Batman 300 and up (reviews by shaxper)

[shaxper]

The argument that ol' Cape-and-Cowl gets too dark and broody without a kid in green pixie boots glued to his side is bogus,

Not sure if you're specifically responding to me here or not, but that was never my point. My point was that later writers (beginning with Conway) introduced this idea of Robin helping Batman to "hold back the demons" as a means of balancing the darker, deeper protagonist with the more shallow, lighthearted one. I don't think anyone's under the impression that Robbins, O'Neil, and Englehart depicted a Batman who was somehow over the edge.

There was little in past stories--aside from those first eleven Golden Age episodes--to indicate that there was anything wrong psychologically with Batman (at least nothing that wasn't wrong with every other hero who donned tights and fought crime for free) so the "damaged psyche" interpretation never has rang true for me.

Of course. And yet many writers have felt the temptation to explore how a child traumatized enough by his parents' death to vow to become such a terrifying avenger would have some level of psychological issues at play. I felt Conway, Moench, and Barr balanced these issues well and without making Batman into a total psychopath. Then there was Frank Miller...

[Cei-U!]

Not sure if you're specifically responding to me here or not, but that was never my point.

No to the first part and I know it wasn't to the second.

My point was that later writers (beginning with Conway) introduced this idea of Robin helping Batman to "hold back the demons" as a means of balancing the darker, deeper protagonist with the more shallow, lighthearted one. I don't think anyone's under the impression that Robbins, O'Neil, and Englehart depicted a Batman who was somehow over the edge.

I suppose I'm being a bit of a hypocrite here, as in Lash House I had Superman observe that Batman would've become dangerous eventually had he not adopted Dick. Still, I prefer to see the Batman/Robin relationship as similar to those between Pat Ryan and Terry Lee or Dick Tracy and Junior, fathers and sons in ever way but biological.

And yet many writers have felt the temptation to explore how a child traumatized enough by his parents' death to vow to become such a terrifying avenger would have some level of psychological issues at play. I felt Conway, Moench, and Barr balanced these issues well and without making Batman into a total psychopath. Then there was Frank Miller...

I've always liked to believe that someone in young Bruce's life--Uncle Phillip pre-Crisis, Alfred post--had the good sense to get him into counseling. He could afford the very best care, after all, and family court would've almost certainly ordered it when appointing his guardian. Up to the point in the series where those aforesaid temptations were given in to, Batman struck me as keenly self-aware psychologically, a man consciously acting (in the theatrical sense) the part of terrifying avenger rather than getting his catharsis on. The catch is that if you get too psychologically realistic with a fantasy character like Batman, the whole thing falls apart: a vigilante who dresses up like a bat and drags a 12-year-old through the vilest neighborhoods in the middle of the night looking for people, often armed people, to beat up can't be anything other than crazy. Which brings us back to Miller...

Cei-U!
I summon ... I don't know, you pick something!

[shaxper]

I suppose I'm being a bit of a hypocrite here, as in Lash House I had Superman observe that Batman would've become dangerous eventually had he not adopted Dick. Still, I prefer to see the Batman/Robin relationship as similar to those between Pat Ryan and Terry Lee or Dick Tracy and Junior, fathers and sons in ever way but biological.

Oh, I agree. But don't you know any men who were once reckless and led self-destructive lifestyles but now try to take better care of themselves because they are fathers? I know quite a few.

I've always liked to believe that someone in young Bruce's life--Uncle Phillip pre-Crisis, Alfred post--had the good sense to get him into counseling. He could afford the very best care, after all, and family court would've almost certainly ordered it when appointing his guardian. Up to the point in the series where those aforesaid temptations were given in to, Batman struck me as keenly self-aware psychologically, a man consciously acting (in the theatrical sense) the part of terrifying avenger rather than getting his catharsis on. The catch is that if you get too psychologically realistic with a fantasy character like Batman, the whole thing falls apart: a vigilante who dresses up like a bat and drags a 12-year-old through the vilest neighborhoods in the middle of the night looking for people, often armed people, to beat up can't be anything other than crazy. Which brings us back to Miller...

I think part of my limitation here is that I haven't read enough of the 70s Batman stuff. I'm so used to him having the troubled core and keep forgetting that, for nearly a decade, he was solo, intense, and not the slightest bit unstable. I really do need to go back and read more of those stories.

I summon ...

...a subtle Lash House endorsement?

[shaxper]

New Titans #61

"A Lonely Place of Dying, Part Four: Going Home!"
writer: Marv Wolfman
co-plotter and layouts: George Perez
finished pencils: Tom Grummett
embellisher: Bob McLeod
letters: John Costanza
colors: Adrienne Roy
assoc. editor: Jonathan Peterson
editor: Mike Carlin

grade: C+

Wolfman gets it...kinda'.

Seems like much of the purpose of this issue is to backtrack a bit on Tim Drake, who was definitely being imposed upon the reader like a sledgehammer. This time around, Wolfman dials it back a few notches, beginning with replaying that final scene in the Batcave from the previous chapter. This time, Tim's approach to reuniting Bruce and Dick feels like more of a presumptuous imposition, and Dick responds as such, getting angry and storming off, leaving Tim in tears. Even Alfred later rebuffs some of Tim's inquiries, observing that he asks "too many personal questions," though ultimately giving in and answering them. Likewise, the story is still giving in to Tim and his inevitable editorially-mandated destiny to become the next Robin, but the path feels a little more resistant and realistic this time. Most of the issue isn't spent on Tim at all, and by the end of this chapter, it looks like Tim will first don the Robin costume of necessity and not because Dick or Alfred necessarily thought it was a good idea for him to become Robin otherwise. I only wish Wolfman could give Tim some better characterization and not present him as such an obvious Gary Stu. Still, this dialing back a bit on everything coming up Tim was a nice move.

