the Joker get a solid win on some of these lesser sidekicks. I just played Arkham Knight and it makes Scarecrow a serious threat... Let him kill off someone? Let Two Face get a hit in... Let someone OTHER then Joker be a real threat for a change.

Batgirl came later but she certainly filled a niche Dick couldn`t, even with the shaved legs.

What did Jason failed at?

Surviving. He was the one who failed at the training. He became known as the angry one... the reckless one... the one who showed all the others what happens if you don't follow orders and that specter hung over the cave for years with that trophy case.

Bringing him back? It really negated so much of what he was great at. Now he leans less from 'poor kid who got in over his head....' to 'jerkface who kinda deserved it.'