All Star Bats and Rob 7

[The Batman]

With all the various interpretations of Batman that we've seen through the years, I'm surprised that people are still willing to come out and say that this or that characterization isn't valid and this one is. Miller's Batman might not be everyone's preferred version, but it sure as hell is a valid one.

I mean, the ASB&R strikes me as an over the top version of the guy that quipped when a thug took a dive into a vat of corrisive chemicals in "The Case of the Chemical Syndicate".

http://www.fantomcomics.com/MAR070173_hi_ALL_STAR_BATMAN_AND_ROBIN_THE_BOY_WON DER.jpg

[Mia]

Is that what Batman is "supposed to be" or simply the version you like the best?..

No it's the rendition of Batman which has been shown for most part for the last 70 years. And it's the way that ASB&R was originally marketed.





As I keep pointing out, over the course of Batman's existence he's evloved and changed to fit the times. That's how the character has stayed popular all these years. From what I understand early Batman used to carry a gun and let people die. There was an era when Batman showed fairly little detective skills and basically just waited for the criminal to slip up and finally caught them. there was a time when Batman was really big on detective work. There was a time when Batman was really big on using "bat-gadgets".
..

Sure Batman has changed over the years to fit the times. But like I said in an earlier post. They were all subtle changes. The basic premise of the character has remained the same:He has no superpowers and relies on "his own scientific knowledge, detective skills, and athletic prowess." He is physically at the peak of human ability in dozens of areas, notably martial arts, acrobatics, strength, and escape artistry. Intellectually, he is just as peerless; Batman is one of the world's greatest scientists, criminologists, and tacticians, as well as a master of disguise, and gathers information. He is a detective. And instead of simply outfighting his opponents he uses cunning and planning to outwit them.

There's nothing of the above Millers AS Batman.




If you and others were able to look at the "big picture" you'd realize Miller has written Batman in various stages of his career and each stage has a different Batman. This is still early in his career and it's obvious he might not have it all down pat yet. That only makes sense. A guy just getting into the police academy isn't the same as the same guy who's a rookie cop isn't the same as that same person on the force for 3 years isn't the same as the seasoned cop and isn't the same as the older same guy a couple of years from retirement. You aren't the same person you were 6 years and and you won't be the same 6 years from now. Why should a writer charting Batman's career treat him any differently?

It's very possible this Batman will evolve into the version you think is the "right" version but he isn't there yet...

What big picture is there to look at? A man in a costume who has no respect for the law, takes pleasure in holding others and tortures children?

Yes Miller has portrayed Batman in his various incarnations including in Batman Year One. And you will notice that Batman in that story is far different than the over the top one Miller is portraying now. While that Batman might be a rookie and made mistakes. He still respected the law and cared about the welfare of others. He wanted to help others and protect the weak. Miller's Batman doesn't want to.

This one doesn't.




I see the Punisher and Midnighter as completely different characters because they are. I see Miller's version of Batman and all the other characters he's doing as "refreshing" because unlike you and many others my view of Batman isn't so narrow and I enjoy this interpretation. The version of Batman some of you hold so dear ito me is just more the same that I've seen more than enough of already. Miller's take on the character is valid in my opinion and it's not the same as the Punisher ot Midnighter. If you think it is, your entitled to that opinion..

Of course The Punisher, The Midnighter and Batman are different characters. It's why they have different names. The Midnighter and The Punnisher are best known for using brute force, being extreeme and having sadistic tendencies and using their fists to solve problems--Much like the Batman in ASB&R. There's nothing 'refreshing' or new about this type of character in comic books. Really am surprised that you haven't seen this.





I've no desire to waste time debating your definition of "edgy" verses mine. Define "edgy" anyway you want to it's fine with me but don't expect me to agree.

Looks more like you don't like anyone challenging your opinions. Begs the question why you post on a message board in the first place.


You consider Millers sadistic Batman to be enjoyable and 'refreshing'. I think it's a character assination and sick. We'll just have to agree to disagree.


.

[the goddamn batman]

No it's the rendition of Batman which has been shown for most part for the last 70 years.

I'm sorry, but that statement is just complete bullshit.

The idea that there has been a constant characterisation of Batman for the last 70 years just shows how little you actually know about Batman's history.

This version in ASB&R is more in line with the original Batman that debuted in Detective Comic #27 than anything we've seen in the last 20 years... at least. To say that it's out of character is jsut ignoring the fact that this is MILLER'S Batman and not regular continuity Batman as well as the general history of the character and the changes he's been through in the last 70 years.

And in all honesty the rest of your bost bores me to tears with it's incauracy and general lampooning of Miller simply for doing something you don't like.

[Captain Jim]

This version in ASB&R is more in line with the original Batman that debuted in Detective Comic #27 than anything we've seen in the last 20 years... at least.

I really don't see that at all. Sure, the original Batman had a violent streak to him and maybe even took a few lives. But he was a far cry from this guy running around with a big grin saying, "I'm the g-d Batman."

I also have some trouble with the general tenor of the last few posts that seem to be saying that any version of Batman is an acceptable version and that there is nothing that makes him unique. So, he could don some web-shooters next month and start swinging around town on spider-webs, and that would just be another acceptable version, I guess? I don't see it.

[Captain Jim]

I must say, I don't understand the passion of some of the people who don't like this book. I figure, you don't like it, don't buy it. (I don't.)

I have to wonder if a lot of people feel compelled to buy it for the Jim Lee art and resent the storytelling that comes with it. I know I'm unusual in this regard, but I have never bought a book I didn't like just for the art.

[Punch]

I also have some trouble with the general tenor of the last few posts that seem to be saying that any version of Batman is an acceptable version and that there is nothing that makes him unique. So, he could don some web-shooters next month and start swinging around town on spider-webs, and that would just be another acceptable version, I guess? I don't see it.


Miller's version is well within the the boundaries of what Batman is.

-Batman is Bruce Wayne
-parents were killed while he watched
-trained to work as a vigilante to bring justice to Gotham
-dresses like a bat to scare criminals

Everything else is a writer's personal take on characterization.

[Sean Whitmore]

Miller's version is well within the the boundaries of what Batman is.

-Batman is Bruce Wayne
-parents were killed while he watched
-trained to work as a vigilante to bring justice to Gotham
-dresses like a bat to scare criminals

Everything else is a writer's personal take on characterization.

I generally agree. Go too far beyond those as "must haves", and the Batman character basically didn't appear throughout a large part of the 1950s.


SEAN

[Dr. Chaos]

I know I'm unusual in this regard, but I have never bought a book I didn't like just for the art.
I'm mostly in the same boat.

Writing comes first for me, if the story is boring me, it doesn't really matter who the artist is. I've never really read a comic book with a visual flair thats been able to keep me by it's self.

[BYC]

Miller's version is well within the the boundaries of what Batman is.

-Batman is Bruce Wayne
-parents were killed while he watched
-trained to work as a vigilante to bring justice to Gotham
-dresses like a bat to scare criminals

Everything else is a writer's personal take on characterization.
Where does Adam West fit in? :D

[Sean Whitmore]

Where does Adam West fit in? :D

Goofy bastard that he was, he still met those basic criteria.


SEAN

[The Batman]

Now that I think about it, I'm not sure that a comparision between the Adam West Batman and the ASB&R Batman is entirely out of line.

[Alex Dragon]

No it's the rendition of Batman which has been shown for most part for the last 70 years. And it's the way that ASB&R was originally marketed.

Batman hasn't been portrayed in the same way for the last 70 years. I named just a few of the incarnations he's gone through in an earlier post. This isn't a matter of opinion, it's a fact that many people have talked about. Batman from the 30 isn't the same as Batman from the 50 isn't the same as the 70s Batman isn't the same as the 90s Batman.



Sure Batman has changed over the years to fit the times. But like I said in an earlier post. They were all subtle changes.

