Anyone else feel like the Death of Batman could have been explored more?

[frostedone]

Originally Posted by Super Buddies Forever

I still argue that the best part of The Death of Superman was "Funeral For A Friend." It was seven issues of seeing Metropolis and the entire DCU reel from Superman's death. Yeah, we all knew he was coming back, but it still felt powerful to see the cast's reaction to the dead Superman and the "missing" Clark.

And yeah, we all know Bruce isn't dead, but you only get that good death story once. Instead of "Battle For the Cowl," it would have been nice to have gotten something more cohesive that explored the characters a bit deeper.

Originally Posted by Captain Jim

I think part of the problem here was that from the end of RIP to the end of FC, all of the bat-titles were focused on Bruce being "missing," with everyone fearing the worst but not really knowing. That was the status quo for months until we finally got BFTC (which I liked, tie-in's and all), at which time the characters seemed to have resigned themselves to Bruce's death. It wasn't until just recently (Blackest Night #0 and the latest Batman, which showed a flash-back) that we even knew for sure that the bat-family was aware of the manner of Bruce's "death." I really think that there should have been at least an issue or two, prior to BFTC, that specifically followed up on the events of FC.

I agree with both of you 100%.

[ANewHope]

Well How many books do you need to tell that story?

So far we have Tim Drake's perspective in finding the truth about batman in Red Robin.

We see Dick Grayson dealing with the loss of Bruce for almost 4 months now. It continues in Batman.

It looks like Batman Streets of Gotham will be a good book that follows how the city will react to the new Batman. Comissoner Gordon was questioned in #1 of Streets of Gotham and he pretty much stated he was never on a friend to friend basis with Batman. He never knew the man, he just requested his help from time to time.

We actually did see Tim Drake and Dick Grayson reacting to the death of Batman in the Robin and Nightwing RIP tie-ins and the final issues before those issues were reset.

I'm not saying that I wouldn't like a Batman Requiem issue like we saw in final Crisis, but the point is that only a few characters actually know that Bruce Wayne died and that Dick Grayson has taken up the mantle of Batman. So seeing the DC nation's reaction to the passing of Batman seems unlikely. And if there's never a funeral, then the majority of society will never know about it.

Gotham Sirens #1 ended with Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn demanding to know who the real Batman actually is from Catwoman. It'll be interesting if she actually tells them, but she was given a confession tonic to make her more willing to tell the truth.

[nepenthes]

The reason Batmans "death" felt a little void of impact is because the story that was originally supposed to deal with the fallout, Judd Winnicks Battle of the Cowl, was aborted and handed ovee to essentially an amateur writer. Tony Daniels only used a fraction of Winicks original outline and struggled awkwardly with the characters, logic and themes the story demanded. Battle or Cowl was supposed to be the exploration, but because Winicks outline packed too much in in, it was decided to spread it all out....and put to use in what we are only beginning to read now in Red Robin and the new Batman book.

So it seems that what isn't beleated has just been skipped over for the sake of getting on with the story.

[Captain Jim]

Originally Posted by nepenthes

The reason Batmans "death" felt a little void of impact is because the story that was originally supposed to deal with the fallout, Judd Winnicks Battle of the Cowl, was aborted and handed ovee to essentially an amateur writer.

Your opinion

Tony Daniels only used a fraction of Winicks original outline

You make that sound like a fault. He did what editorial wanted.

and struggled awkwardly with the characters, logic and themes the story demanded.

Again, that's your opinion. And one you seem to be in the minority on.


Wow, you never miss an opportunity to insult this guy, do you?

[nepenthes]

Originally Posted by Captain Jim

Your opinion

of course

You make that sound like a fault. He did what editorial wanted.

I didn't mean to and I know that's what editorial wanted. I thought it was relevant to mention because if Winick did in fact plan out a story that explores Batmans death in three issues, and Daniels only used a fraction of it in three issues, then we are subsequently losing alot of the material that would give impact and context to his death.

Wow, you never miss an opportunity to insult this guy, do you?

I don't want to harp on about him, but in this particular case, if I believe that Daniels writing meant that impact was lost from the event of Batmans death (which is the thread topic) then I think it's fair to contribute that opinion here. But otherwise no you won't see me rubbishing Daniels if BotC is just mentioned in passing. I don't actually enjoy being negative about comics or creators.

[dupersuper]

Originally Posted by NeoStar9X

That right there would be the problem. Not apart of the BftC main series. Many people might have simply skipped that event all together and just waited for the new titles and Batman/Detective to start back up. Or maybe only got into or back into Batman with the "relaunch".

I'm hoping the reactions are covered in the titles as a result of this (which the reactions should be shown I feel).

Well, presumably some one who felt the death of Batman wasn't being fully explored would want to pick up all the BftC stuff...

[Lemurion]

From what I've heard, one reason why they didn't go with Winick's version was that it would not have fit in three issues.

I enjoyed BftC, it wasn't the greatest Batman story ever told, but it was a perfectly enjoyable read.

As to character reactions, I'm watching them play out in the various Bat-books and so far they seem reasonable. As for Gordon's reaction in Streets: we don't know if that's his actual feelings or what he told the officer.

Time will tell - and so far the books are good.

[earl]

Yeah but he's not dead. Batman isn't really the type of character where everyone is going to circle around and cry around a statue anyway. I think the last issue of Batman covered all of this enough for me and that is the reason they did that issue. It's time to get back to business.

Somewhere in the DC universe there is a park with a whole lot of out of date statues at this point. Hawkman probably has his own garden or something.

[Captain Jim]

Originally Posted by nepenthes

if Winick did in fact plan out a story that explores Batmans death in three issues, and Daniels only used a fraction of it in three issues, then we are subsequently losing alot of the material that would give impact and context to his death.

But Winick's original plan for this series was to have taken more than three issues. I forget exactly how many, but I remember it was to have come out twice/ month. For whatever reason, editorial decided they didn't want the story drawn out that long, and that's why they moved all of that non-essential stuff out of the mini and into the ongoing title.

[carabas]

they moved all of that non-essential stuff out of the mini

I don't know, but I skipped BFTC and its multitude of tie-ins almost completely, only read the first isue.
Reading the new books, I don't feel like I have missed anything that was essential.

[Captain Jim]

Originally Posted by carabas

I don't know, but I skipped BFTC and its multitude of tie-ins almost completely, only read the first isue.
Reading the new books, I don't feel like I have missed anything that was essential.

I meant essential to the story they wanted to tell.

[vickvega]

I think Joker would be pretty interested in whats going on with Batman. Considering his life is only fulfilled when he's tormenting him. Why arent any writers exploring this aspect? Seems to me, he would want to know what happened to batman more than any other character.

[Mundungus]

Now that I think about it Batman isn't the kind of person you erect a statue for.

Outside of the Bat-family, there are only a few characters in his inner circle that care and respect him. Other than that, there are those that respect him, and others who find his demeanor off-puting.

He's definitely not a Superman.

[carabas]

Originally Posted by vickvega

I think Joker would be pretty interested in whats going on with Batman. Considering his life is only fulfilled when he's tormenting him. Why arent any writers exploring this aspect? Seems to me, he would want to know what happened to batman more than any other character.

Give it time. The Joker doesn't even know Batman is dead yet.