I like Alfred's observation that Batman is, "almost as obsessive about family as he is about preventing crime." It makes sense, and I think it works throughout all of Batman's history, regardless of who was writing him at the time. Even the later anti-hero Batman that we're first glimpsing here shows a reluctant need for his extended Bat Family.

Beyond that, all I've got for this issue are minor details:

- Does anyone else understand how the heck the coded message left by the Titans' new mysterious antagonist (Danny Chase?) led to Jericho uncovering an encoded Batman mini disc? One seems entirely unrelated to the other. Besides the question of why the bad guy would have Batman's message, there's the fact that the mini disc is a physical item; you don't download or decrypt a custom designed data disc.

- Why the hell does Joey sign out the individual letters of Dick and Raven's names? Does Wolfman know any actual deaf people? They create custom signs to represent the people closest to them. I'd imagine the Titans would qualify in Joey's world. Besides, with superheroes, time is often in short supply. It takes Joey four times longer to sign out Dick and Raven's names than it should (2 signs as opposed to 8).

- Joey knows about the data disc format from having been in Dick's body briefly in the past. That's a pretty arbitrary piece of information to have gleaned. What else does Joey know about Dick and Bruce? Isn't he going to turn evil in a year or two? Somehow, I doubt the writer of those later issues will consider this fact when writing them.

- Dick makes calls while sitting in an alleyway? He needed to rest that badly? If four muggers suddenly turned the corner, what the heck would he do?

- Why does Bruce decide he needs Dick's help in taking down Two face? Maybe he's worried about his ability to make sound decisions at this point? I hope they explain this next issue.

- Wolfman describes Batman's mind as "racing with possibilities. His eyes take in everything, missing nothing," while Dick will comment in the very next panel that "...Batman's acting like a bull in a china shop...and he's barely paying attention to the danger." These two viewpoints do not jibe. Is Wolfman attempting to suggest that Dick has Bruce pegged wrong?

- Seriously, how long would it take Two Face to furnish an entire house upside down, and where'd he find the skilled labor to pull it off? This isn't the 1950s anymore, Marv. We're going for more realism in comics now.

- What's up with Batman's nose on page 18?

- Nothing about Two Face's logic makes any sense to me in this issue, even while Batman and Nightwing appear to get it just fine. Why use the number IV when his MO is the number 2? WHY make the basement the second floor? None of it adds up, but our heroes seem to disagree.

-The art on page 22 really confuses me. The explosion appears to be occurring in two different places, not in one location as shown from two different perspectives. Nightwing is in the basement, and the center of the explosion appears to be nowhere near the ceiling, yet Batman's on the first floor and apparently directly above the center of the explosion. Had the panels been reversed, one could suspect that the explosion grew between panels, but we see Batman's perspective first.


the plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence:

Tim asks Dick to become Robin again for Batman's sake, he refuses and storms off to help Batman as Nightwing, some anonymous antagonist contacts Titans tower and leaves an encoded message, this somehow leads to Joey discovering a data disc created by Batman for Nightwing, Raven interrupts Nightwing and Gordan discussing Batman's behavior and gives the disc to Nightwing, the disc contains all the clues that Two Face left Batman but none of the answers, Dick deduces that Batman is testing him to see how fast he'll decipher them, Tim and Alfred talk about the fighting between Bruce and Dick, Nightwing finds Batman, Batman asks for help with Two Face, Batman storms Two Face's hideout before Nightwing can stop him, Nightwing enters through the basement, Two Face shows up and activates a bomb, Alfred realizes Nightwing's locator signal has terminated abruptly, and Tim seems ready to run to the rescue as the camera zooms in on the Robin costume.


Not a great issue, and there were lots of minor issues, but Marv wrote Dick incredibly well (he almost aways does), and I appreciate his dialing back on Tim a bit.

[shaxper]

Detective Comics #608

"Anarky in Gotham City"
writer: Alan Grant
pencils: Norm Breyfogle
inks: Steve Mitchell
letters: Todd Klein
colors: Adrienne Roy
assoc. editor: Dan Raspler
editor: Denny O'Neil
creator: Bob Kane

grade: A-

Ah, now this feels like a Grant/Breyfogle story (whereas the previous Mud Pack storyline felt a bit out of character and imposed). This first in a two part storyline is densely plotted and rich in ideas, information presented, and (of course) visuals. It was particularly fun to read this knowing how it ends. Breyfogle is always so careful to show Anarky's head facing perfectly forward, never tilting or turning (if you've never read this story before, trust me -- this matters), and Grant and Breyfogle serve up some massive misdirection on who Anarky is when we meet the Machin family for the first time.

As for Anarky himself, I still don't understand this character after all these years. When I read this comic as a 9 year old, it was my first introduction to the concept of anarchy, and so I walked away believing it was a kind of extreme democracy in which the people's vote is what matters. In hindsight, Anarky is actually more of a fascist, enforcing morality in accordance with his own definitions and answering to no one. But Anarky as an anarchist? I don't see it.

