As a fan of the darker, more serious Batman (Year One, Long Halloween, Broken City, Court of Owls) would I still enjoy Morrison's run? I've heard a lot of great things about it, that it explores the history of the character and is meta in certain parts, but there're man bats and other campy villains too.
The thing about Batman is that it's silly to pretend that any of it is really serious - he's a millionaire who dresses as a bat and fights lunatics and monsters alongside his teenage sidekicks. That being said, I'm not saying that makes all Batman equivalent to the 60s tv series or anything, just saying that serious Batman is a bit of a con because the core of Batman is unrealistic.
My advice is to just try reading the first book of Morrison's run, Batman and Son. It does contain man bats, but it's also fairly serious in the sense that things are serious for the characters. Also, if you enjoy Damian, you might enjoy reading the story that introduced him.
Well it probably wouldn't endear him to the character considering how much terrible person (and that's putting it lightly) Damian was.
Anyhow, I finished reading Batman R.I.P. for the third time. Again, like the most of the Part of Morrison's Batman epic, the story is better on this read through, though I still see plenty of problems with it that prevents it from being truly great. It's been upgraded at least from meh to average in my book. Though, like the rest of the books, the art hasn't aged well at all (though not as bad Kubert's). I wonder if this fact will stay consistant when I start rereading the Batman & Robin books?
Sure, Damian starts off as a pain in the ass, but that's what makes the progression of his character satisfying, He was raised by assassins, after all. If he came on to the scene as a perfectly formed Tim Drake-esque Robin, there'd be no conflict. My hope is that someone would start off with Batman and Son, then enjoy it enough to keep going.
As far as RIP goes, I'll agree the art doesn't age well. The thing about Morrison is that he relies heavily on the story telling ability of his artists, this is why the strongest books in the Batman epic are (IMO, obviously) Batman and Robin (with the exception of the storyline with the red hood) and the issues of Batman Inc done with Christ Burnham. Tony Daniel has a style that I know a lot of people enjoy, but I don't think it helped much in RIP.
I think you're over-egging that.
"The Clown at Midnight" was straight up hardboiled.
Morrison actually had Bruce/Batman as a weary detective on the streets more than once.
There's actually been a lot of street level stuff in his Batman, which for some reason, people want to forget, just like the big crazy superhero stuff in Miller's bat-comics that everyone tends to blank out even while they say aloud he's got Superman in there.
“Face down in my own blood and vomit in the pouring rain… Must be a better way to strike terror into the hearts of criminals" was Morrison, you dig?
"When you think about it, life is like a detective story. It's all shadows and clues, mysteries and secrets. And it always starts with a dame."
"It started with a dame. It ended with a funeral."
Last edited by T Hedge Coke; 12-18-2012 at 01:55 PM.
My biggest problem with Morrison's Batman run is Damian--I like his churlish attitude and his contrast to the rest of the Bat-family, but he's a complete Mary-Sue with all his ridiculous abilities. When I read that he had finished putting together the flying Batmobile himself, I just thought, oh, come on. The kid's frigging ten, enough already. There's definitely a good story to be told with Batman having to raise a brat son as a potential sidekick, but Damian (and oh, how I hate that stupid name) is simply absurd. When he met up with Huntress in this month's World's Finest (and how Levitz is squandering Huntress and Power-Girl is a separate post) I really wanted her to just smack him around and put a gag on him after all his stupid arrogant pronouncements.
He'd only be a Mary Sue if anyone writing him actually thought he was right or good or something. And, clearly, no one's supporting Damian's jerkishness or killing. He's highly talented, yes, but so is everyone else in the comics. They're superheroes. You might as well be mad that eight year old Dick could beat up armed adults or that Tim Drake continues to be considered a genius computer dude or one of the few smart enough to deduce batman's secret identity. That Batman can plan for every eventuality and just happens to have the right tool in his belt for any job.
csis and T Hedge are putting my standard responses out of business, thanks guys.....
I'm not the pickiest art guy or an art-focused comic reader, but yea, Morrison really benefits from superior storytelling ability from artists. I guess if you consider Quitely and Burnham's stories in the run (others were great too), you might be right in saying Daniel's RIP art hasn't aged well.As far as RIP goes, I'll agree the art doesn't age well. The thing about Morrison is that he relies heavily on the story telling ability of his artists
Be fun to imagine who would have been better....I think you'd want an artist still who fits with the dark gothic noir feel of RIP, but of course be better than Daniel....that Ryan Sook who did RoBW #5 impressed me quite a bit, maybe I'd have went with him.
Last edited by jgiannantoni05; 12-18-2012 at 08:22 PM.
DC discarded their history, and now has none. DC will always be in the shadows of their past work.
I'll admit that I still enjoy what Daniels did in RIP. His Bowie / Joker was spot on, his Dr.Hurt had the appropriate level of aristocratic smugness (seriously, I think he had a perpetual smile on his face until Bruce rose from the grave), and his Batman of Zur-en-arhh was just the right balance of absurd and menacing.
There are some flaws in there, sure (the reveal of the Batman of Zur-en-arrh springs to mind), but that image of young Bruce standing in the rain at his parents grave with arms outstretched and the red skies really sums up the whole myth of Batman in one image.
And I liked the Club of Villains designs.
I think Daniels nailed all but a few moments/ideas.
The lettering on RIP was functionally incompetent at points, particularly any notebook simulation. It's that hard to line up your faux handwriting to the lines of the notebook? Really? (At least they didn't swap dialogue or use nonsense characters as B&R and FC were saddled with.)
Agreed. For me the things he did right (mainly the characters), outweighed the bad. Maybe it's just my own preferences, but I like that Morrison has worked with so many different artists over the course of his Batman work, as it really gives each arc it's own flavor. And it could be that I just really enjoy RIP as much as anything Morrison's ever written involving Batman; but looking back Daniels' contributions in RIP really stand out in my mind, which says a lot considering he's probably amongst my least favorite of the many artists involved.
Yeah, I really didn't care for the "Bruce's diary" narration boxes.The lettering on RIP was functionally incompetent at points, particularly any notebook simulation. It's that hard to line up your faux handwriting to the lines of the notebook? Really? (At least they didn't swap dialogue or use nonsense characters as B&R and FC were saddled with.)
Yea, I should clarify that really enjoy Daniel's work in RIP. I'm not even sure I much think his work hasn't aged well. Kinda mixed & undecided on that, hard to untangle what worked and for what reasons.
Tony really nailed Hurt and Joker and other moments.
DC discarded their history, and now has none. DC will always be in the shadows of their past work.
Bookmarks