Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 41
  1. #16
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    8,089

    Default

    Most of his works have their own clearly defined beginning and end, so even if it's not technically the "end of Batman" it can probably be read that way. See: New X-Men.

  2. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,570

    Default

    Nah. I actually prefer it the way it is, with Morrison's run continuing into the new 52, because it means that his run will actually have repercussions. I doubt any of the development the characters have received or the new stuff like Incorporated would continue into the new 52 if not for this, so I think it's better the way it is. I'd really rather his run continue into the new 52 with minor changes and continue to have some influence on how things are with Batman. That is, unless he suddenly at the very end totally derails everything. I guess there's a small chance of that.

  3. #18
    Veteran Member Lancerman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    5,398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jake V View Post
    I don't really think that Morrison is being kept from writing whatever he wants to write.
    He likes writing superheroes within the constraints of continuity. A big part of his Batman run was him exploring the continuity in different ways. I doubt he cares much that a neccessary function of the genre he loves to write in forced him to make some adjustments. It's the game he willingly signed up for. If he wanted to go no holds barred he could have pitched something to Vertigo or wet independent. The rules don't change for him.

  4. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jake V View Post
    You're assuming he's got a story like that he wants to tell and isn't being allowed.
    No I was asking if he should have been

  5. #20
    Rocket surgeon Sunbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,223

    Default

    Considering the reboot was the effective end to decades of stories a lot stories and characters should have had proper endings. A massive missed opportunity.
    "Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain" Steven Pinker

  6. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Nuke View Post
    No I was asking if he should have been
    ...I don't understand. Your question is "Should Grant Morrison have been allowed to End BATMAN?". "Allowed" implies that something stopped him, which gets back to Jake V's point.

  7. #22
    deep green nepenthes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ivy's Lair
    Posts
    6,037

    Default

    It's a reasonable question, not sure why people seem to be having issues with it

    Quote Originally Posted by mex4173 View Post
    In a sense, "there will be Batmen and Robins until at least 1,000,000 AD" (Batman #700) is something of an ending. For that matter, the same thing could be said about the last page of FC #7 or "Tell him Gotham's in trouble. And tell him he'll need this," from RoBW #6.
    Exactly, Batman & Robin will never die. But there can be an ending to Bruce Wayne's part and personally I'd lLOVE to see how Morrison plays this.

  8. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sunbird View Post
    Considering the reboot was the effective end to decades of stories a lot stories and characters should have had proper endings. A massive missed opportunity.
    Then again, before the reboot DC kept claiming that Batman would be 'untouched' and carry on like business as usual. No one anticipated the pretty significant retcons and erasures (not to mention the compression) Batman's been subjected to lately.

  9. #24
    Mind Controller ArnoldoAAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    San Jose, Costa Rica
    Posts
    7,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jake V View Post
    I don't really think that Morrison is being kept from writing whatever he wants to write.
    I think Action Comics #9 begs t differ
    DC really let him loose on that one
    Check out the Comicfrontline
    The Self-destruction of New 52 FINAL PART
    Click here
    Check out Batwatchhttp://batwatch.net/

  10. #25
    BANNED Jake V's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    11,560

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Nuke View Post
    No I was asking if he should have been
    There's no reason to believe he's not "allowed" to do anything.

    Should DC have tasked Morrison with writing a "last" Batman story? I don't think you get a writer's best work when you're telling them what to write.

  11. #26
    Senior Member clownprince01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,604

    Default

    I don't mind if it was Grant Morrison, Scott Snyder or anyone else. But I believe all the main DC characters, not just Batman, should've been allowed to have some kind of ending. Didn't have to be something definitive like Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow or The Dark Knight Returns, but some kind of story that more offers closure other than a sudden DCU-wide reboot. Either that or replace Flashpoint with something akin to Kingdom Come and then do a cold hard reboot.

    One problem I have with comics is that there are far too many origins and nowhere near enough endings.
    Your name is Kal-El. You are the only survivor of the planet Krypton. Even though you've been raised as a human being, you are not one of them
    JOR-EL

  12. #27
    Veteran Member Dr. Hurt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,537

    Default

    But Grant Morrison did kill Batman. He gave him a final case to investigate, the death of a god, and then he put him in a final death trap, his own mind which he escaped, and then he faced the god of evil and paid the price. Morrison even gave him his last rites, which was a nice review of his entire history, right before he died. And then we saw what would happen if Bruce died, so we got BftC, and Dick becoming Batman.

    But this is comics, so you cant kill someone like Bruce Wayne forever. So how do you kill him? You kill him in a way that feels permanent to the people inside the universe, and that's what happened, but then you bring him back.

  13. #28
    Elder Member thwhtGuardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    mansfield, MA
    Posts
    20,868

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nepenthes View Post
    It's a reasonable question, not sure why people seem to be having issues with it



    Exactly, Batman & Robin will never die. But there can be an ending to Bruce Wayne's part and personally I'd lLOVE to see how Morrison plays this.
    It doesn't seem too reasonable to me because as others have pointed out the question assumes that GM wanted to tell a Batman The End kind of story but DC stopped him from doing so. There's nothing to say he planned such a story and nothing that proves that he wasn't allowed to do it.

    Would I like to see him tell a final Bruce as Batman story? Definitely. But he doesn't need to be "allowed" to do that, if he called up the front office of DC tomorrow and said," I'm doing my take of DKR and What ever happened to the Caped Crusader." you can be sure DC would be down with that like white on rice.

  14. #29

    Default

    i doubt Morrison could have wrapped it up in one book, he'd probabily need 3 books to set it up

    i lost alot of love for Morrison after RIP. It was hard to enjoy as a stand alone book, too much multi-coloured Batman and the jumping around in time was confusing.

    Enjoyed The Black Glove though

  15. #30
    Marquis de carabas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Belgium.
    Posts
    31,788

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batzarro#1 View Post
    i lost alot of love for Morrison after RIP. It was hard to enjoy as a stand alone book, too much multi-coloured Batman and the jumping around in time was confusing.
    That might have been because R.I.P. was in no way at all anything remotely resembling a stand-alone story, nor was it intended to be one.

    It's like losing a lot of love for Tolkien because "Th Two Towers" didn't really work as a stand-alone novel.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Nuke View Post
    No I was asking if he should have been
    Well, I'm pretty sure he did end Batman and then somenbody else carried on past the ending as has been done in corporate superhero comics foras long as they have existed.

    And yes, he totally should have been allowed to do this.

    What do you mean exactly by a "real ending' anyway?
    'The marquis. Well, you know, to be honest, he seems a little bit dodgy to me.'
    'Mm,' she agreed. 'He's a little bit dodgy in the same way that rats are a little bit covered in fur."

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •