Comic Book Resources

Very nice piece, Greg, thanks!

"puts Bruce Wayne as pushing fifty at the time of Final Crisis, so it’s best not to think about it too hard at all."

This may just be me, but the idea of an older Wayne (perhaps not that old) doesn't seem to problematic. If I'm not mistaken the official age of Wayne is still 29, but I don't think that really how old most people think of him or write him. To me, Wayne seems to be in his late thirties at least, then you can have early Batman in his late twenties, middle Batman in his early thirties and late Batman in his late thirties. If Wayne is suppose to be one of the 'elder statesmen' of the DCU, then it makes sense to me for him to be a bit older. Of course the response might be that no-one in their late thirties could do what Batman can but 1. no-one in their late twenties could either and 2. he's BATMAN. You would have to push Damien’s birth earlier for it to make sense, but I could see a ten year old Damien.

This may just be me, but the idea of an older Wayne (perhaps not that old) doesn’t seem to problematic.

I knew as soon as I typed that paragraph about the timeline that it would be the thing people seized on. I keep thinking about it myself. That's just how we roll, I guess.

Here's the thing. What screws it up isn't Bruce Wayne's age so much as it is Dick Grayson's. Figure Bruce started as Batman at -- let's be extra-forgiving and say 23 or so, though in my head I picture him as five or six years older during Year One.

All right. So Bruce adopts Dick as Robin in Year Three, making him 26. Then Dick is Robin all through middle and high school -- Marv Wolfman once said in Titans that Dick began at age eight, probably trying to solve this same problem (that is, that if Dick ages, so does Bruce) but again, we'll be forgiving and telescope things a bit. Even so, the oldest Dick Grayson can be when he starts out as Robin is still around age eleven or twelve. Dick is Robin until he graduates high school -- age eighteen, roughly. A minimum total of six years, making Bruce 32. (if we go with Marv Wolfman's stated "age eight" beginning, that adds another three or four years, putting Bruce at 36.) Then we have the "Teen Wonder" Robin years, Hudson U, first and second iterations of Titans, all of that stuff. This is when Batman first encounters Talia and Ra's Al Ghul and he's at least 33 by then. If he and Talia get together and conceive Damian that year -- say, right after Batman and Ra's have their sword battle in the desert -- it still puts Bruce at 43 when Damian is ten years old ... but the way I read those stories, I don't think that's the way it happened, I think he was too occupied with getting Ra's into the hands of the authorities. I think the earliest Bruce and Talia spent the night together came quite a bit later, right around the time Batman was going after Ra's and the League of Assassins for the murder of Kathy Kane. That's the first time it's made absolutely clear that Bruce and Talia were together overnight as lovers. And-- again being very generous with time estimates -- I think that's three or four years later, when Bruce is 36 or 37. So when Damian is ten years old that makes Bruce Wayne 46 or 47, hence, "pushing fifty."

Of course, the mistake was in ever allowing Dick Grayson to age at all. But at the time it was an amazingly cool idea, and I loved 1970s "teen wonder" Robin and later, Nightwing, and now the new Grayson Batman. But the math doesn't really work.

I know I said it was best not to think about it but I just can't stop myself. It's a disease. Pity me.

The solution to that would just be to retcon Wayne sleeping Talia back to Wayne's first few years of being Batman. If we had Bruce becoming Batman at 25, and Dick becoming Robin at 12 and Damian being conceived in the same year, then Bruce would now be 38 and Dick 22. That would completely change a huge amount of Bruce's history, but if we keep making Bruce do new things and at the same time don't make him (that much) older then events are going to need to be stuffed in to the remaining time more tightly.

The solution to that would just be to retcon Wayne sleeping Talia back to Wayne’s first few years of being Batman.

That was my thought as well. It changes a bit about Ras's first appearance - Dick obviously isn't in college when he gets kidnapped - but other than that it would be workable. And I have no problem with Bruce being in his late 30's (late 40's probably is pushing it a bit).

Of course, I'm also of the theory that Zatanna has managed to keep most of the JLA relatively young with her magic over the years, so it's not that big a deal for me.

Well, sure, a retcon is the answer if you're bound and determined to FIX it. My feeling is that it's not really broken -- fussing about this kind of thing is how fans amuse each other, but the creators of the actual comics shouldn't be bothered about it. Better to just ignore it and forge ahead. Not ignoring minor stuff only leads to "Rebirth"-style pedantry.

The thing originally bothered me was just that Talia successfully hid her pregnancy and then her son from Batman, the World's Greatest Detective, for over a decade. To me that's more jarring than the chronology. But thinking about that led me TO thinking about the overall chronology.

I dunno, Greg. God knows Batman is my all-time favorite comic book character but, the Dini/Timm animation titles excepted, I have yet to regret walking away from his titles back in '86. Nothing you've said about this new plotline or its effects on the various (and far too numerous) titles) remotely tempts me to change my mind. Guess I'm just a cranky old fart stuck in the Bronze Age...

Well, Cei-U, I started reading Batman books right around the time you dropped them, and I can say with certainty that this is the best they've been in a loooong time. They've tried revamping the line several times, but this is the first time ever that it feels like they're actually trying to do something new with the characters (I'm excluding Knightfall/Knightsend/Knightquest because I was a stupid teenager and believed the hype).

Like you, I love the various Batman movies and cartoons, and many times have wished the media tie-ins would rub off a bit on the comics themselves. This new direction feels as fresh to me as the various animated series or Batman Begins. I don't want to oversell it, but if you're thinking of dipping a toe back in then now is the time.

40-frakkin years!!!

Way too much Batman porn for you!!!!

Fortunately for me, I read Batman selectively and occasionally.
Like Miller, Loeb and Sale, Loeb and Lee, Morrison and Quitely.

As an aside, both Dawn and I utterly adore the expression 'nerd rabbit trail'.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing as the initial premise of this article: I hadn't been reading any of Morrison's Bat-stuff, but was enjoying Dixon's run on Robin before it was prematurely scrapped and would follow what's going on in the Bat-universe here and there, so I was skeptical as well. Picked up Batman and Robin and Streets of Gotham on a whim and quite enjoyed them both. Thanks for the overview on the rest, I probably won't be getting any of the others, but it's nice to see what the outlook is there.