You just said the character hasn't changed in the last 70 years. Now you say he's changed to fit the times and the changes have been "subtle". ??? And no the changes haven't been "subtle" they've been "gradual". "Subtle" isn't going from carrying a gun to hating them. "Subtle" isn't going from a broad smile always on your face to being humorless and deadly serious all the time. "Subtle" isn't going from parading around in broad daylight to lurking in the shadows of the night.



The basic premise of the character has remained the same:He has no superpowers and relies on "his own scientific knowledge, detective skills, and athletic prowess." He is physically at the peak of human ability in dozens of areas, notably martial arts, acrobatics, strength, and escape artistry. Intellectually, he is just as peerless; Batman is one of the world's greatest scientists, criminologists, and tacticians, as well as a master of disguise, and gathers information. He is a detective. And instead of simply outfighting his opponents he uses cunning and planning to outwit them.

There's nothing of the above Millers AS Batman.

???? What am I missing here? This Batman isn't strong? Isn't athletic? Isn't a good fighter? I could've sworn I saw some scenes where Batman was taking on a bunch of thugs and avoiding gunfire. He isn't smart? He isn't a detective? So how did he find these thugs? So how did he know the background on the guy that killed Dick's parents? Just beecause Miller didn't give us scenes of Batman at the crime scenes with a magnifying glass doesn't mean he isn't smart or hasn't done his detective work. And when exactly did Batman's detective work and cunning go so far that he didn't have to use his fists? Are there Batman stories out their where Batman's so smart he tricks criminals into turning themselves in?

As far as how he's handling the criminals in this story how's it really that much different than hundreds of other Batman stories? Other than the over the top language and inner dialogue he's having, this is typical Batman fights thugs type stuff.

And as I keep pointing out and you refuse acknowledge in any real way: This isn't the fully formed has it all down pat and figured out Batman.


What big picture is there to look at? A man in a costume who has no respect for the law, takes pleasure in holding others and tortures children?

"A man in a costume with no respect for the law"? What, you mean as opposed to "Suit and tie Batman" who waits for search warrants and reads Miranda Rights to criminals? Are you talking about the law respecting Batman who spends most of his non crime fighting time testifying in court?

There must've been an issue I missed because I don't remember Batman taking "pleasure" in holding others and tortures(ing) children. That issue I missed must've had had the panels where Batman was having so much fun "torturing" Dick. The issues I read had Batman beating himself up over doing what he thought was the right thing to do. In the issue I missed did Bats have a big smile on his face when he thought or talked about this torture that he apparently enjoys so much?


Yes Miller has portrayed Batman in his various incarnations including in Batman Year One. And you will notice that Batman in that story is far different than the over the top one Miller is portraying now.

Of course I noticed that and apparently wasted my time in my other posts giving my theory on why he's doing what he's doing.


While that Batman might be a rookie and made mistakes. He still respected the law and cared about the welfare of others. He wanted to help others and protect the weak. Miller's Batman doesn't want to.

No, Miller's Batman didn't save the girl in the alley from those thugs because he was trying to protect her or do the right thing he must've done it because he was bored and wanted a workout. This Batman is so much different than regular DC Batman who's never broken the law and is always nurturing and caring of others. Hey, remember than Batman story where Batman was chasing the Riddler and the Riddler got away because Batman got held up at the stoplight? That story was almost as good as the time Batman was late for his court date because he had to walk to the courthouse because he realized his driver's license expired. That crazy unlawful Miller Batman would've drove to the court house with the expired license and took pleasure in parking in a no parking zone.


Of course The Punisher, The Midnighter and Batman are different characters. It's why they have different names. The Midnighter and The Punnisher are best known for using brute force, being extreeme and having sadistic tendencies and using their fists to solve problems--Much like the Batman in ASB&R. There's nothing 'refreshing' or new about this type of character in comic books. Really am surprised that you haven't seen this.

I'm surprised that you see all these characters in such shallow terms. Almost as surprised at you that you can't seem to understand that just because you don't see Miller's version of Batman "refreshing" other's must feel the same way you do.


Looks more like you don't like anyone challenging your opinions. Begs the question why you post on a message board in the first place.