The costume is a clear theft of V For Vendetta (with a slight Amadeus twist), and yet V was fighting a totalitarian regime. Anarky, on the other hand, seems furious that the government is too weak-willed in dealing with people who should be punished. That's kind of the exact opposite of what V stood for. Anarky seems to believe in a democracy in which all voices are heard, and the punishment for those who defy them is extreme. And, by the way, when are letters to the editor ever the voice of the people? They generally reflect the most extreme outlying perspectives on a given issue. What would Anarky do if the publisher printed two letters that disagreed with one another, or that defied his own particular take on morality?

Still, I really like Anarky, particularly in the distinct voices Grant gives to him (that's always Grant's greatest strength), giving him an eloquent V-for-Vendetta-like voice, and yet betraying that voice with the familiarity of a fanboy teen upon accidentally running into Johnny Vomit at first. Subtle and brilliant.

At this point, it's appropriate to share this quote from Chad that he provided earlier on in this thread:

Though your reviews haven't yet gotten around to this character yet - Alan Grant introduced Anarky with the hope that he would become the third Robin. He wasn't aware of course, that plans were already underway for a different direction.

I still find this fascinating and would have loved to see DC try it. I envision another Jason Todd with a more focused defiance who would force Batman to weigh the ethics of his decisions a lot more extensively. Of course, Warner Bros. never would have gone for it.


The minor details:

- My favorite Breyfogle panel of the issue -- the proud writer of the letter to the editor on page 14. So adorable. Seeing how likeable and sweet she is almost makes you sympathize with Anarky. Then you realize his crusade makes absolutely no sense. Really, it's not even the violence he uses that I find objectionable. He's still not killing.

- Of course, Batman driving the batmobile on page 17 is pretty darn sweet too.

- More on the Anarky identity misdirection (don't read this if you want to be surprised). I absolutely love that Grant and Breyfogle make you suspect Lonnie first on page 18 and THEN shift focus to his dad. So much more crafty than never making you suspect him at all.

-This randomly makes me wonder when the first time was in comics that we were left to wonder about the identity of a costumed character until the end of a story. Clearly, Batman's identity in Detective #27 was unknown until the final page, but it wasn't a mystery that we were baited with and left to guess at. The earliest example I can think of in which the reader was specifically enticed to guess at a character's identity until the end would be Powerman in World's Finest #229.

-Grant seems either to be getting piecemeal information from O'Neil about what's happening in the other title or is trying to clear things up in anticipation for making Anarky the next Robin when he has Bruce say:

"I know, I know -- my own methods aren't always legal, either. But there IS a difference, Alfred...I only use violence when it's absolutely necessary, not as a form of punishment...not lately, anyway"

(my own bolding)

Bruce has not yet clearly worked out this stuff over at the other Batman title.

- Alfred prepares a summary of the major news events for Bruce each morning. Darn good idea.

- In the letters column, a fan points out that, before entering the business, Norm Breyfogle entered a drawing into a contest to design a new Robin costume, and that drawing was published in the back of Batman Family #13. Wish I owned the issue.

- Also in the letters column, Dan Raspler (or whoever writes the responses) talks about the upcoming Legends of the Dark Knight #1 and says, "it should bring a new definition to the word "collector's item." And, indeed, it did. That new definition was "over-hyped, and still worthless twenty years later."


The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence:

We are given a letters to the editor page from the Gotham Gazette with one writer complaining about a heavy metal club making too much noise for residents and another writer complaining about a factory polluting the Gotham River, we see Batman at the metal club, busting a drug dealer who is also the opening act, as the dealer escapes, he runs into Anarky, who electro shocks him into a coma with his staff and sprays "I deal drugs. I kill kids" on the wall above him along with the anarchy symbol, and leaves a clipping from the Gotham Gazette letters to the editor page at the scene, Batman puts two and two together and checks out the writer of the column, a nice old lady who offers no leads, Anarky meditates upon the evils of the current government and the need to heed the peoples' voices, he next goes after the CEO of the company polluting Gotham River, Batman returns home in parallel to Lonnie Machin returning from his paper route, followed by his father, Mike Machin, who complains of having had a restless night. A video is then played on the news, made by Anarky as he dunked the CEO's head into a pale of toxic sludge from his factory, poisoning and nearly killing him, Bruce and Alfred then debate Anarky's ethics and how similar/different they are to Batman's, and Batman reads the next day's Letters to the Editor page, planning a trap for Anarky.


Awesome issue overall, even if Anarky's ideology still thoroughly escapes me. Granted, he's only a kid, but I didn't even understand his thinking when I was a kid.

[Cei-U!]

Here is the aforementioned Breyfogle Robin redesign from Batman Family #13 just for you, shax.

Cei-U!
Boy, Ah said the boy had a lot to learn!

[shaxper]

Here is the aforementioned Breyfogle Robin redesign from Batman Family #13 just for you, shax.

Cei-U!
Boy, Ah said the boy had a lot to learn!

Wow.

I was so incredibly psyched and appreciative when I saw this reply.

Then I clicked on the link.

Wow.