I guess we're still discounting the fact that we know exactly when Talia gave birth to Bruce's son? I mean, I know the God of All Comics claims that's not Damian, but they did have a son, and it was years into their relationship. 1987, to be precise.

"Well, sure, a retcon is the answer if you’re bound and determined to FIX it. My feeling is that it’s not really broken — fussing about this kind of thing is how fans amuse each other, but the creators of the actual comics shouldn’t be bothered about it. Better to just ignore it and forge ahead. Not ignoring minor stuff only leads to “Rebirth”-style pedantry."

I TOTALLY disagree here. For two reasons:

One, It IS the writer's business to keep his facts straight, not us fans. It's their job. Ignoring "minor stuff" like this is precisely what leads to discussions like this one (How can Batman have a 10-year-old son?") And yes, It IS broken- the answer is: he shouldn't, but they decided to go ahead and give him one anyway.

And second: Just what the Hell is wrong with us fans wondering about such things? We live in a world where we have REALLY serious problems like war and the economy going on yet "Normal" people spend too much of their time talking about political or celebrity gossip, and somehow being a comics geek is supposed to be wrong or embarrassing? GIVE ME A BREAK. No seriously, give me one. How many times have you complained about that in this column only to then launch into geeky tirades yourself? Heck, you just did it again!!

Besides, as pointed above, the answer is simple: DC retconned Damian's birth. If I, continuity fan that I am, can accept that, why can't you? As you said, the important part is that good stories are written as a result. (whether these stories are worth it, however, is something only time will tell...)

BTW: Can someone tell me if Batwoman is supposed to be an albino? I didn't notice this before (I'm not following her series) but her skin looks way more pale than the other characters'. Nothing wrong with that, I just wanted to know if that was natural, part of her disguise, or an artistic choice.

I have some quibbles. My biggest one is, why would Tim choose “Red Robin” as his new heroic identity? He’s never read Kingdom Come. Because apart from that tenuous connection to a story that came out thirteen years ago, it just is annoying. The costume is not that great, the name is dumb — in fact, I keep thinking of the burger chain, so I guess it’s a good thing the first story arc is set in Europe.

I'm seeing this criticism a lot, and I have to ask: Did no one read the end of Tim's Robin series?

After Jason Todd discarded the Red Robin suit (which he acquired during Countdown), Ulysses Armstrong -- formerly The General, one of Tim's old foes -- came into possession of the costume and used it as part of a psychological warfare campaign against Drake; Armstrong also adopted the Anarky identity to further the head-games. During a battle between Armstrong (as Anarky) and Drake in a warehouse, Tim's face got seriously burned, so he took the Red Robin suit and wore the cowl as a means to conceal his scarring.

Granted, his face miraculously healed by the next issue, so he was back to being regular Robin for Battle for the Cowl and all of that. But, still, he already had the Red Robin costume on hand. Why wouldn't he use it, after being de-mantled as Robin proper?

As Tim explained in his narration, the suit was already sullied, by Jason Todd and Ulysses Armstrong. No one would think twice if a Red Robin crossed the line (whatever line that might be), whereas quite a few eyebrows would be raised if a regular Robin did.

Red Robin may not be the best name or the best costume, but Tim taking on the identity was firmly foreshadowed, if not outright established, at the end of his series. His ties to the suit are far from tenuous, as a result.

I'm with you on the name evoking the burger chain, though. That's unfortunate. 'Cause, when I think Tim Drake as Red Robin, I don't think "yum!"

When did "Kingdom Come" become the new version of the "Adult Legion"?-- "we insist it's not the actual future, but we can't resist implying that it's all about to come true!"

"One, It IS the writer’s business to keep his facts straight, not us fans. It’s their job. Ignoring “minor stuff” like this is precisely what leads to discussions like this one (How can Batman have a 10-year-old son?”) And yes, It IS broken- the answer is: he shouldn’t, but they decided to go ahead and give him one anyway."

It's the writer's business to tell entertaining stories. When writers start doing stories that serve no purpose but to "fix" old continuity, then they've crossed the line into fan-fiction. Pros don't get No-Prizes, fans do.
If it bothers you that much, chalk it up to "Hypertime" or "New Earth" or whatever else can help you sleep at night.

First of all: while the books are good (in some cases VERY good - B&R and Streets), I frankly don't care about creators doing something "new" with them. The Dixon / Nolan era was solid Batman stories through and through, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Then the Rucka / Brubaker era was solid stories, and again, nothing wrong with that aside from Larry Hama's famously (and inexplicably) awful tenure. I mean, I like Morrison, but he's not doing anything close to as good as Gotham Central was.

"Why not make Tim Drake the new Nightwing?"

Simple answer: because the "Nightwing" name is being used over in the Superman books, and while it's fine having eight million Green Lanterns wandering around apparently people might get confused.

Great piece as always.

I thought I was going to get by with just Detective Comics and Batman & Robin, but it looks like I'm going to have to add Streets Of Gotham to the pull list as well. Sigh.

GIVE ME A BREAK. No seriously, give me one. How many times have you complained about that in this column only to then launch into geeky tirades yourself? Heck, you just did it again!!

Sounds like somebody needs a nap.

...I'm kidding. I say these things with a certain amount of self-deprecating humor, you know. It's not 'wrong' or 'embarrassing,' not really -- but it is trivial. I think about timelines and such in a good-natured, shooting-the-breeze kind of way. Lots of fans and fan organizations do that. The Baker Street Irregulars have published newsletters, magazines, and even whole books about this kind of minutiae in the Sherlock Holmes canon.

That's not nearly the same as having a fit of temper about how the writer's not doing his job! if he doesn't acknowledge every single thing published about the character up to the point he takes it on. THAT is a 'tirade.' A casual aside in the column noting that the times don't quite fit is just that -- a casual aside. I don't actually need every little thing explained in the story, especially if it's a good story and entertains me.

I’m seeing this criticism a lot, and I have to ask: Did no one read the end of Tim’s Robin series?