Not that I don't want anyone challenging my opinions but why on earth do you think it's productive or even interesting to waste time debating what you and I think is "edgy" or "refreshing"? You say it isn't "edgy" or "refreshing" and I say I find it "edgy" and "refreshing". I explained my thinking behind it and you disagreed. Is there any point at all in going any further?

It seems all I'm doing is going back and forth with a person who doesn't seem to realize that all their responses and comebacks can be boiled down to "I don't like this version of Batman so it's bad". It seems to me that all of your rationals and rebuttals don't have much backing them other than "this isn't the Batman I want to see". You're even twisting Batman's history in an effort to rationalize your displeasure of the series. There's no need to do that. If you don't like the book that's fine in and of itself.



You consider Millers sadistic Batman to be enjoyable and 'refreshing'. I think it's a character assination and sick. We'll just have to agree to disagree.


That's more than fine by me. I didn't mean to get rude or mean about it but even though I think you're opinions are probably valid to you doesn't mean I agree with them or they're factually based. If you think Miller's doing "Character assasination" and it's "sick" that's a legit reaction. I find it fun, edgy and refreshing. That's a legit reaction too.

Sorry if I got too sarcastic. I was doing it to try and drive some points home.

[the goddamn batman]

^^^Damn, son. Nice post.:D

[Sean Whitmore]

Sorry if I got too sarcastic. I was doing it to try and drive some points home.

And they were good points, too. I'll bet all the money in my pockets that they'll either be ignored or dismissed out of hand, but that's not your fault.


SEAN

[Captain Jim]

I explained my thinking behind it and you disagreed. Is there any point at all in going any further?

I think the first sentence above is a great summary for most of this thread. The second sentence is what I continue to ask myself about this thread.

[the goddamn batman]

Probably not. It's just two sides who've both alreaddy made up their minds, and aren't going to sway anybody into thinking anything else going back and forth and back and forth and....

[The Mutt]

Probably not. It's just two sides who've both alreaddy made up their minds, and aren't going to sway anybody into thinking anything else going back and forth and back and forth and....

Like Batman and The Joker?

[the goddamn batman]

Like Batman and The Joker?

But far less interesting.

[The Mutt]

But far less interesting.

Free, though.

[Ottmeister X]

This series gets my nomination for the worst dialogue ever in a comic book. Number 7 really punched it over the top for me. I don't have my copy with me, but I'll have to grab it later for examples. Miller must really think he can do no wrong to put out drivel like this.

[brunofrankelli]

This series gets my nomination for the worst dialogue ever in a comic book. Number 7 really punched it over the top for me. I don't have my copy with me, but I'll have to grab it later for examples. Miller must really think he can do no wrong to put out drivel like this.

Are you kidding me? Miller's always written hammy dialogue.

[The Mutt]

I learned long ago that comic book dialog that looks great on the page can sound goddamn silly when read aloud. That said, if you haven't read ASBAR out loud, you are missing out on comedy gold. Get some friends together. It's a hoot and a half.

[The Batman]

Did you learn that when you watched Sin City?

Because I did.

[filthysize]

Did you learn that when you watched Sin City?

Because I did.

......Ditto.

[The Mutt]

Did you learn that when you watched Sin City?

Because I did.

Heh. Long before, but Sin City really drove it home.

[SURFACE]

Hello Batfans,
I'm new to this forum so I may come off sounding a bit stupid!
I've been a longtime Batman fan over the years but have not been keeping up with him as of late, I recently picked up "All Star Batman & Robin" #7, it's been a while, I mainly get industry related mags like Comic Book Artist, Sketch,Alter Ego, Rough Stuff etc...
First off who is the blonde chicky bouncin around with Bats, and what's with all the swearing, I know that Miller writes it and Lee is doing his usual phenominal work on the series, and not meaning to come off as too much of an "old timer" but I don't recall a general release DC publication with a major character with so many "goddamn" swear words in it...what gives?
enlighten me...curious
Shawn Surface
SURFACE ART STUDIOS
http://www.surfaceartstudios.com

[Punch]