[shaxper]

Legends of the Dark Knight #1

"Shaman, Book One"
writer: Dennis O'Neil
pencils: Edward Hannigan
inks: John Beatty
letters: John Costanza
colors: Richmond Lewis
asst. editor: Kevin Dooley
editor: Andrew Helfer
Batman created by Bob Kane
Special thanks to Carol Goldberg

grade: D

Before discussing the story itself, I think it's worthwhile to reflect on the creation of this new series in general. Undoubtedly, the primary drive in creating a third Batman title was to make more money. As O'Neil observed in an earlier letters column, sales on Batman titles had indeed gone sky high since the release of the film, creating enough demand to release a third Batman title. Now this is good news to a degree, but it's also sad news when you consider that the storylines that these new fans were eating up, the ones that they were demanding more of, were the thoroughly unimpressive and disorganized "Year 3", the forgettable and also disorganized "Tulpa," the Gary Stu Robin launch-vehicle "Lonely Place of Dying," and the uneven "Mud Pack". Of course, these fans were also picking up Year One, DKR, and The Killing Joke via trade paperback, but even still, we're at that critical tipping point where the fan base driving Batman sales was no longer one that knew anything about the true potential of the Batman franchise and its real, non-hyped high points. Englehart, Wein, Conway, Moench, and Bar, would be wiped away from collective memory, their contributions lost in favor of the new.

But enough of the soap box. I suppose where I owe O'Neil credit is in making the purpose of this book so thoroughly different from that of the other two. Right from the start, O'Neil makes it clear on the inside of the outside cover (wow. That's not confusing) that this title will "present separate stories by different creative teams; the best talent in our industry will use BATMAN: LEGENDS OF THE DARK KNIGHT to tell stories that (like the five issue "Shaman") stand alone...".

Of course, as cool an idea as it was at the time, like so much else that O'Neil did, this pretty much set the tone for the industry for years after, ultimately resulting in high profile writers on five issue story arcs in virtually every title who arrive and leave with no respect for internal continuity and character progression; Just self-contained decompressed story arcs for the trade paperbacks.

Anyway, it was a good idea here.

And, of course, another bad idea O'Neil starts with this issue -- multiple covers. I'm at least glad the double cover idea didn't stick, as it seemed quite stupid and probably costly, but I remember seeing dealers selling sets of all four covers of LoTK #1 when it first came out and thinking "Why? Who needs that?". Unfortunately, it stuck for a while, and even Spidey #1 was making millions just by presenting the cover in different colors (although, to be fair, they were sparkly metallic covers ).

Another interesting point. O'Neil continues his quote from above by saying:

...to tell stories that (like the five issue "Shaman") stand alone, outside the regular continuity of BATMAN and DETECTIVE COMICS"

(my bolds).

Did O'Neil just mean that LoTDK isn't part of the modern day events of those titles, or did he actually mean to suggest that these stories would not and could not apply to continuity?

Finally, just who was the intended audience for this book? I'm assuming most of the new readers flocking to the Batman titles were kids (and O'Neil seemed to think as much in his notes to new readers in the letters columns), and he even states in the intro to this issue that "All in all, BATMAN: LEGENDS OF THE DARK KNIGHT is a very innovative and important book. It's the perfect way to start reading comics," but this is not a kid's comic. It's darker, more thematically and intellectually mature, and it presents far more internal narration than action. When I picked up LoTDK as a nine year old, I bought a subscription to it and read it each month because it was BATMAN, but I was constantly frustrated by the book, incensed that the stories were so dense and difficult to read, as well as lacking in action and familiar villains. This probably should have been a Vertigo title.


On to the story, itself...

"Shaman" is pretty much a perfect embodiment of O'Neil's editorial views and understandings of the Batman Universe. By that I mean that it's dark, it works REALLY hard to align itself with the fanboy favorite Year One (actually attempting to supplement that story), and it has absolutely zero awareness of continuity, screwing things up all over the place.

Probably the most important continuity glitch O'Neil makes is more tonal than it is explicitly factual. Bruce returns to Gotham happy. He's actually cracking jokes in Miller's most intense moment from Year One, as he lies dying, no longer thinking of and apologizing to his deceased father, with the bat crashing through the window. I'm no fan of Miller's take on Batman, but O'Neil just pissed all over it by making this a semi-light hearted moment. Then, of course, O'Neil has Alfred design the Bat costume, which completely defies the moment in Year One and in Batman Annual #13 in which he shows it to Alfred for the first time and Alfred is startled by it.

Beyond that, there's just a lot that doesn't make sense in this issue:

1. Bruce failed to receive training from the tracker/bounty hunter he was seeking out (Willy Doggett died before Bruce could watch him work) AND learned that he's still inexperienced and can easily get himself killed, yet he returns to Gotham right after this experience to begin his war on crime. In what way is he feeling ready at this point?

2. Bruce is unable to believe that the Shaman cured him without modern medicine and antibiotics, yet he's completed his training at this point, meaning that he's already well immersed in Eastern philosophy and martial arts training, including his experiences under Tsunetomo, who taught him to alter his body functions and sense of time through meditation. Someone with that kind of experience would scoff at the healing abilities of a tribal medicine man?

3. Bruce is barely aware of what's happening while he's feverish, yet he explicitly recalls every word and details of the Bat story.

4. The Bat story makes no sense. The bat grew wings of its own volition, and yet the Raven permits the bat to keep the wings. Huh?

5. Bruce appears to have absolutely no connection with the Native American woman beyond receiving information from her about her shaman grandfather, and yet he asks her to come back to Gotham with her. Did I miss a romantic connection somewhere?


There are still things I like about this story. Hannigan and Beatty do a very nice job with Bruce on his first night out as Batman, and I respect that O'Neil tried to bring the now virtually forgotten Leslie Thompson back into Bruce's world with this story. All in all, though, this felt like a sad cash-in on the success and reputation of Year One, as well as a sloppy attempt to add a few signature O'Neil twists into Batman canon for posterity that definitely didn't need to be there (Bruce's new inspiration for becoming Batman, the new origin of the "criminals are superstitious and cowardly lot" phrase).

And seriously, O'Neil couldn't edit this book himself?


The minor details:

1. Willy Doggett is an expert bounty hunter and tracker that Bruce sought out as part of his training, but he doesn't make the list of people who trained Bruce because he is killed before Bruce gets to watch him in action and learn from him.

2. I completely forgot that the Superman Archives were launched at this point. Hard to believe the DC Archive Editions have been around since 1989!


The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: Bruce is pursuing a killer on a mountain in Alaska with a potential trainer, the trainer and killer are killed in an altercation, and Bruce loses all his equipment, left to freeze to death on the mountain, he is found by and cared for a group of Native Americans and told the story of the bat by their shaman, curing him of his wounds and illness, Bruce returns to Gotham, his first night out from Year One is briefly, replayed, including a drastic rewrite of the moment he decides to become Batman, he decides to meet with a Dr. Madison Spurlock about her request for the Wayne Foundation to fund his research of "Indians of Northern Alaska," he goes out as Batman for the first time and saves Leslie Thompson and a pregnant Native American patient from a band of thugs, the patient sees Batman, calls him "Chubala," and stabs herself to death.

I did enjoy the tone of this story. Mazzucchelli really gave a distinct feel to Batman's early days that Hannigan and Beatty emulate well here, but O'Neil's script is just plain stupid and badly researched in regard to continuity happening in his own damn Bat Office. I really expected to respect O'Neil a little better after reading this, and I had the opposite reaction.

[JTG]

Anarky has been a favorite character of mine ever since I stumbled upon his obscenely long Wikipedia entry. Then I bought the trade, and I grew to love him, even if I don't always agree with his philosophy .

If you want to better understand his philosophy at that time, I suggest picking up the trade or finding Batman Chronicle #1, which is where he basically explains it in Juvenile Hall. Or you could just read the Wiki page. The debate ceaselessly rages there, though the term Libertarian Socialist probably best describes his situation at the time. For the people, anti-state... I think you have to look at him as though he absolutely believes he's "answering to the people" when he dishes out that sweet vigilante justice. Whether or not he's actually dishing out his own justice rather than the collective will, well, that's debatable and I think you have your opinion on that.

Later of course he moves with Grant to Neo-Tech Objectivism, a whole other can of worms, which is the mini-series and subsequent on-going. The mini-series is pretty good if you ask me, the on-going was garbage and got cancelled pretty quick.

[shaxper]

Batman #442

“A Lonely Place of Dying, Chapter 5: Rebirth”
writer: Marv Wolfman
co-plotter: George Perez
pencils: Jim Aparo
inks: Mike DeCarlo
letters: John Costanza
colors: Adrienne Roy
assoc. editor: Dan Raspler
editor: Denny O’Neil
creator: Bob Kane

grade: B+

It seems to me that Marv Wolfman had to write this issue for two distinct audiences – new/young fans who expected to see Tim become Robin and were excited, and old veteran fans who expected to see Tim become Robin and were skeptical. Marv does his best to write to both audiences in this final installment.

For the young fans, Tim gets to put on the costume, save the day, and fight side by side with Batman and Nightwing.

For the older fans, Tim doesn’t get a definitive “Yes, you can be Robin” by the end of the issue, instead understanding that he will have to prove himself over time and actually earn the role. Wolfman is finally and clearly backing off from the Gary Stu approach to Tim in this issue. And while, in the letters column, O’Neil declares that Tim is, indeed, the third Robin with no subtlety nor tact, Wolfman goes far further to make Tim palatable to wary fans in this issue.

For one thing, it’s solely Tim’s idea to become Robin, with Alfred second guessing himself as he drives Tim to Two Face’s hideout. We’ve come a long way from the previous issue, in which Alfred and Nightwing were clearly pushing Tim (whom they had just met) to take on the role.

For another, Tim nearly gets his butt kicked in his first battle with Two Face, and even then, he’s careful to explain the physical training and karate he’d taken to enable him to somewhat hold his own in battle. Incidentally, I love how Tim pulled out the brick to protect himself from Two Face’s crowbar. While he lacks the innate ability and lifelong training of Dick Grayson, he clearly distinguishes himself by being the smartest of the Robins.

For another still, he has the guts to tell Batman to his face that he’s become reckless without a Robin, not depending upon Alfred or Dick to do his explaining for him.

Then, finally, we’re given this dialogue that seems to run through all the objections to, and rationales for, Batman having another Robin:

Tim: You need someone to make you slow down just a bit and wonder what could happen. I mean, how many times have you been hurt these past months?

Batman: So, for my sake, I should put some child in danger?

Tim: No, that’s not it---

Batman: This ISN’T a discussion.

Tim: Then if not for you – for those criminals you hunt down. You want them to think they can get away with murder? Batman, if they think they can KILL someone like Robin – who are they going to hunt down next? I don’t know why you decided to wear that costume <Really? He knows everything else about Bruce and Dick. He couldn’t trace it all back to Bruce’s parents being killed??> -- but it makes you a symbol. Just as Robin was a symbol. Or Superman, or Nightwing, or the policeman who wears his uniform. And this isn’t just a symbol of the law. It’s a symbol of Justice. When one policeman is killed, others take his place because Justice can’t be stopped. And Batman needs a Robin. No matter what he thinks he wants.