I did not, no. Nor was I current on the Jason Todd thing. So that's a fair point.

I still don't care for the name or the costume, though.

I guess we’re still discounting the fact that we know exactly when Talia gave birth to Bruce’s son? I mean, I know the God of All Comics claims that’s not Damian, but they did have a son, and it was years into their relationship. 1987, to be precise.

I did know that, I like both Son of the Demon and its sequel Bride of the Demon a lot. In fact, I wish they'd get Mike Barr to come back and do some more Batman one of these days. But I knew that DC had said those were "Elseworlds" and anyway, going by those numbers would put Bruce well into his sixties.

That's kind of how we play this Wold Newton-chronology-No-Prize speculation game around here... you try to make it fit within the published stuff that you know is still regarded as something that 'counts.' Barr's two "Demon" graphic novels have been explicitly disregarded.

Not to go all Geoff Johns on you. I'm starting to regret bringing it up... it really was just a throwaway point.

God knows Batman is my all-time favorite comic book character but, the Dini/Timm animation titles excepted, I have yet to regret walking away from his titles back in ‘86.

Ack! You've missed all my favorite Bat-runs! Grant/Breyfogle, Milligan/Aparo, Puckett/Parobeck (in Batman Adventures), Rucka/Martinbrough... heck, I'll even give a nod to Dixon/Nolan, who gave us solid, entertaining Bat-fare. And now we've got Morrison/Quitely, which is utterly fantastic already.

BTW: Can someone tell me if Batwoman is supposed to be an albino? I didn’t notice this before (I’m not following her series) but her skin looks way more pale than the other characters’. Nothing wrong with that, I just wanted to know if that was natural, part of her disguise, or an artistic choice.

The simple answer is that it's an artistic choice, of course, to make her a more vampiric-looking Bat creature. But speaking as a redhead, we are an awfully pale people. I wouldn't call myself albino, but I do reflect sunlight if I walk outside.

-"It’s the writer’s business to tell entertaining stories."
Oh God, how many times have we heard this one? Except most of the time, the stories aren't that much better than the original versions. I'm among the first to jump aboard on a new continuity if it *is* good. But most of the time? It's just deconstruction for its own sake.

-" When writers start doing stories that serve no purpose but to “fix” old continuity, then they’ve crossed the line into fan-fiction. "
True; however, most of the time they're *told* to do it. Also, there is such a thing as GOOD fanfiction, and good continuity-fixing stories for that matter.

-" Pros don’t get No-Prizes, fans do."
Actually, Fans never got the No-Prizes either. Writers get something better: MONEY.

-"If it bothers you that much, chalk it up to “Hypertime” or “New Earth” or whatever else can help you sleep at night."
THAT is the point I'm trying to make here: it DOESN'T bother me that much. No more than, say, finding out my favorite sports team failed again. I'll grumble about it a few minutes, then move on with my life. It's when people act all "You bother to think about comic book continuity? LO-SER!" than I'm (slightly) more annoyed. Enough to spit a comeback and then forget about it. Oh, and DC *used* to blame it on Parallel Earths, and the fans accepted it . Then came The Crisis and they threw out their excuse with the bath water. Continuity errors *are* a problem ANd it's up to the comics to fix them. Me? I just decide if I agree with their solutions or not (and post about it. That's what sites like these are for, you know.)

PS: Stephen, I hope you don't take this as a personal attack, your post just happened to bring up several points I wanted to make. Similarly, I hope Greg doesn't take my comments personally, I love reading his column but I'm a bit tired of the "I'm going to engage on Nerd thinking, shame on me" bit. (Not just here, though.)

Anyway, fun column as always, Greg, though you're a lot nicer to the Bat-relaunches than I am. I found Winick's new Batman to be pretty awful, full of overwrought introspection and ugly artwork. The story's also completely unnecessary, as they already covered stuff in the equally awful Battle for the Cowl, and Morrison's proved it all unneeded in Batman & Robin-- one can just jump straight into Grant's series from the end of RIP or Final Crisis or whatever and not miss a beat.

Red Robin was pretty lousy too, although on a reread it's only mediocre, so that's better than I thought at first. I'm interested in the world-travelin', high-flyin' adventure aspect, but I'm not a fan of the grim-and-gritty Tim Drake-- oh, sorry, Tim Wayne, apparently (bleh)-- and his deciding Bruce is still alive even with evidence to the contrary-- they buried a body, for cripes' sake! He's just gone and lost it, which is understandable after every friend and family member he's ever had has been killed off in the past few years. But I'm glad he's not Nightwing-- Nightwing was Dick's identity, and Dick's alone. And besides, he'll be Nightwing again in a year or so.

I didn't bother with Sirens, because I could smell the badness coming off of that, but I gave Streets a go. It was pretty mediocre-- I liked the first two pages, and it was downhill from there. My opinion's probably higher than it should be anyway due to the lovely Nguyen art. The back-up did nothing for me, either.

Detective is going to look absolutely gorgeous in hardcover. The wait's probably going to kill me, but I'll deal with it.

Batman & Robin, of course, is the bee's knees. I have never ever given a crap about the character of Dick Grayson, but in one issue, the Morrison/Quitely team have made me love the dynamic Dick-and-Damian duo, and I don't mind if Bruce Wayne comes back at all so long as the book stays as awesome as this. But I'd bet a dollar that Bruce will be back in time for Batman #700.

"…Sorry, veered off down a nerd rabbit trail there for a moment."

YAY! Part of the joy of hanging out at my LCS every Wednesday is the nerd-ness of it all.

You say you regret bringing it up, but you KNEW this would happen. We're comics nerds, for crying out loud! I'm not even that big on continuity and I find it fun to rant about this stuff occasionally. So don't get all regretful on us now, sir!

I haven't been bothering to read any of the monthly issues of Bat-titles in recent months -- I almost always wait for the trade these days, if I bother reading new stuff at all -- but I am ready to offer an opinion about the ages of key characters.

The impression I've generally gotten about Dick's "starting age" as Robin goes as follows:

1. In the Pre-COIE era, it was stated more than once that he was an eight-year-old circus aerialist when he was orphaned.

