Batfamily Explosion!

[oasis1313]

Are you kidding me right now? That is EXACTLY why DC should create new characters in the Batman orbit, because that section of their universe is far and away the most popular, so new heroes there have more of a chance to succeed. Have you forgotten that DC makes comics to, ya know, sell them? They aren't a non-profit organization with a mission statement to please a very small niche of their own market, the hardcore fan.

Now, to actually answer the question.

The batfamily, in my opinion, should be as large as the market can support, so long as the creative teams can maintain distinct directions in each title. The Batgirl of Burnside move is brilliant for more reasons that just new art and direction, it invented a burrogh of Gotham to fit around the character. Lets have Batgirl in Burnside, Tim at the fancy private school outside of town, Dick in Amusement Mile. Lets make Gotham a universe unto itself, havingthe characters close by, but with their own area of responsibility, their own section of Gotham to call home and reflect their character!

This is exactly what I've been saying. But it might require more talent than DC has in its stable of writers and editors.

[Cowtools]

I love a larger Batfamily. The more the merrier! IF we have a large stable of Bat-books to hold them.
People are always complaining about 'too many Bat-books' - well this is why we need them!

Batman can be a brooding loner in the main book, while the rest of the gang get a chance to shine.

[Aioros22]

DC "needs" no such thing. They already have the Marvel family, and the Superman family, both of which are more "families" than the Bat-Family. If DC wants to capitalize on that, use them. Heck, the Marvel family could use some love. There's also a difference between a superhero "family" and a bunch of redundant vigilantes all tied to Batman at the hip. Half of them have absolutely no reason to exist, and no compelling relationship to Batman.

What Marvel family? DC hasn`t had a proper Marvel Family since the 90`s.

It makes sense for Batman to build a staple of networking knights. It`s on itself a rip off idea from the Pulp genre, but it`s unique at DC house.

[Rafa-Rivas-2099]

Less evil?
He cancelled Batman Brave and the Bold!!!

Yeah, I can't think of a more evil thing than that. That show was perfect.

[catbatfan]

I wouldn't even mind if they stayed in some respective book.

E.g. Red Robin getting a book and Spoiler and Bluebird being a large part of his cast.

No thanks. I'd rather see a Spoiler book with Tim as part of her supporting cast. Aren't we done with Steph playing second fiddle to Tim or anyone else for that matter? She was Batgirl for God's sake and deserves respect.

[Rafa-Rivas-2099]

Do you complain that The Wire has too many drug dealers and cops or the Sopranos too many Italians? - of course not, they're the subject matter and each are unique despite belonging to a broader group, just as costumed vigilantes are in Batman comics. There's always been a ton of characters around him, and yeah with many many overlaps and redundancies. What keeps it interesting though is that their constantly revolving and each has a traceable and nuanced character arc. That is really cool and whats more it's something you can *only* do in a serialised format over a very long period of time. So where as Solo Batman is the most well-known take in broader media and therefore the version new readers are most familiar with, a lively and colorful Bat Family actually represents everything that is intrinsic and awesome about the medium of comics.

Well, if the cops were kids I'd complain. It diminishes Batman. I like Dick as a young adult but I hate kids around. Again, freaking Brady Bunch.

As for your picks, "always" started during the 50s, the least kind era to Batman. The second pick only seems a bunch because of Huntress, who lived in another Earth, alone, and Man-Bat who wasn't really "family". During that era, Robin was an adult and he kind of did his own thing. The Batty Family gatherings rather started during the late 90s. Before that it was mosly Batman and Tim, Dick didn't appear that much.

[SiegePerilous02]

Well, if the cops were kids I'd complain. It diminishes Batman. I like Dick as a young adult but I hate kids around. Again, freaking Brady Bunch.

Yeah, it doesn't always happen, but the teen drama that sometimes accompanies the younger Bat-clan members is really tedious. Dick is one of my favorite characters on his own, but the Robins as a whole often comes across as a bunch of pretty boys angsting about their daddy issues, like some episode of Supernatural.

[sanderling]

I like Batman well enough, but I like his supporting cast more. Particularly the Robins. I'm all for a rotating cast of "batfamily" members who travel in and out of each others books.

[catbatfan]

I like Batman well enough, but I like his supporting cast more. Particularly the Robins. I'm all for a rotating cast of "batfamily" members who travel in and out of each others books.