The symbol angle is a new twist, and it’s the one that ultimately wins Bruce over. Of course, it’s not an airtight logic (I’d imagine the real Batman would have countered the policeman example with: “So I should just keep lining up kids in domino masks and watching them die for the sake of preserving a symbol?”), but it’s probably the best rationale any writer could provide for Bruce taking on a new Robin.

Of course, there are the concerns Batman didn’t raise – the fact that Tim has a family and a stable homelife and doesn’t NEED this the way Dick and Jason did, as well as the more important white elephant – the fact that Jason just died doing this. While mentioned earlier, it’s completely ignored here. Tim certainly doesn’t seem as though he’s really considered the risk here, simply playing out a fantasy in order to help out his hero.

Still, it’s the best we’re going to get beyond “I need a new Robin cuz Warner Bros. said so.”


Chronology/continuity issues:

According to Two Face, Robin’s been “hiding for months now,” implying Jason’s death occurred several months ago. If we’re to take Two Face at his word and assume that Jason didn’t go off the radar prior to his death (I’d think the killing of Felipe in the two issues just prior to A Death in the Family must have generated some buzz), then Marv has screwed up again. Dick states in Year 3 that Jason has only been dead for a few weeks, Year 3 took place over a matter of days (three, if I’m not mistaken) and Lonely Place of Dying takes place almost immediately after Year 3.

Also, in the letters column, O’Neil states both that Dark Knight Returns takes place 20 years in the future AND verifies my argument that it is no longer the actual future of this continuity since Batman did not take the path described in DKR (retiring) after Jason died.


The minor details:

Marv seems to have a shaky and ever-changing grasp of Two Face. This time around, he has Two Face explain that the coin provides a sense of systematic procedure, preventing things from falling to chance. Virtually every other writer to tackle Harvey has seemed to approach him from the perspective that he views chance AS the ultimate system of logic and justice – the one thing all else bows to.

He also makes Harvey pretty unthreatening. I mean, the relatively untrained Tim shouts at him from ten feet away, runs up to him, punches him in the face, and initially captures him by doing this. Seriously – all the kid’s done is work out and take karate.

I also enjoyed Two Face saying, “Without procedure there is ANARCHY.” If only this reference had been intentional…

Another missed connection to other Batman titles – all this talk of symbols, and yet the exploration of the Bat symbol in Legends of the Dark Knight seems so far removed from the concept of a brightly colored sidekick. I wish O’Neil had somehow left some room in that story for us to accept the idea that the symbol of the Bat might one day work in conjunction with some other symbol that balances it (Ravens aren’t THAT far removed from Robins…)

Tim claims in this issue that he never wanted to be Robin but is doing so for Batman’s sake. I get that this is another attempt by Wolfman to make him less of a Gary Stu, but I don’t buy it. Any kid who has idolized Batman from youth has dreamt of being Robin.

Aparo’s art is really off in this issue, especially Alfred’s face on page 7. I seriously had to go back to the first page to make sure it was actually Aparo drawing.

Nice (and surprisingly subtle) touch having Tim narrowly avoid being beaten with a crow bar and then blown up with dynamite.

So Bruce Wayne’s butler runs out to save Tim from Two Face, Two Face is clearly eavesdropping when Alfred calls him “Tim,” and Tim refers to saving “Bruce and Dick” in the very next frame. How does an arch villain not store this info away and look into it later?

I always love when, after years of surviving impossible situations, Batman finally gets himself into a trap he can’t escape from just in time for a sidekick to make their debut. Last time we saw this was when Nocturna flirted with being a superhero way back in the Doug Moench days and had to rescue Batman and Robin from near-death (and, as much as that’s my favorite Batman run of all time, Nocturna as a superhero was a TERRIBLE idea).

When Tim tells Bruce he’s like to come and learn from him, Wolfman missed a valuable opportunity. It would have been so great to have Tim use a line that was reminiscent of Bruce seeking out Harvey Harris as a young unwanted apprentice in the recently published Detective Annual #2. It would have been cool for Bruce to see something of himself in Tim as a primary reason for his taking him on. After all, Tim seems to be capable of Batman’s level of intellect and passion to expand his knowledge.

Is it just me, or does Nightwing seem so much cooler as the “older brother” when a Robin is around?

Wolfman completely abandoned the parallel he’d been weaving between Bruce and Harvey in this final chapter. Sure, company will help Bruce keep himself sane, but at least acknowledge this somewhere in the issue! Two Face was a big enough deal to be Bruce’s foil in the other chapters of this story, but now he’s nothing more than a joke in this one.

I’m assuming the “Joker” we see a cameo of at the end is the imposter Joker that will soon be turning up in the title. I do love how much fun DC has had teasing us with Joker’s return, first in the Secret Origins Special, then in making us think Harvey was The Joker in Batman #440, and now this. GREAT misdirection, incidentally, as the voice he heard in #400 WAS the Joker – we just thought it was Harvey’s internal dialogue.


(continued in post below...)

[shaxper]

(...continued)


The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence:

Tim worries that Bruce and Dick haven’t come back so he decides to save them as Robin, Alfred reluctantly assists him, he confronts Two Face and is narrowly saved from Jason’s fate (crowbar and dynamite) by Alfred, Tim rescues Bruce and Dick, Bruce is understandably skeptical about Tim wearing the Robin costume, but Tim makes his case and had the foresight to plant a tracker on Two Face, so Bruce allows him to tag along for the moment, he proves himself again by thinking quickly when Two Face uses a wrecking ball to knock a pile of cars in a junkyard onto the Batmobile, Bruce and Dick easily stop Two Face, back at the mansion Bruce agrees to give Tim a chance to prove himself (no clear commitment to make him a Robin), and we discover it was the Joker manipulating Two Face through that radio (or was it?)