Post-COIE, someone apparently decided that Batman encouraging an 8-year-old to go trade blows with armed thugs was too extreme. I can sympathize with that., So they upgraded Dick -- and I have a vague idea that the upgrade made him about 13 (in some writers' versions) when he first donned the costume of Robin. In Marv Wolfman's "Year Three," for instance (published in 1989 in the regular "Batman" title) Dick looked to me like he was in early adolescence -- not just a scrawny eight-year-old -- when he was orphaned. Although I can't recall his exact age being mentioned in dialogue, that time around.

In 1982 there was a "New Teen Titans" story in which the other Titans threw a surprise birthday party for Cyborg. Donna said something like this: "So you're nineteen -- join the crowd!" Obvious implication was that Donna herself, and most of the other Titans at that party, were already 19. That probably included Dick. In 1985, on the other hand, the Earth-2 Dick Grayson explicitly describes his Earth-1 analog as twenty years old. Dick's transition from "Robin" to "Nightwing" occurred between those two stories. So, per the Post-COIE continuity, I'd say Dick was the first Robin for either 6 or 7 years, with his time ending either shortly before or shortly after his 20th birthday (which I don't think we ever saw onstage).

I agree that, per the old Denny O'Neil stories from the 70s, Dick was already at college, while still using the Robin identity in his spare time -- thus, 18 years old for the sake of argument -- when Bruce first encountered Talia and Ra's. So if we grant that Damian was conceived at least "10 years + nine months ago", and that this happened no earlier than Dick's freshman year in college, then Dick ought to be at least 28 or 29 by now. Which sounds a few years too high for my taste! I'm reluctantly willing to go as high as 25, but anything beyond that goes outside my comfort zone for him. (Yeah, as if anyone else cares what makes me comfortable.)

On the other hand, I think the consequences for Bruce's age may be a trifle less drastic than Greg Hatcher estimates. If we grant Damian's conception happened when Dick was 18, and if we go on the theory that Dick had been Robin "for at least 5 years" at that time, then Damian's age means Bruce has aged at least 5 years + 10.75 years since the day he met Dick. Heck, call it 16 years.

Greg estimates Bruce was 26 when he took Dick under his wing. That would make Bruce about 42 today (or conceivably a few months short of his 42nd birthday, but let's brush that quibble aside). On the other hand, Grant Morrison insisted in an interview a few years ago that he thinks Bruce was only 19 when he returned home to Gotham to put theory into practice by using the last several years of training as Batman. If DC is letting Morrison have his way in reshaping the details of Batman's continuity (and lately it appears that editorial policy is: "Let's assume Grant knows what he's doing! I don't understand Final Crisis either, but it must be brilliant!" and so forth), then Bruce may have only been 21 or 22 when he met Dick, which would mean Bruce could still be just 37 or 38 today (16 years later). Saying Bruce is "in his late thirties" works fine for me.

Greg offers the opinion that Bruce and Talia didn't sleep together until around the time of "Detective Comics #490," when Denny O'Neil had just killed off (it seemed -- no bodies recovered at the time!) Ra's al Ghul and the Sensei after the murder of Kathy Kane a few issues earlier. Greg also conjectures that this happened at least 3 or 4 years after Bruce first met Talia. I reject both of those assumptions -- first, because Morrison's dialogue when introducing Damian made it painfully clear that the little snot's conception had occurred under circumstances which had nothing to do with the nitpicking details of any previous "continuity" about the development of the Batman/Talia relationship, and second, because I really don't see any reason to think Bruce and Dick had aged 3 or 4 years in the 1970s comics, i.e. between Talia's first appearance and the final page of "Detective Comics #490." I doubt that entire decade consumed much more than 1 full year of Batman and Robin continuity at the outside; possibly even less!

Aaarrrgh! I failed to remember that I was using a PC I usually don't, and thus my name wouldn't automatically be inserted into the appropriate field. The long post just above, about ages of Dick and Bruce and so forth, was from Lorendiac.

Nice post. I picked B&R, Streets, Detective, and Sirens, so I appreciate the info on the rest of the field. Re: Sirens - I'm sticking on for the second issue because 1) I have faith in Dini and 2) I think the character dynamics could facilitate some pretty cool storytelling. I think the first issue suffered from trying too hard to set up the premise. Would anyone really raise an eyebrow if the first issue simply began with Catwoman, Poison Ivy, and Harley Quinn teamed up to pull a heist or take down some guy who had upset all of them? (This is part of what made the animated series great, we were thrust into situations and accepted them.) Then, over the course of a few issues, we could get some more subtle impressions of why they've decided to stick together.

I've always been a Superman guy rather than a Batman guy but I went ahead and bought all the books just to give 'em a go because I was cautiously optimistic given the creative teams (except Winick/Benes. How could that possibly be good?). Batman & Robin is really the only winner, but it's sooo good. Despite the last 5 or so years, Rucka can be good and JH Williams III makes any book worthwhile so I'm hopeful for Detective.

Streets of Gotham was ok, but I have no reason to stick around other than the back-up and I'm praying those'll be collected. Sirens should be great...Dini doing Harley & Ivy is almost always gold, but he was absolutely on auto-pilot. Red Robin, I love Tim Drake and the idea that he believes Bruce is alive and even the world travelin', but man that was a thoroughly average comic.

" But the more I see of Dick Grayson as Batman, the better I like the concept. If Bruce Wayne never came back, I think I’d be okay with it, in the same way I was okay with Wally West replacing Barry Allen. "

Isn't this a bit of a premature assessment? As an experiment, the current direction has had good results, but as a permanent status quo, I can't see it sticking ( and this isn't about marketing inertia, but as a storytelling engine ). The beauty of Batman is that the concept is so elegant in its simplicty; boy sees parents murdered, travels the world training to be the greatest crimefighter ever, returns to his home grounds as a dark guardian angel figure ( with an inept trust fund man-child identity as his cover ). This is the former Robin becoming Batman as the handler of the new Robin, a lethally skilled 10-year-old psychopath made from the " juices " of the first Batman. It's a better new status quo than most, but it hasn't proven to have legs. I'll admit being wrong if it does prove to be better, but this is not like the Barry/Wally thing, replacing a has-been; this is taking one of the most effective and well-regarded characters in popular fiction, and replacing him with a two-dimensional kid assassin and his bat-dressed babysitter.