I agree (although I prefer the Batgirls to the Robins---specifically Cass and Steph).

DC should launch a Batman Family book starring not just the superheroes but Alfred, Gordon, Leslie Thompkins, Lucius Fox, etc. Maybe rotate certain characters out through different arcs, but anchor the series with an ongoing backup story (perhaps starring Black Bat and Spoiler *hinthint*).

[Rafa-Rivas-2099]

Yeah, it doesn't always happen, but the teen drama that sometimes accompanies the younger Bat-clan members is really tedious. Dick is one of my favorite characters on his own, but the Robins as a whole often comes across as a bunch of pretty boys angsting about their daddy issues, like some episode of Supernatural.

Well that's a whole new angle. Even in the 90s the teenage drama wasn't so bad. It was only Tim, the rest were Oracle, Azrael, Nightwing, Catwoman, Ace, Harold, Alfred and Huntress. All adults, a teenager and dog. Same with the 50s and 70s crowds, only one teenager.

My angle was the rather ridiculous and diminishing notion that a kid can do stuff that took Bruce years of training to learn. Think about it. Years of focusing on training rushed into 2 or 3 years of Tim's spare time after school, homework and faking he is a normal kid in front of his father. It's absurd, that is one of the worst suspension of disbelief breakers in Batman's world. Not even the grappling hook is that bad. Maybe this is why they went with early Jason as the model of BTAS' Tim, who doesn't make that much more sense, but at least he doesn't have to do the "fishing trip with Bruce" routine with his father.

I agree (although I prefer the Batgirls to the Robins---specifically Cass and Steph).

DC should launch a Batman Family book starring not just the superheroes but Alfred, Gordon, Leslie Thompkins, Lucius Fox, etc. Maybe rotate certain characters out through different arcs, but anchor the series with an ongoing backup story (perhaps starring Black Bat and Spoiler *hinthint*).

I agree, Batman's network is much more interesting than the kids.

Alfred - Main assistance and father figure.
Lucius - Tech supplier.
Gordon - Information supplier.
Leslie - Health emergency contact and mother figure
Jason (Bard) - Legwork (John Blake did this)

In a perfect world, add Dick and Barbara and that's all I need. O'Hara, Aunt Harriet, Bullock, Montoya, Mayor Hamilton, Summer, Steph would be great recurring characters, but they shouldn't be part of the network.

[The Red Monk]

I'm starting to think that Chuck Dixon's skills at differentiating Batfamily character was a rare gift and a lot of newer writers are much more derivative.

Chuck Dixon was the only writer to make me kind of tolerate/like Tim Drake. That alone is a herculean achievement.

Are you kidding me right now? That is EXACTLY why DC should create new characters in the Batman orbit, because that section of their universe is far and away the most popular, so new heroes there have more of a chance to succeed. Have you forgotten that DC makes comics to, ya know, sell them? They aren't a non-profit organization with a mission statement to please a very small niche of their own market, the hardcore fan.

And in doing so they will eventually end up with the X-Men problem of far too many characters and zero coherent direction (and heck, the X-Men were meant to be a team). And end up wrecking what made Batman and his world popular in the first place. I also disagree with shoving every superhero into the Bat-Family just so they have a chance to succeed. If a character is good, they will succeed regardless of needing to suck off a more popular and/or superior character.

Do you complain that The Wire has too many drug dealers and cops or the Sopranos too many Italians? - of course not, they're the subject matter and each are unique despite belonging to a broader group, just as costumed vigilantes are in Batman comics. There's always been a ton of characters around him, and yeah with many many overlaps and redundancies. What keeps it interesting though is that their constantly revolving and each has a traceable and nuanced character arc. That is really cool and whats more it's something you can *only* do in a serialised format over a very long period of time. So where as Solo Batman is the most well-known take in broader media and therefore the version new readers are most familiar with, a lively and colorful Bat Family actually represents everything that is intrinsic and awesome about the medium of comics.

This is a ridiculous comparison to draw. Both The Wire and The Sopranos are ensemble-oriented shows, focused on many different individuals and their stories. A better comparison are the X-Men. The Batman mythos are not ensemble-oriented, the focus is always on Batman, he's the core, the Bat-Family are simply embellishments - they are not the core, and too many of them CAN in fact ruin the core dynamic. Heck, even with The Sopranos, the focus is always on one core group - Tony Soprano and his closest friends and family. It is in fact possible to have too many characters in a TV show, where they start to clutter everything up, and wreck the overall direction by taking up space.