Hello Batfans,
I'm new to this forum so I may come off sounding a bit stupid!
I've been a longtime Batman fan over the years but have not been keeping up with him as of late, I recently picked up "All Star Batman & Robin" #7, it's been a while, I mainly get industry related mags like Comic Book Artist, Sketch,Alter Ego, Rough Stuff etc...
First off who is the blonde chicky bouncin around with Bats, and what's with all the swearing, I know that Miller writes it and Lee is doing his usual phenominal work on the series, and not meaning to come off as too much of an "old timer" but I don't recall a general release DC publication with a major character with so many "goddamn" swear words in it...what gives?
enlighten me...curious
Shawn Surface
SURFACE ART STUDIOS
http://www.surfaceartstudios.com

All-Star Batman is tame compared to what else goes on in DC books

[Alex Dragon]

Hello Batfans,
I'm new to this forum so I may come off sounding a bit stupid!
I've been a longtime Batman fan over the years but have not been keeping up with him as of late, I recently picked up "All Star Batman & Robin" #7, it's been a while, I mainly get industry related mags like Comic Book Artist, Sketch,Alter Ego, Rough Stuff etc...
First off who is the blonde chicky bouncin around with Bats, and what's with all the swearing, I know that Miller writes it and Lee is doing his usual phenominal work on the series, and not meaning to come off as too much of an "old timer" but I don't recall a general release DC publication with a major character with so many "goddamn" swear words in it...what gives?
enlighten me...curious
Shawn Surface
SURFACE ART STUDIOS
http://www.surfaceartstudios.com

I'm a fan of the mags you mention also.

The chicky bouncin' around with Bats is the Black Carnary. Her non ALL STAR version/counterpart that appears in the "regular" DC titles is a character who's been around for years and recently married the Green Arrow (I think).

Frank Miller is the writer of this series and it's sort of an alternate version of Batman mostly based on his re-imaging of the character that dates back to his DARK KNIGHT RETURNS work done years ago. That work was such a success that it had a big part in making Miller a huge star in the comicbook world. Miller is such a huge draw when he does any Batman work that DC pretty much lets him do whatever he wants to. DC started up a new series of books with different creator's take on popular established characters without the hinderance of years of thick/dense continuity. In this particular case Miller wanted to go back in Batman history and do a retelling of how Batman came to team up with Robin. It seems to me that Miller has changed some elements of the origin of how Robin came to be and how Batman acted at the time to try and show just why Batman needs Robin and the positive effect Robin had on Batman and how it changed him. Most fans have come to accept Robin without question but I think Miller's making an effort to show and justify Robin's existence.

Miller for the most part tends to write for a more adult audience. That's why the language is a bit stronger than normal and he's playing up the sex a bit more. The language in a typical DC comic isn't usually quite as strong as you're seeing here. If another writer without Miller's clout wanted to same sort of dialogue, DC would've probably told them no.
Miller's version of Batman is more in line with the harder edged "ganster" type stuff that he likes to do and in many ways resembles the work he's done on his own creation of SIN CITY where the "establishment" is crooked, the guys are all "tough as nails" and all the women are "tough and sexy" (and some would say alittle "Whorish") and everyone talks in a over the top tough guy type dialogue. Also poping up are some of the props Miller likes to use like Bars, fancy cars, rainy nights, and scantly clad women. All of the stuff typically found in SIN CITY.

Other than that it's a book that isn't really well written but seems to be a lot of fun if you accept it for what it is.

[TuPeT]

Who doesn't like this comic is just an old and sad MoFo. Funny as hell. Goddamn Batman should beat the goddamn crap out of you...

[zulu624]

this is definately not the batman we all grew up with, and i love it. you guy thought all star bats was crazy, wait untill all star joker appears in issue #8. bwaahaaha!!:evilangry

[Captain Jim]

Welcome to CBR, zulu. :)

[Choppa]

Here's what I don't get. So All Star is supposed to be the "iconic" representation of the character free from all the continuity blah blah blah.

