Batman Knightfall Review (Canon Read Through #39)

[darkseidpwns]

Eh, maybe a semantical point. I disagree. DC treated them more like events, with checklists and numbering and all, all built around some shocking development to Batman's world (which IMHO New 52 did not do, wasn't built around Batman breaking his back or dying or killing Joker, New 52 was built on events outside of Batman's orbit (that you didn't even know happened until Rebirth), it was a reboot more than anything).

But Knightfall and NML weren't designed for a quick cash grab, they really wanted to do something with legs. The other events just happen and then next issue everyone forgets about it.

[JBatmanFan05]

But Knightfall and NML weren't designed for a quick cash grab, they really wanted to do something with legs. The other events just happen and then next issue everyone forgets about it.

I still don't agree. They were a cash grab like everything else (genius ones in that they wanted you to feel like you had to buy every title in the Bat line). They were events conceived to end with a return to status quo. And when they ended? Characters moved on with little/token/insignficant mention under new writers. They were events like Legends, like Millennium, like Invasion!, etc. No events were totally forgotten afterwards by every writer. They all got some minor mention afterward.

http://crushingkrisis.com/crushing-c...reading-order/

Common parlance has Knightfall and Death of Superman, etc as "events" or "crossover events." They may be a status quo of sorts for a bit, but that doesn't mean they're not primarily "events" to me. New 52 was a reboot, a new status quo following the event called Flashpoint.

[millernumber1]

You raise a lot of very fair points. I do think maybe writers have different lines they are less willing to cross nowadays. More artistic protectiveness or something (I could probably find a more derogatory way to describe it). And so I do wonder if the top writers would be willing to work together in a Knightfall/NML way. I think DC should try one again though. And the writers should embrace the challenge. This is the Rebirth era, a more classic retro age for DC. Trying such a truly collaborative story event again would be by now practically fresh and new (and frankly shocking), and a classic nostalgic call back to the 90s.

I'm not asking for these to become regular or widespread for DC, that may be a bad move. But will Batman comics really just be a series of writer runs forevermore and that's it (aside from Eternal like corners)? That'd be a shame IMHO. Same old, same old forevermore is what that is.

A modern Knightfall doesn't have to eat the entire Bat-line to meet my thirst for such an event, I'm open to compromise. If (very very hypothetically) Batman (Tom King) & Tec (Scott Snyder) and one or two other books (or maybe even not) did a years long main event story, that'd be close enough for me I think.

If you were going for a derogatory term, I'd say that the current writers, at least the current stars (King and Snyder) just aren't willing to play well with others. I hate to say it about two men who are incredibly kind and gracious to fans, but they want to write in their own little bubbles, and don't care that their titles should be interacting and setting the tone for the rest of the Bat-books. DC did its darndest to make Snyder's run work in that way, with the Night of the Owls, Death of the Family, Endgame tie-ins/crossover issues, but Snyder himself did nothing to help anyone - all the other writers were given their marching orders and had to play or get out.

I agree that it would be nice if DC tried it again - though I do think that Eternal is probably the template for how that would go, rather than something eating the Bat-line.

Knightfall and NML weren't events, they were simply a new status quo much like the Post RIP-New 52 .

Technically, the status quo of Superheavy fits the kind of Knightfall/NML/RIP/Batman Inc type of status quo you're talking about. It's just really clear that 1) Snyder's story grew plot tumors; 2) Snyder refused to write space in his story for other writers to actually interact meaningfully with the status quo; 3) DC, again, was trying their hardest to make the status quo fit in a Knightfall/Batman Reborn type way, but I don't think it was super successful. I liked reading Superheavy, but I didn't read Tec at the time, and mostly was just reading Batgirl, Grayson, and Batman and Robin Eternal, none of which really connected to the status quo outside of one or two references in isolated issues. Batgirl was probably the closest, since her dad was Batman, and the two-issue guest star by Jim, and then the way Fletcher used the Bat-Bunny suits as plot points several times was pretty well integrated, but the rest of it was just pretty superficial.

But Knightfall and NML weren't designed for a quick cash grab, they really wanted to do something with legs. The other events just happen and then next issue everyone forgets about it.

I mean, they were longer than a month, but they were still relatively quick, and designed to grab cash. I think it's more a question of scale rather than a difference in kind.

Also...I mean, people remember NML and Knightfall, but I don't think they really changed that much. Status quo pretty much reset a year later. You have things like Rucka's New Gotham thematic push in Detective for the year after NML, but for the most part, there wasn't that much continuation other than the changes in relationships that occurred in those events. Basically, I pretty much agree with JBatmanFan.

[godisawesome]

NMl, Knightfall, and other such 90's events/landmark stories may be more the creation of a near perfect symbiosis of strong journeyman writers and near perfect editor-writers like Denny O'Neill. You get someone like him in charge of a line of books with the write kind of writers underneath him, and you can really get incredible coordination and high consistency week-to-week. DC used to have that. The closest they've got now is stuff like Eternal, where someone like Snyder is the overseer, but it's not as perfected since he's still doing heavy lifting on his own books.