Heck, you even admitted that there are many overlaps and redundancies among the characters, to the extent that existing ones start suffering because of the presence of others. Too many ingredients in one pot will all wreck each other and the stew. Individual Bat-Family members lose what makes them interesting when you have 20+ others claiming that niche. And I absolutely disagree that a large, overstuffed Bat-Family represents the best of comics; IMO, it represents the worst - too much crap, too little direction, and ultimately no restraint. All of these will add up to a train-wreck waiting to happen.

No thanks. I'd rather see a Spoiler book with Tim as part of her supporting cast. Aren't we done with Steph playing second fiddle to Tim or anyone else for that matter? She was Batgirl for God's sake and deserves respect.

She was a pretty terrible Batgirl, with godawful sales and poor writing. For all that I dislike Tim Drake, he is a far superior character to Stephanie, and would be absolutely wasted playing second fiddle to her.

[SiegePerilous02]

Well that's a whole new angle. Even in the 90s the teenage drama wasn't so bad. It was only Tim, the rest were Oracle, Azrael, Nightwing, Catwoman, Ace, Harold, Alfred and Huntress. All adults, a teenager and dog. Same with the 50s and 70s crowds, only one teenager.

My angle was the rather ridiculous and diminishing notion that a kid can do stuff that took Bruce years of training to learn. Think about it. Years of focusing on training rushed into 2 or 3 years of Tim's spare time after school, homework and faking he is a normal kid in front of his father. It's absurd, that is one of the worst suspension of disbelief breakers in Batman's world. Not even the grappling hook is that bad. Maybe this is why they went with early Jason as the model of BTAS' Tim, who doesn't make that much more sense, but at least he doesn't have to do the "fishing trip with Bruce" routine with his father.

To be fair, Dick learns a lot of those skills at a ridiculously fast rate as well, but yes Tim is far more noticeable. I also always disliked how Bruce took someone else's kid and trained them to be a vigilante without their knowledge. It was sketchy as all hell, and not something I can see a properly written Bruce ever doing. Ditto his on/off allowing of Steph to operate as Spoiler. If I were said parent, I would demand the guy get arrested, and that's not something I'd like to think about Batman.

Chuck Dixon was the only writer to make me kind of tolerate/like Tim Drake. That alone is a herculean achievement.



And in doing so they will eventually end up with the X-Men problem of far too many characters and zero coherent direction (and heck, the X-Men were meant to be a team). And end up wrecking what made Batman and his world popular in the first place. I also disagree with shoving every superhero into the Bat-Family just so they have a chance to succeed. If a character is good, they will succeed regardless of needing to suck off a more popular and/or superior character.



This is a ridiculous comparison to draw. Both The Wire and The Sopranos are ensemble-oriented shows, focused on many different individuals and their stories. A better comparison are the X-Men. The Batman mythos are not ensemble-oriented, the focus is always on Batman, he's the core, the Bat-Family are simply embellishments - they are not the core, and too many of them CAN in fact ruin the core dynamic. Heck, even with The Sopranos, the focus is always on one core group - Tony Soprano and his closest friends and family. It is in fact possible to have too many characters in a TV show, where they start to clutter everything up, and wreck the overall direction by taking up space.

Heck, you even admitted that there are many overlaps and redundancies among the characters, to the extent that existing ones start suffering because of the presence of others. Too many ingredients in one pot will all wreck each other and the stew. Individual Bat-Family members lose what makes them interesting when you have 20+ others claiming that niche. And I absolutely disagree that a large, overstuffed Bat-Family represents the best of comics; IMO, it represents the worst - too much crap, too little direction, and ultimately no restraint. All of these will add up to a train-wreck waiting to happen.

TV shows also often have one head writer/showrunner who has a vision for the series growth, with an ending in sight. DC and Marvel characters are meant to go on indefinitely with a constantly rotating staff of writers who each want to add their own pet character(s). It's no wonder things get cluttered after a while.