But is the regular "Batman" title hampered by continuity much at all? Except for the really big things like Dick having been Robin and Jason Todd dying, there really aren't many references to previous events. Even the All Star book isn't going to stray too far from such fundamental elements.

And Bruce's characterization just keeps on changing with the writer. The Batman from Murderer? is different from HUSH Batman who is also different than the current OYL Batman.

So is another book really necessary? If DC wants to target new readers, wouldn't it make more sense to do more HUSH type stories which slowly explain everything about the Batman mythos? Didn't HUSH sell a lot? Or is the number 1 on the issue cover a bigger draw?

[Captain Jim]

^^^^

I do think the "Robins" is probably the major issue. But in addition to the presence of Jason and Tim, there's also the different role for Robin. In the "iconic" version, Batman & Robin are pretty much a regular and permanent team.

[mattx110]

Hello Batfans,
I'm new to this forum so I may come off sounding a bit stupid!
I've been a longtime Batman fan over the years but have not been keeping up with him as of late, I recently picked up "All Star Batman & Robin" #7, it's been a while, I mainly get industry related mags like Comic Book Artist, Sketch,Alter Ego, Rough Stuff etc...
First off who is the blonde chicky bouncin around with Bats, and what's with all the swearing, I know that Miller writes it and Lee is doing his usual phenominal work on the series, and not meaning to come off as too much of an "old timer" but I don't recall a general release DC publication with a major character with so many "goddamn" swear words in it...what gives?
enlighten me...curious
Shawn Surface
SURFACE ART STUDIOS
http://www.surfaceartstudios.com
i'm with alex dragon, well, not "with" alex dragon, but i mean, i agree, anything twomorrows puts out is worth getting.

i do that too, drop out and wind up reading more about making comics and the industry stuff than actual comics, but trades can help catch up.

and frank miller gets to do whatever he wants with this batbook, so it's good for some fun. anyway, jim lee is always worth a look too. i got started buying my own comics around the time he started working in comics so we've got a special bond (that he knows nothing about, it's a one-way bond, umm... like a two-way mirror but bondy).

[SURFACE]

Who doesn't like this comic is just an old and sad MoFo. Funny as hell. Goddamn Batman should beat the goddamn crap out of you...
I'm ok with a darker Batman, I'm familiar with Millers writing, was just taken aback by all the "Goddamns" in this particular issue.
Plus what's with the Canary hangin with Batman, He doesn't watch himself the boys gonna get an "Arrow" in his back!

[Choppa]

^^^^

I do think the "Robins" is probably the major issue. But in addition to the presence of Jason and Tim, there's also the different role for Robin. In the "iconic" version, Batman & Robin are pretty much a regular and permanent team.

That's totally superficial though. Sure the two of them are together, but do they represent the "iconic" versions when one is insane and the other heading down the same path? Technically the main "Batman" book has this as well since that's an intentional feature added post OYL. Look at how much issues had Robin there in some sense.

[Alex Dragon]

Here's what I don't get. So All Star is supposed to be the "iconic" representation of the character free from all the continuity blah blah blah.

But is the regular "Batman" title hampered by continuity much at all? Except for the really big things like Dick having been Robin and Jason Todd dying, there really aren't many references to previous events. Even the All Star book isn't going to stray too far from such fundamental elements.

And Bruce's characterization just keeps on changing with the writer. The Batman from Murderer? is different from HUSH Batman who is also different than the current OYL Batman.

So is another book really necessary? If DC wants to target new readers, wouldn't it make more sense to do more HUSH type stories which slowly explain everything about the Batman mythos? Didn't HUSH sell a lot? Or is the number 1 on the issue cover a bigger draw?

No, another Batman book isn't necessary but Batman is usually a strong seller for DC so they'll continue to do as many Batman books as they can get away with. I think books like ALL STAR are a pretty good thing. Frank Miller and certain writers would probably never do one of the ongoing books. Even though you point out that there hasn't been that many major changes in Batman to the point where continuity would be that big a deal you have to realize that there are writers out there who don't like the current Batman. Miller obviously has his own take on the character and if Miller did his Batman in the regular Bat-books lots of fans would be upset and rightly so. You can't have a character acting a certain way issue after issue for "X" amount of years then suddenly ignore all that and do your own thing...Well...you shouldn't anyway.