The only thing that annoys me about Dick Grayson as Batman is this idea he still has to prove himself and find redemption. In comic book time he's at least been doing this over 15 YEARS!!! Since he was a KID! I'd rather they just have him take over with a cocky confidence. The whole "doubting himself" character arc is way overdone.

The villain of the piece is Firefly, and Dini treats him as a compulsive serial arsonist, giving us a much crazier Garfield Lynns than we’ve seen in the past.

He's been a compulsive serial arsonist since at least the 90s. That's nothing new.

"The only thing that annoys me about Dick Grayson as Batman is this idea he still has to prove himself and find redemption"

He has to prove himself *as Batman.* No one questioned him as Nightwing. No one quetioned him as the leader of the Titans, or the Outsiders, or even the JLA.

But this is like a good college QB getting to play in the NFL - no matter how good he was before, it's something else.

Now, if the point is that Dick's already proven himself as Batman... well, I agree with that, but the creative team (esp. Morrison) seems to be ignoring that Prodigal ever happened for the most part.

Re: the timeline screwed up by Damien's existence.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall there was a moment later in Morrison's Batman run where is was explained that Damien was artificially aged. Thus he's not actually ten years old; he just looks like a ten year old.

But this is like a good college QB getting to play in the NFL – no matter how good he was before, it’s something else.

Even this shouldn't require that much proving. He's an acrobatic and crimefighting prodigy. And pretty much everything required of him as Batman he has tons of experience at: answering the Bat signal? Check. Thorough knowledge of the Batcave and the streets of Gotham? Check. Thorough knowledge of Bruce's methodology? Yup. Experiences with the rogue's gallery? Yes. Years and years of training and apprenticeship from the guy he's replacing. Yes. Even without Prodigal storyline, he shouldn't have so much self-doubt.

Sometimes people are just a natural at something. LeBron James and Kobe Bryant entered the NBA from high school and just hit the ground running and were stars in their very first seasons because they had a ton of preparation and natural talent from the time they were kids. To make my own sports analogy, it would be like if if Kobe and LeBron still had inferiority complexes about how good they were years after entering the league because neither of their names are Michael Jordan.

I just don't find his lack of confidence after all this time beleivable. It's so tired already.

I really love JH Williams III work, no matter what he's doing, but does it seem odd that he'd render Batwomans nipples in every panel she's in? Is it not the same type of cheesecake people detest whenever Ed Benes or similar artists have scantily clad women in their comics?

I must admit it does have that retro erotica pinup classiness to it, but in the end it's still quite distracting.

-"Correct me if I’m wrong, but I recall there was a moment later in Morison's Batman run where is was explained that Damien was artificially aged. Thus he’s not actually ten years old; he just looks like a ten year old."

God, I hope not. I mean, this is set in the DC Universe so its not impossible, but it feels out of place in Batman's corner of the world. Besides, the "aged children" thing rarely works well (see: Gwen Stacy's kids-turned-villains, although that was doomed anyway since they made them Osborn's children instead of Peter's.)

Let me chime in on the "Damian's age" thing. IF he were based in the Son of the Demon novel's events, then yes, he would be too young to be Robin (about 5-6 years old, given the rate time passes in DC comics). However as pointed out above this is not necessarily the case, and even if it were, the DC Universe has shifted what, twice since the first Crisis? Or is it THREE times by now? No point in arguing about it. Besides, since Batman has been active as long as Superman, who last time I looked admitted he has been a hero for at least 13 years, there *is* plenty of time for Damian to grow up. I find the circumstances of his conception more troublesome. Was Wayne really that careless? The guy who plans for EVERYTHING didn't have a condom at hand? Alternatives include: he was drugged, he was raped (Hey, that CAN happen. See: Green Arrow and Shado. People just don't like to think about the possibility, but it's there) and finally, cloning, which I suspect will eventually be used (possibly even making Damian turn out to be somebody else's son.)

And about Batman being in his 40's, so what? Seriously, you think that would matter, with BATMAN of all people? Now THIS is a case of fans not accepting someone for his age and not a writer error. Heck, as a man in his 40's myself, I love seeing heroes in this age bracket in action! (In any case, since there's NO evidence of how old Batman was when he began his career -that I know of- it can simply be assumed he started as young as 18 (and it would fit in with his obsession to fight crime too) so he would be in his mid-30s by now.

One final comment: Yes, I do believe it is the writer's responsibility to keep continuity facts clear, IF that is part of his job description, which is not necessary true all the time. Sometimes they write stories set out of continuity, such as the Elseworlds or All-Star stories; or, are given express permission to reboot someone, like they did with Superman in the 80's. But the rest of the time, when you're playing within a established larger continuity, it IS part of his job to keep his facts straight, and if he doesn't, he can get reprimanded, made to fix it, or even fired. It's NOT an optional thing he (or she) can ignore without permission. Just because SOME of the fans don't care, doesn't mean it's fair "just because the story is more important". The problem is that a story with continuity would not bother fans who don't care for such things (unless it's poorly written) a good story is good even if it has references you don't get. The reverse, however, isn't true- a story with continuity errors WILL piss off continuity fans even it doesn't the rest. So, to truly be fair, a story *that is supposed to be part of a continuity* should keep attention to its facts. It's not "trivial". (Well, SOME details are trivial. If they changed Robin's costume to make it less dumb, most people would not mind. Saying Batman has a 10-year-old son? Sorry, NOT trivial.)

Here's an interesting possibility on the age conundrum: excessively bright kids, which I would certainly count Dick Grayson among, have been known to graduate both High School and College early. If this were true,then Bruce could still conceivably be in his mid to late thirties, could he not?

T.- I agree that Dick should be less whiny. However, I do think his self-doubt is credible when dealing with Damian. It's clear that Dick hasn't been able to reach him or keep him under control. Even an experienced parent, teacher, or mentor figure will feel self-doubt when he or she can not reach a child. Throwing in guns and super-villains can't help the situation.