Look, creating Tim Drake and making him a third Robin was a TERRIBLE idea, but it was also an inevitability, and I feel Wolfman finally did his best in this issue to make that inevitability work. The Gary Stu aspect of Tim is finally gone, though he’s still just a little too perfect, and I truly respect Wolfman not allowing Tim to become Robin right away. This made me furious as a kid reading this issue, and I’m sure it didn’t please Warner Bros. that much either, but it was the right call for the more mature reading audience. No way Bruce would jump right into something like this so quickly.

If only Wolfman hadn’t suddenly turned Two Face into such a joke this issue. We always knew he wasn’t the real heart of this story, but suddenly diminishing the threat he poses and treating him like a secondary problem in order give more attention to Tim was just insulting, as well as a clear example of poor internal consistency.

[Chad]

Does Batman Need a Robin?

Mike W. Barr gave more attention to this concept in his own post-Crisis run, depicting a generally carefree Batman and Robin who could occasionally and randomly go completely over the line, seething uncontrolled rage that seemed to come out of nowhere. He ultimately worked hard to suggest that Bruce and Jason were both driven by dark rage, but kept each other sane through a facade of light-hearted fun. The significance of this is that it allowed Batman both to be tremendously dark/conflicted and fun/lighthearted at the same time. I felt this was an incredibly successful approach to the character that opened the doorway for Batman, allowing him to be explored in any number of ways, no longer limited either to dark brooding or lighthearted simplicity. This Batman certainly needed a Robin.

"STOP LAUGHING! DO YOU HEAR ME, JOKER? FOR YEARS YOU'VE LAUGHED AND SNEERED AT EVERYTHING DECENT! BUT NO MORE, DO YOU HEAR ME? NO MORE!"

"Batman, STOP! Stop--you'll kill him...You lost the Catwoman, yeah, but you stopped the Joker and saved the Bensons...saved their lives. That's something."

"No chum, that's everything! Let's go home!"

Excellent, beautiful summation of Barr's Batman, Shaxper. I noticed a distinct change between how Barr depicted Batman in Batman and the Outsiders and the few times he wrote the character in his own title in the early 80's and how he presented the character during his run on Tec. In the former, his Batman is content to compliment one of his teammates on the way he turned a dictator over to his people to be ripped to shreads ("I like the way you think") and quite willingly murdered Ra's Al Ghul by sabotaging his rocket so it would fly into the sun in Batman Annual 8 (that Ra's survived had nothing to do with Batman). His Tec run however, featured a Batman who flaunted his appreciation for the word 'chum'.

The argument that ol' Cape-and-Cowl gets too dark and broody without a kid in green pixie boots glued to his side is bogus

My biggest complaint with the first Nolan film is how dependant Batman is on others. He needs his girlfriend to tell him he doesn't kill. He needs Ra's to explain his mission in life. Lucius Fox is required to build his devices. Alfred is there to provide perspective. Far from being the polymath his character should be, this is a Batman without meaning, determination, and little skill of his own. It's a trait that I've found in the comics themselves and I can't help but feel it stems from the work that was done in A Lonely Place of Dying. I can accept the argument that at this point in time, having lost a Robin as violently as he did, Batman's in a bad spot. Here comes Tim Drake - a level headed kid who is taking complete responsibility for whatever might happen to him - offering to help him out. I don't like the idea of a crazy Batman, but I'll concede that at the nadir of his career, Batman might be acting as irrationally as Wolfman decides he should be. However there's a line (a thought, actually) in Batman 442 delivered by Dick Grayson that really set a bad precedent. "Bruce, for once think with your heart, not cold logic". Retroactively, Wolfman is establishing that far from Batman's actions being out of character since Jason's death, Batman has always been a cold, emotionless creature. You could argue otherwise but you'd be arguing with Dick Grayson. Interestingly, in a nice moment in his story Wolfman contrasts Batman as he was with both Robins by showing him as a proud, smiling fatherlike figure when photographed with Dick Grayson juxtaposed against a much sterner figure in pictures with Jason Todd. So Wolfman himself wouldn't seem to buy Grayson's presentation of the facts, but still...who would be a greater expert on how Batman relates to his Robins than Dick Grayson?

"You ask why I want to make Dick Grayson my ward? You ask it as if this were some momentary whim a well known playboy has decided to make. We all know my reputation and I don't deny that some of it is probably well deserved but this is no whim. My parents were killed by criminals as were his. I know what it's like. I know the loneliness. The fears. The nightmares. I know it all. Nobody understood when it happened to me. Nobody understood what it does to you but I do. I watched as his parents died and my heart went out to him."

Wolfman's own writing in Year Three. And THAT's why Bruce Wayne (not Batman) adopted Dick Grayson (not Robin). Grayson's "for once think with your heart" is extremely cold but goes unchallenged here and in later appearances. It seems to have become accepted fact that Batman's sole purpose for taking in Robins is to recruit soldiers in his war on crime and it's a take that has led me to really despise the creature he's become.