Think about it this way...For a writer it's much more enticing to be able to do a character the way you think they should be done and not worry about what's happening with the current version or have to continue what another writer has done. With a book like ALL STAR fans can see different interpretations of Batman through different writers.

For example, Mark Waid wasn't a fan of the so called "Bat-dick" take on the character and really had no desire to write that Batman. With a book like ALL STAR now Waid can do the Batman he likes and have a shot at showing us how he'd make that Batman work. There are writers out there who think the 50s Batman was the best. Some think the 70s version was the best and would want to do their take on that Batman. Maybe some writers would want to take him in a new direction and it might be great stuff.
But you can't do that kind of thing in the regular Batman books.

And, like those creators who have a fav version of Batman, fans have versions they like better than the others. If someone doesn't like what's happening in the regualr books ALL STAR can be a nice change of pace. So, while there are times when perhaps there isn't a real need for another Batman title at least ALL STAR offers something different.

[The Mutt]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u51/The_Mutt_pics/BATMANGODDAMN.jpg

[SURFACE]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u51/The_Mutt_pics/BATMANGODDAMN.jpg
:D ...now that's funny-good work!

[TuPeT]

I'm ok with a darker Batman, I'm familiar with Millers writing, was just taken aback by all the "Goddamns" in this particular issue.
Plus what's with the Canary hangin with Batman, He doesn't watch himself the boys gonna get an "Arrow" in his back!

He knocked the bandits so hard that they will wake up two days later and of the Canary's past Ollie does not need to know... :)

That's how AS Batman does...:p

I've liked very much this "version", but in Brazil only came until #5 so far, so thank to the scanners and original uploaders :D . Is it true that Joker comes in the #8 issue?

[ZombieHavoc]

So I just read All-Star Batman and Robin 1-7 straight through, and I have to say that I love the hell out of this book. I was curious after reading so much of both negative and positive things about the book.

I think it's weird to think about how Batman morphed from whatever he was in 1939 to the campy 60's, Adam West-era Batman to the type of character that would now lend itself to interpretations like Miller's in All-Star.

How did he go from BAM! and ZANG! to boning the Black Canary because he's the goddamn Batman?

I don't know, but I'm sure as hell glad he did.

[The Batman]

Don't know if it's my favourite Bat-title, I think I still give that to Dini's run on 'Tec, but I do love this romp that Miller and Lee are on.

[rick]

The strip is just so twisted in so many ways that it is really hard not to love the dammed thing.

[Sean Whitmore]

I have fun with it and I would have agreed as recently as a year ago. But Morrison's Batman and Dini's Detective are too good for me to consider AS my favorite.


SEAN

[Liberty Belle Fan]

I enjoy the title immensely as well. I've always thought Batman had to be crazy to do what he does on a consistent basis and All-Star clearly cranks that factor up a lot. At the end of the day, it may not be true to form in a purists mind, it's just plain fun.

[Ironman2978]

So I just read All-Star Batman and Robin 1-7 straight through, and I have to say that I love the hell out of this book. I was curious after reading so much of both negative and positive things about the book.

I think it's weird to think about how Batman morphed from whatever he was in 1939 to the campy 60's, Adam West-era Batman to the type of character that would now lend itself to interpretations like Miller's in All-Star.

How did he go from BAM! and ZANG! to boning the Black Canary because he's the goddamn Batman?

I don't know, but I'm sure as hell glad he did.


in the 1939 Batman was originally written in the style of the pulps and this influence was evident with Batman showing little remorse over killing or maiming criminals and was not above using firearms.In early strips, Batman's career as a vigilante initially earns him the ire of the police.

[Pixie_Solanas]

So when is DC going to realize their All Star Line is a total failure? .

It is? AS Batman & Robin is pretty much the only DC book I buy... It's sick, twisted, and a helluva lot of fun. Some of the lines Miller comes up with are soooo bad, they're actually great.