T.- I agree that Dick should be less whiny. However, I do think his self-doubt is credible when dealing with Damian. It’s clear that Dick hasn’t been able to reach him or keep him under control. Even an experienced parent, teacher, or mentor figure will feel self-doubt when he or she can not reach a child. Throwing in guns and super-villains can’t help the situation.

I totally agree with you here. I like the problems and self-doubt he has with raising Damian because being the guardian of a child is something new to him and its intimidating. That he doesn't have experience with. I also like the idea of grief over losing his support system and friend in Bruce. I also think the survivor guilt complex is also an area with potential for creating internal conflict.

I think between anxiety over being a guardian and winning Damian's respect, grief over losing Bruce and survivor's guilt, there's plenty of area to provide internal conflict for Dick without trotting out the same old crimefighting competence issues. The crimefighting competence is the area where I don't like the self-doubt, that should be a given.

Re: Dick's self-doubt

I say this not having read these new comics, but if we're going to use a sports analogy, I'll take this one: Dick becoming Batman is like a player for a small market baseball team going to the Yankees. He's already been in the major leagues, but it's a lot more pressure. He's got a lot more to live up to (huge contract/very vocal fanbase for the Yankees vs. Dick's own view of what being Batman means/what he thinks Bruce would want) even though he's doing basically the same things he's always been doing.

Re: Damian's age and Batman always being prepared

In Batman 656, which is the issue in which Batman meets Damian, we get this dialogue:
"But have you forgotten that night you and I shared under the desert moon above the Tropic of Cancer?"
"I remember being DRUGGED senseless and refusing to cooperate in some depraved EUGENICS EXPERIMENT. THAT night, maybe?"

(CAPS instead of bold because I'm not sure if I can do it here, but everything capitalized is in bold in the issue.) Anyway, Batman implies it was a different night than what we've ever seen (as far as I can tell, anyway, but I don't have encyclopedic knowledge of their meetings) in which he was conceived, so who knows when it occurred. Aaaand he couldn't be prepared with a condom because he was drugged senseless.

I say this not having read these new comics, but if we’re going to use a sports analogy, I’ll take this one: Dick becoming Batman is like a player for a small market baseball team going to the Yankees. He’s already been in the major leagues, but it’s a lot more pressure. He’s got a lot more to live up to (huge contract/very vocal fanbase for the Yankees vs. Dick’s own view of what being Batman means/what he thinks Bruce would want) even though he’s doing basically the same things he’s always been doing.

The problem is, as Batman's former partner for a majority of Batman's career, it's not really like he's being asked to play at a new level. He started out in the majors. He was alongside Bruce going on the exact same adventures fighting the exact same Rogue's gallery with the exact same risks on the exact same cases. If you're playing as partners, if one players success or failure affects the other player's fortunes, if you are playing in the exact same game on the same side versus the same opponent, then one player is not in the minors while the other is in the majors. You are both playing on the same team. You've always been in the same league.

So is Catwoman a full-on villain again, or are Harley and Ivy now anti-heroes?

Seems odd as last time I read a Catwoman she was a good guy, and last time I read a story with Ivy she was getting chased by a monster made of people she slowly murdered.

Apart from all that, I have been following the new Manhunter’s adventures in trade and enjoying those stories a lot, so it’s a pleasure to see that DC’s found the character a home.

Which is odd, as normally you sat you dislike stories that have characters being overly gritty, constant crossover tie in's and needing to know other stories to know what's going on, yet that's exactly what the first few trades on Manhunter are all about.
From a character so determined to prove to the reader how tough - and yet real - she is, to the awkward crossover tie-ins, cliff hangers that rely on one knowing who the villain is (as they aren't named they just appear - not even fighting the hero yet!) and a messy story tieing her in to the Manhunters of the past... YUCK!

Sorry, I just find it odd that such a terrible title constantly gets 'it's such a shame people don't jump on board'.

Also, if the most successful Manhunter has had it's title canceled, re-started, canceled, team book canceled and is now the back up feature in another character book... they should probably stop re-launching Manhunter.
The Goodwin and Simonson stuff is amazing, but that was because of Goodwin and Simonson not the character.

FINALLY, someone who was thinking the same thing about Red Robin. Why on earth would Tim wear the costume and not go more ninja-like(as parts of his original costume were suggesting) and not really have a costume at the moment. Kingdom Come(while great) needs to be left alone and yes, it's not a great costume or a very good name.

In the book, Tim says, "I'm not Robin anymore.". Well, he still pretty much is. I would rather have seen a new identity or no identity.

I pretty much completely agree with this piece... although I just want to say that it's the combination of Grant Morrison, Frank Quitely, AND Batman that makes Batman and Robin the headliner. Take away any one of them and JH Williams blows it out of the water.

If Rucka and Williams were currently working on Batman instead of Batwoman, that book would be the headliner. Sorry to the Morrison/Quitely enthusiasts.

"I absolutely was not going to spend any more money on Judd Winick superhero comics"

Thank you.

I think they missed a huge opportunity with Tim here. Instead of pushing him into the second tier Bat family role, why not go a new route and have him as the main antagonist of the Batman line? Make him a new deadlier Riddler and ditch Nigma. Losing his dad in Final Crisis then getting shut out of becoming the new Batman and also losing his spot as Robin would be a slap in the face. Having a main bad guy pulling the strings of the other Batman villains who is arguably smarter than Batman could have been interesting. It's the opportunity and set-up DC completely missed out on in Hush.

“Why not make Tim Drake the new Nightwing?”

While it makes sense logically on paper to have everyone "graduate" up a notch in the hierarchy... I don't know, I always thought of the role of Nightwing as being instrinsically Dick, nobody else's. Even though his relationship with Tim has been a great one (probably the two characters who can identify with eachother the most about dealing with Bruce's personality quirks), I really don't want to see anyone else as Nightwing, just retire that costume.