Hell, it even occurs to me that Jason (though I like him) is kind of redundant in the wider DCU as well. We already have an orphaned, red headed street kid with an antagonistic relationship with his mentor and a rivalry with Dick Grayson in Roy Harper. Yes, I know Jason has black hair sometimes and that Roy's friendship with Dick isn't as antagonistic, but the differences between the two characters aren't big enough to justify them both existing.

[dropkickjake]

And in doing so they will eventually end up with the X-Men problem of far too many characters and zero coherent direction (and heck, the X-Men were meant to be a team). And end up wrecking what made Batman and his world popular in the first place. I also disagree with shoving every superhero into the Bat-Family just so they have a chance to succeed. If a character is good, they will succeed regardless of needing to suck off a more popular and/or superior character.

.

The X-Men problem of having tons of marketable characters? I'll take it. I also don't see the correlations between lots of characters and "wrecking what made Batman so popular in the first place." Also, one of the greatest complaints about the bat-verse in the early n52 was that the direction was TOO coherent, with every title serving whatever Snyder was doing. Lots of characters doing their own thing with their own directions sounds great to me. Not to mention the fact that sense the bat family ISN'T supposed to be a team, there is no reason why several characters shouldn't have entirely desperate directions.

And it is just a point of fact that a character will have a better chance at success when they have more exposure. New characters get better exposure when they are in more popular corners of the dcu. We don't live in an ideal world, but a practical one.

[oasis1313]

The X-Men problem of having tons of marketable characters? I'll take it. I also don't see the correlations between lots of characters and "wrecking what made Batman so popular in the first place." Also, one of the greatest complaints about the bat-verse in the early n52 was that the direction was TOO coherent, with every title serving whatever Snyder was doing. Lots of characters doing their own thing with their own directions sounds great to me. Not to mention the fact that sense the bat family ISN'T supposed to be a team, there is no reason why several characters shouldn't have entirely desperate directions.

And it is just a point of fact that a character will have a better chance at success when they have more exposure. New characters get better exposure when they are in more popular corners of the dcu. We don't live in an ideal world, but a practical one.

I would agree wholeheartedly with this. What's wrong with creating marketable product? Every member of the Bat-Family should have their own LINE of books.

[John Venus]

To be fair, Dick learns a lot of those skills at a ridiculously fast rate as well, but yes Tim is far more noticeable. I also always disliked how Bruce took someone else's kid and trained them to be a vigilante without their knowledge. It was sketchy as all hell, and not something I can see a properly written Bruce ever doing. Ditto his on/off allowing of Steph to operate as Spoiler. If I were said parent, I would demand the guy get arrested, and that's not something I'd like to think about Batman.

TV shows also often have one head writer/showrunner who has a vision for the series growth, with an ending in sight. DC and Marvel characters are meant to go on indefinitely with a constantly rotating staff of writers who each want to add their own pet character(s). It's no wonder things get cluttered after a while.

Hell, it even occurs to me that Jason (though I like him) is kind of redundant in the wider DCU as well. We already have an orphaned, red headed street kid with an antagonistic relationship with his mentor and a rivalry with Dick Grayson in Roy Harper. Yes, I know Jason has black hair sometimes and that Roy's friendship with Dick isn't as antagonistic, but the differences between the two characters aren't big enough to justify them both existing.

All the Robin's has had some kind of pre existing skill that gave them a head start: Dick was an acrobat, Jason was a street tough and Tim was a detective.

Tim wanted to be Robin and basically begged Bruce for the position. That's not possible in the current compressed timeline. I kind of agree that giving Tim parental figures was unnecessary and it was basically giving him his own 'Aunt May' to worry about him and stuff.

And in doing so they will eventually end up with the X-Men problem of far too many characters and zero coherent direction (and heck, the X-Men were meant to be a team). And end up wrecking what made Batman and his world popular in the first place. I also disagree with shoving every superhero into the Bat-Family just so they have a chance to succeed. If a character is good, they will succeed regardless of needing to suck off a more popular and/or superior character.


This is a ridiculous comparison to draw. Both The Wire and The Sopranos are ensemble-oriented shows, focused on many different individuals and their stories. A better comparison are the X-Men. The Batman mythos are not ensemble-oriented, the focus is always on Batman, he's the core, the Bat-Family are simply embellishments - they are not the core, and too many of them CAN in fact ruin the core dynamic. Heck, even with The Sopranos, the focus is always on one core group - Tony Soprano and his closest friends and family. It is in fact possible to have too many characters in a TV show, where they start to clutter everything up, and wreck the overall direction by taking up space.