Currently, editorial at DC is either more like skilled management (Mark Doyle) or to into interfering in good stories.

[millernumber1]

NMl, Knightfall, and other such 90's events/landmark stories may be more the creation of a near perfect symbiosis of strong journeyman writers and near perfect editor-writers like Denny O'Neill. You get someone like him in charge of a line of books with the write kind of writers underneath him, and you can really get incredible coordination and high consistency week-to-week. DC used to have that. The closest they've got now is stuff like Eternal, where someone like Snyder is the overseer, but it's not as perfected since he's still doing heavy lifting on his own books.

Currently, editorial at DC is either more like skilled management (Mark Doyle) or to into interfering in good stories.

That's very true. You need a combination of writers who work well together (which I think, given the right framework, Snyder and King can do - with Tynion or Seeley), and an artistic vision. I think you're right that right now we have good managers of people without an artistic or narrative vision that I can see (I've not heard Doyle come out with anything, and his subordinates like Chris Conroy, Dave Wielgosz, or Rebecca Taylor don't have writing credits that I'm aware of. Marie Javins does, but I don't think she's on the Batline outside of special projects.

I'm really curious if what we really need is writer-editors again, but ones who know how to be a good editor as well as push a creative vision across a group of titles.

[godisawesome]

There might be a trade off between the two styles: the editor-creator may be better for the journeyman writer who need some protection while they work out their flaws, while the editor-manager is probably better for letting guys like Morrison, Snyder, and even King just get off the leash.

[millernumber1]

Better than the editor-writer who is prone to pushing their own disastrous creative endeavors out, like Coundown and One More Day.

[Scott Taylor]

In modern times, you could compare Knightfall a little more to Dick's time as Batman rather than to something like Eternal.

[millernumber1]

That's not really modern, though. It's almost a decade ago.

Eternal didn't have the same impact on the Bat-line - I still say Superheavy is the closest the n52 came to having that kind of coordinated event change of status quo - but it is the closest in execution, being a bunch of different writers working together on a year long storyline.

[JBatmanFan05]

Eternal didn't have the same impact on the Bat-line - I still say Superheavy is the closest the n52 came to having that kind of coordinated event change of status quo - but it is the closest in execution, being a bunch of different writers working together on a year long storyline.

Eternal fails on impact. Superheavy fails on Snyder (like with all his "tie-in-overs" as I call them) showing clear disinterest (and likely ignorance of) every other book in the line using GordonBats (or insert the event's subject matter).

[millernumber1]

Well, yes. That's what I said.

I still love Eternal, and like the Year of JimBats pretty well.

[JBatmanFan05]

I still love Eternal, and like the Year of JimBats pretty well.

I kinda like Eternal in that it's a good Cluemaster tale, the best we're likely to see for a long time perhaps. I actually really enjoyed Superheavy and hope some big writer uses Mr Bloom again in a serious way (and not like the subpar often jobbing ways Pyg has been used Post-Morrison). So many interesting villains disappear after their creator finishes.

[godisawesome]

Eternal kind of illustrates the point about why someone like Denny O'Neill is needed to run any weekly saga; there was a lot of good stuff there, especially at the start, but the ending sequence was in desperate need of some strict editorial control, and a better ending. NML and Knightfall both wound up having better pacing leading to their final battles, and botha managed to more effectively juggle launching new characters. Azrael and Cass Cain got off to a better start than Blue Bird by quite a bit, and it's not like the former two didn't have some issues with their launches as well.

[masahikotahara]

Comics should be fun and that is why Deffinition is doing his reviews; it's fun. That said, his reviews are (by definition, no pun intended) subjective. You don't like it? Fine, calm down and carry on, right? The references to the Nolan films are what's to be expected; like he said Knightfall was (part of) the source material Nolan used. I agree that exposing Batman's true identity was not Bane's intention; beating him was, although his goal was something else altogether:

BANE: ''And I escaped from that hell--escaped from my dreams--for one reason only.''

BANE: ''To find you--and to break you.''

BRUCE: ''Why? What has it been all about? Freeing the inmates from Arkham, watching me deal with them, watching them wear me down...was it all just to learn about me? To weaken me?''

BRUCE: ''There must be more to it--but what?

BANE: Gotham--The ultimate prize.''

BANE: ''You have it.''

BANE: ''I want it.''

I read Knightfall in one sitting and I loved it. I took breaks now and then but I was compelled to continue reading it. The whole binge watching thing with TV-series is comparable to binge reading stuff like this; it's not for everyone. With some series I love to binge; it keeps you focused on the story and with the more complicated ones (Mr. Robot, for example) you don't tend to lose the flow. On the other hand, with other series (like Lost - and Prison Break back when it was good in the first two seasons) I really liked to sit and talk about the bizarre/exciting ending of the episode, and the fact that I had to wait for the next episode added to that excitement. To each his own...

[Darkseid Is]

This is a random question but has Bruce ever beaten Bane in combat? I heard of a story called Legacy but I've never read it. I know it has something to do with Bane though.