[Patroklos]

I can't say I understand your critiscism of the "manifesto" of LOTDK. What's so bad about letting the events in that comic be outside of official continuity, (although that paticular paragraph became much more fluent in later years) especially as it would allow the creative talent to write stories unhindered by such considerations? Also, I think it's quite clear that O'Neill is going for a cheap sales pitch in his "perfect way to start reading comics". LOTDK was clearly made to appeal to already existing fans, people who would be compelled to buy a prestige format with big name writers and artists doing a Batman story. I can't swear to it, but I think that LOTDK actually was the best selling Batman title for some time, which suggests that the strategy worked.

[shaxper]

I noticed a distinct change between how Barr depicted Batman in Batman and the Outsiders and the few times he wrote the character in his own title in the early 80's and how he presented the character during his run on Tec. In the former, his Batman is content to compliment one of his teammates on the way he turned a dictator over to his people to be ripped to shreads ("I like the way you think") and quite willingly murdered Ra's Al Ghul by sabotaging his rocket so it would fly into the sun in Batman Annual 8 (that Ra's survived had nothing to do with Batman). His Tec run however, featured a Batman who flaunted his appreciation for the word 'chum'.

The "chum" Batman seemed to be editorially mandated by O'Neil, as the two filler writers to take on Batman immediately after the reboot both went out of their way to characterize him in this way. Interesting, both considering O'Neil's own approach to the character a decade earlier and Dark Knight Returns, which was certainly enticing the fanbase to demand something very different from Batman.

In that sense, Barr did an excellent job of marrying the two -- giving O'Neil what he wanted at the time while also laying the groundwork for this guy to be able to become Miller's Batman should Jason ever be killed.

It's a trait that I've found in the comics themselves and I can't help but feel it stems from the work that was done in A Lonely Place of Dying. I can accept the argument that at this point in time, having lost a Robin as violently as he did, Batman's in a bad spot. Here comes Tim Drake - a level headed kid who is taking complete responsibility for whatever might happen to him - offering to help him out. I don't like the idea of a crazy Batman, but I'll concede that at the nadir of his career, Batman might be acting as irrationally as Wolfman decides he should be. However there's a line (a thought, actually) in Batman 442 delivered by Dick Grayson that really set a bad precedent. "Bruce, for once think with your heart, not cold logic". Retroactively, Wolfman is establishing that far from Batman's actions being out of character since Jason's death, Batman has always been a cold, emotionless creature. You could argue otherwise but you'd be arguing with Dick Grayson. Interestingly, in a nice moment in his story Wolfman contrasts Batman as he was with both Robins by showing him as a proud, smiling fatherlike figure when photographed with Dick Grayson juxtaposed against a much sterner figure in pictures with Jason Todd. So Wolfman himself wouldn't seem to buy Grayson's presentation of the facts, but still...who would be a greater expert on how Batman relates to his Robins than Dick Grayson?

"You ask why I want to make Dick Grayson my ward? You ask it as if this were some momentary whim a well known playboy has decided to make. We all know my reputation and I don't deny that some of it is probably well deserved but this is no whim. My parents were killed by criminals as were his. I know what it's like. I know the loneliness. The fears. The nightmares. I know it all. Nobody understood when it happened to me. Nobody understood what it does to you but I do. I watched as his parents died and my heart went out to him."

Wolfman's own writing in Year Three. And THAT's why Bruce Wayne (not Batman) adopted Dick Grayson (not Robin). Grayson's "for once think with your heart" is extremely cold but goes unchallenged here and in later appearances. It seems to have become accepted fact that Batman's sole purpose for taking in Robins is to recruit soldiers in his war on crime and it's a take that has led me to really despise the creature he's become.

One thing I've come to accept about Wolfman's work on Year 3 and Lonely Place of Dying is that he's thoroughly inconsistent, changing facts, continuity, and characterization on a moment's notice.

On top of that, I'd add that there are several times in Year 3 when Wolfman subtly shows that Nightwing is an unreliable commentator on Batman's life, most specifically believing that Batman had never been dark prior to this time and missing the fact that he'd been very dark until the moment he took Dick in (which the story clearly shows).

In short, I wouldn't read too much into Dick's erroneous comment.

[shaxper]

I can't say I understand your critiscism of the "manifesto" of LOTDK.

I can't say I recall articulating one.

I did say that I lamented how the comic industry went on to use the LotDK format for virtually all comics later on, but I also pointed out that it worked with LotDK.

What's so bad about letting the events in that comic be outside of official continuity, (although that paticular paragraph became much more fluent in later years) especially as it would allow the creative talent to write stories unhindered by such considerations?

Nothing, unless it's the way you're approaching every title and every character so that no characters ever develop/grow and so that every major event and turning point ends up discarded and forgotten a year later. Again, I have no problem with how this was handled in LotDK since Batman had two other titles where he could theoretically have room to grow and develop. The entire point of LotDK was that it was supposed to be a unique approach, and I respect it for that.

Also, I think it's quite clear that O'Neill is going for a cheap sales pitch in his "perfect way to start reading comics". LOTDK was clearly made to appeal to already existing fans, people who would be compelled to buy a prestige format with big name writers and artists doing a Batman story. I can't swear to it, but I think that LOTDK actually was the best selling Batman title for some time, which suggests that the strategy worked.

I don't disagree with any of this, except to say that I don't think O'Neil believed he was targeting the existing fanbase (or at least not primarily targeting them). If so, why wait until the summer of '89 to release this third ongoing (when all the new fans were just pouring in after the film) and why create the incentive covers?