Though I will agree with you that the "Red Robin" name seems to have come from nowhere from Tim's perspective and wasn't explained. Kingdom Come aside, we're not told the significance of it or how Tim arrived at the name, hopefully that will get addressed. It's totally hokey and I think about the restaurant's "Bleu Cheese Burger" and Bottomless Fries every time I hear the name! Besides, wasn't Kingdom Come pretty explicit that their Red Robin was Dick anyway???

Great, thoughtful, earnest piece. I agree with you. Personally, I don't care about the age thing. It didn't bother me until someone brought it up. Actually, it doesn't bother me now. I can suspend my disbelief on the whole matter.

My problem is the back-up stories. I just don't know if I can spend $4 on a book I only want from which I want only about $3 of story. I think the back-up story experiment will ultimately backfire. I'd love to pick up "Streets of Gotham," but logistically I can't buy both that and "Detective Comics." The back-up story will likely end up a failed experiment. It'd be a lot better for readers if they took the back-up stories out and cobbled them together into another series all its own (like Marvel is doing with "Astonishing Tales.") At least the price tag at DC is justified with the additional material, as opposed to Marvel's unforgiving and unrepentant price jack.

I want to start to the phone number poll to let damien live or die. God I wasn't a fan when they killed off jason todd but he more annoying then todd was in the back issues I read. Detective Comics was pretty good but not totally sure what is up with short hair girl trend. I can't read Batman and Robin. My head hurts reading Morrison now and my eyes hurt from looking at the art for #2. God that is some ugly art. I accidently bought this because it was in my box and forget to take it out. DC I WANT MY MONEY BACK! Red Robin was okay. I am not liking the direction with Tim. I liked Gotham City Sirens interesting where Dini takes this. Streets of Gotham was pretty good and manhunter seems to pick up where the series left off.

I thought Damien was constructed in a tube? Tube clone baby thing?

I've been reading Batman for a little over 20 years now. I've skipped out here and there in recent years, but was back on board with Morrison. Now I'm getting B&R and 'Tec - loving both, especially the former.

However, I for one want an old Bruce. First of all, I do think that an older Bruce could still hold his own as the Batman - like in The Dark Night Returns for instance. But, I'd also like to see an aged Bruce as mentor, ala Batman Beyond. Whenever he makes it back from whatever cave he and Steve Rogers are hanging out in, I hope he is older - easy enough to explain at that point - and he takes more of an Oracle style role.

I have to say that so far I've enjoyed every title - though Sirens was my weakest, too. I think they're doing a really good job with connecting things thematically. I also think that while Bruce will always be Batman; Dick is the only character that can really follow him.

I think they missed a huge opportunity with Tim here. Instead of pushing him into the second tier Bat family role, why not go a new route and have him as the main antagonist of the Batman line? Make him a new deadlier Riddler and ditch Nigma.

Because that's a terrible idea. The best aspect of Tim Drake's character was that he took on the Robin role because he felt Batman needed a Robin. He did it because he wanted to, because no one else would. It wasn't some tragedy spurring him on, but a desire to do good. And now they've lumped tragedy upon tragedy upon him to the point of ridiculousness. Having him snap and go bad would destroy everything about the character that anyone ever liked.

My head hurts reading Morrison now and my eyes hurt from looking at the art for #2. God that is some ugly art. I accidently bought this because it was in my box and forget to take it out. DC I WANT MY MONEY BACK!

I don't want to live in your world.

Red Robin was AWFUL-- a great opportunity, a great premise-- Tim travels the world trying to find clues to Bruce Wayne's fate. But aside from the terrible art, THEY NEVER GIVE TIM A CREDIBLE MOTIVATION FOR SUDDENLY GOING TRAVELING. Why does he go where he goes? What makes him think that Bruce is out there, and that he's ON THE RIGHT TRACK? He's given no clues, and no credible reason for why he takes off, other than... wah-wah, nobody loves me, I'm running away around the world...
I'm saying he doesn't discover anything that points to Bruce not being dead, and he doesn't ever have a reason for going where he goes. Plot-wise, it's empty.
And Tim WAYNE? Did anybody else find that really creepy, that Tim took Bruce's last name? It's kind of a slap in the face to his real father, the man who raised him and who died because Tim is a super-hero...

I wanted Red Robin to be good, I don't even hate the costume-- but it was crudely drawn and poorly written (both in plotting and characterization).

The book i like the most is Red Robin. I came into it never having read a single issue of Robin so to me it was like a new character only knowing him from appearances in Batman and from Battle for the Cowl. I don't have any hang ups with the Burger joint since i have never been there and quite frankly didn't know it existed. I LOVE the RED ROBIN UNIFORM. Batman Streets of Gotham Rocked I loved it. Batman and Robin I'm never going to read, I hate Morrison on Batman. I believe Grant Morrison should be Writing Avengers and Bendis should be on Batman but whatever Hate his batman. And Judd Winick is an Okay guy by me, his red hood arc was cool and I'm not offended by him at all. But Red Robin won me over and I'm going to be reading how that book develops.

Why refer to Damien Wayne as illegitimate? Weren't Bruce and Talia technically married even before the events in "Son of the Demon"? Or is all of that unrelated?

yes folks, he is artificially aged.

If Rucka and Williams were currently working on Batman instead of Batwoman, that book would be the headliner.

That's so bizarre - because if it was only Rucka, or only Williams it wouldn't be*.
Basically all you've really done is point out that it's a writer and artist working together who make a book great.

*Williams did it with Dini and Morrison's Batman - with arse ugly art - was number one.

Why refer to Damien Wayne as illegitimate? Weren’t Bruce and Talia technically married even before the events in “Son of the Demon”? Or is all of that unrelated?

He's not from Son Of The Demon - I think that's unrelated.

How was Battle for the Cowl a crossover? It was a miniseries with some one shots. It crossed over into exactly one book - Secret Six. If you're reading S6, you didn't have to read Battle for the Cowl. If you're reading BFTC, you didn't have to read S6.
One title does not equal a crossover. It's a mini with a tie-in.

I've liked all the books and I'm a Superman guy. I hope Gotham Sirens gets better because I'm a big Dini fan. His history with BTAS gives him a few issues with me but I love Batman and Robin and Streets of Gotham.

