I don't have anything against Bruce having moments of weakness, just, again, it's not how I see him acting as a kid.
In comics or outside of it? But even in the comics I feel like there have been a lot of disparate flashbacks to Bruce's childhood then we can probably recall.How well defined is Bruce as a child, really? The majority of the time we know he likes things like Zorro and Gray Ghost, and he's sad that his parents got shot. We often hear that he was traumatized, but that's never really explored, he just goes on THE MISSION almost immediately afterward. Maybe King didn't explore it as much as he could have (thus far?), but it's more that what we are usually told happened. And he still ultimately ended up channeling it into something positive after a period that couldn't have been that long, so what even changed?
The same can be said for fiction in general, where everything is constructed to serve the story rather then necessarily capture how people actually talk, although that doesn't mean dialogue can't be good, bad, or in-character depending on the writer.It is the opposite, but no matter how overly detailed or sparse the style of writing, you are generally not going to be getting natural sounding dialogue in a superhero comic of all places. People don't really talk the way King writes most of the time, but nobody in real life talks like a superhero period.
But then that probably becomes a matter of taste.
Well, it's Morrison, of course you can .Maybe Bruce and Selina sounded normal(ish) in Morrison's run, but you can probably find examples elsewhere in that very issue or Morrison's work in general with characters speaking in a weird way.
But the comparison was centered around Bruce and Selina. If I wanted to be even more direct about it I would've compared it to how Brubaker wrote them (or wrote characters in general), and he's the exact opposite to King whereas Morrison and King aren't entirely all that different.
Doesn't mean he has to act crazy or mean.I generally prefer Batman being more down to Earth, which is why I vastly prefer pre-Crisis Bronze Age Bruce. But unfortunately, that has not been the case for the character since the 80s, and while he has returned to that mentality before, he just as often has not. We are still reading about a grown man in a dracula costume who drives a car with bat fins attached to it.
Barry and Wally run around in a red and yellow onesie and nobody calls out their sanity, and their the nicest and most compassionate guys in the DCU.
I feel like the core characterization and who those characters are are generally consistent enough to warrant people being able to call something out as out-of-character not really what you would expect them to act.Complaints of Bruce acting overly weird in this run, and OOC complaints for the characters in general seem strange to me. Because with how often these characters get rebooted or re-interpreted depending on the writer who is using at the time (and that's not even getting into the at times radical other media appearances), I don't think anyone can rightly determine what is "in character" for someone. There is precedence for everything here with the exception of Holly, and even she is in a new continuity with a different history with a traumatic event in her past that I don't believe previous versions of her had to deal with.
Even in an adaption, where it's starting from scratch and doesn't have the length of continuity the comics have to deal with (even in a reboot) still have enormous precedence for how those characters should look and act.
I'm curious about this too.