Heck, you even admitted that there are many overlaps and redundancies among the characters, to the extent that existing ones start suffering because of the presence of others. Too many ingredients in one pot will all wreck each other and the stew. Individual Bat-Family members lose what makes them interesting when you have 20+ others claiming that niche. And I absolutely disagree that a large, overstuffed Bat-Family represents the best of comics; IMO, it represents the worst - too much crap, too little direction, and ultimately no restraint. All of these will add up to a train-wreck waiting to happen.

She was a pretty terrible Batgirl, with godawful sales and poor writing. For all that I dislike Tim Drake, he is a far superior character to Stephanie, and would be absolutely wasted playing second fiddle to her.

Agreed with all of this.

Steph as Batgirl was an attempt to have another Babs like character taking on the mantle. It took away from Cass who had a more unique niche' in the Bat Family.

Well that's a whole new angle. Even in the 90s the teenage drama wasn't so bad. It was only Tim, the rest were Oracle, Azrael, Nightwing, Catwoman, Ace, Harold, Alfred and Huntress. All adults, a teenager and dog. Same with the 50s and 70s crowds, only one teenager.

My angle was the rather ridiculous and diminishing notion that a kid can do stuff that took Bruce years of training to learn. Think about it. Years of focusing on training rushed into 2 or 3 years of Tim's spare time after school, homework and faking he is a normal kid in front of his father. It's absurd, that is one of the worst suspension of disbelief breakers in Batman's world. Not even the grappling hook is that bad. Maybe this is why they went with early Jason as the model of BTAS' Tim, who doesn't make that much more sense, but at least he doesn't have to do the "fishing trip with Bruce" routine with his father.

I agree, Batman's network is much more interesting than the kids.

Alfred - Main assistance and father figure.
Lucius - Tech supplier.
Gordon - Information supplier.
Leslie - Health emergency contact and mother figure
Jason (Bard) - Legwork (John Blake did this)

In a perfect world, add Dick and Barbara and that's all I need. O'Hara, Aunt Harriet, Bullock, Montoya, Mayor Hamilton, Summer, Steph would be great recurring characters, but they shouldn't be part of the network.

I agree with this.

Though as I said to SiegePerilious02 (see the first part of this reply), the Robin's came with pre existing skills.

Your ideal supporting cast matches mine as well. For me, the ideal Bat Family would be: Batman, Batwoman (Kate Kane), Catwoman, Robin (Tim Drake) and Black Bat (Cass Cain). Simple, unique and between them you can have 4-5 Bat Books with each having it's own unique perspective. Then you can divide the rest of the Bat Family like Oracle, Huntress, Orpheus, Azrael, Bat Wing and the others into two teams books like Birds of Prey and the Outsiders. Throw in a Gotham Central book and I am a happy camper.

At this point, I think the Bat Editors should declare a ban on creating new supporting characters and simply force the writers to use all of the existing ones.

I agree (although I prefer the Batgirls to the Robins---specifically Cass and Steph).

DC should launch a Batman Family book starring not just the superheroes but Alfred, Gordon, Leslie Thompkins, Lucius Fox, etc. Maybe rotate certain characters out through different arcs, but anchor the series with an ongoing backup story (perhaps starring Black Bat and Spoiler *hinthint*).

I have been saying this for years now regarding the Batgirls and creating a Bat Family book.

Yeah, it doesn't always happen, but the teen drama that sometimes accompanies the younger Bat-clan members is really tedious. Dick is one of my favorite characters on his own, but the Robins as a whole often comes across as a bunch of pretty boys angsting about their daddy issues, like some episode of Supernatural.

Agreed. I like Batman, I like his flaws and emotional issues, I don't need said flaws exaggerated just so Dick, Tim, Cass and Helena can have Daddy issues. Batman, Alfred, Gordon, Robin and the core Bat villains (Joker, Harley Quinn, Catwoman, Penguin, Two Face, Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze, Clayface, Mad Hatter, Killer Croc and Riddler) should always come first. Then every one else.

I love a larger Batfamily. The more the merrier! IF we have a large stable of Bat-books to hold them.
People are always complaining about 'too many Bat-books' - well this is why we need them!

Yes.