Dick Grayson became Robin at eight years old. He is currently in the age range of 21 to 23. Lets say for an argument that he is 22 right now as Barbara is usually portrayed as older than him.

Lets say Robin was recruited somewhere in Year Two. Some say year three, but there was exactly a year without Robin time wise, so we'll use the real world as an analogue.

That would make it 13 years since Robin was first introduced into Bruces life. If we say that Dick is as old as Bruce when he first became Batman, then Bruce would be 34. It makes sense, until you add in Damien.

Damien fucks it all up because Ras Al Ghul was around in the early seventies, and Dick was a teenager at this point.

You could work out the math, but it really makes Dick to old, or it makes the adventures with Ras really early in Batman continuity. Lets say that Ras is retconned as an early Batman villain. That makes everything sync up perfectly, as everyone is the right age to be superheroing.

But then you have the age progression of Tim Drake, who was also eight when Dick was about eighteen. So if you bump up his age, he is twelve. And he is obviously not twelve. If you were to retcon his existence into Batman continuity and make him eleven when he first becomes robin (a tad more realistic) and you add up to about fifteen, the age hes at now.

I say Jason Todd was around for a year or so. It adds to how quickly someone can be taken from you.

BAM! Geoff Johns style baby!

Okay, just to show how big of a nerd I am, I did a bit of research into the whole "Bruce Wayne Age" thing.

Bruce Wayne began his career as Batman at the age of 25 (Batman: Year One)

For two years he operated alone, recruiting Robin when he is 27 (Batman: Year Three)

Bruce Wayne was partnered with Dick Grayson for approx. six years when Grayson gave up that mantle. There was about an eighteen month gap where there was no Robin, then Jason Todd came along. (Batman: A Death in the Family TPB)

Now, here things get a little blurry.

Jason Todd was twelve when he became Robin, but there is no indication of his age when he died. It is also revealed that Tim Drake is 13 when he steps up as Robin (Batman: A Lonely Place of Dying).

I would estimate at least 9 years pass between Year Three and a Death in the Family. Allowing for about a year and half of Jason Todd's adventured as Robin.

Jason Todd isn't gone very long before Tim Drake shows up. I would say more than three months and less than six.

Here again, its really hard to follow a time line. Tim isn't old enough to drive legally when his own series started (he had to have a special permit to drive his Dad around). I assumed his age was 15, allowing for the passage of two more years. Toss in another year for his adventures leading up to Infinite Crisis plus the whole "One Year Later" Putting Tim at 17. So, four years total to date.

Adding all this up, I figure as of his "death" Bruce Wayne had to be 38/39. So, not as old as some might suppose.

Oops. I left out the First two years of his solo adventures in that estimate. So 40/41. My bad.

Everything going on in Batman comics right now is TERRIBLE. People can try to make excuses on why it makes sense or why its fresh or whatever but the truth is its all ridiculous. Bruce Wayne IS Batman. If this turns out like the Flash and Bruce is gone basically for good, Im done. Thats tough to say for a life long Batman fan but Ill be utterly and miserably f*cking done. Thanks a million Grant Morrison, you son of a b*tch.

If this turns out like the Flash and Bruce is gone basically for good, Im done. Thats tough to say for a life long Batman fan but Ill be utterly and miserably f*cking done. Thanks a million Grant Morrison, you son of a b*tch.

It's okay. You can say "bitch" here.

And if you honestly think Bruce is out of the picture, you must not be very familiar with comics.

Everything going on in Batman comics right now is TERRIBLE. People can try to make excuses on why it makes sense or why its fresh or whatever but the truth is its all ridiculous.

What excuses?
These are good comics!

Crime is doomed!

Bruce Wayne IS Batman.

Was.

If this turns out like the Flash and Bruce is gone basically for good, Im done. Thats tough to say for a life long Batman fan but Ill be utterly and miserably f*cking done. Thanks a million Grant Morrison, you son of a b*tch.

Are you new to comics?
He's not even dead, he's way back at the start of humanity - if you think he's gone for good... then you must be new to comics.
Kick back and enjoy the ride - this and Captain America are showing you how these sorts of 'replacement' events should have gone back in the day - great adventure stories showing the classic traits of the hero, by showing them through a new set of eyes and done slightly differently.

I also find it odd that you say they are all terrible, but your complaint boils down to the fact that it's not Bruce Wayne as Batman.
That's not all terrible, that's one bit.
With Morrison & Quietly, Rucka & Williams, Winick & Benes and Dini & Nguyen on the books, there's pretty much something there for all superhero tastes.

"I’ve done my share of that kind of jaded bitching myself (and to be honest, I still fully expect DC to walk this back within eighteen months.)"

Considering they're on record saying Bruce isn't really dead and will be back soon you aren't taking much of a risk here are you?

Or do you not read the industry you cover?

Glad to see Tony Daniel's coming back with a six-issue run soon, too!

Considering they’re on record saying Bruce isn’t really dead and will be back soon you aren’t taking much of a risk here are you?

They showed he's not dead in Final Crisis, but Greg's just saying it's still enjoyable because despite that, they are playing it for keeps.

Or do you not read the articles you snark about?

As somebody who hated the character of Bruce Wayne as written post-Crisis, and as somebody who's always loved the character of Dick Grayson, and as somebody who's very interested in beautiful women...

...this is the first time in my 24 years of comic collecting that I have finally consented to buying BATMAN and DETECTIVE COMICS.

I hope Bruce Wayne never comes back.

OK...as far as Dick taking the Batman role from Bruce and him being more than a bit self-conscious about it, here's another example that works just fine...At least I hope it does.

Your Father owns a huge, highly-successful business. You're born into the business, you grow-up hearing everything about it, and as soon as you're old enough, you start working at the Family Business right alongside your Father, who is also your Boss.

After years and years of working alongside your Father, doing many of the same things (But not EVERYTHING; I'm sure even with everything Dick's been through in his years, Bruce could still out-do him in telling horror stories, just when you think you've got everything down 100% and could do the job in your sleep, BAM!!! Your Father suddenly dies, no warning, and because you're the Boss' Son and have basically been primed since your birth to take-over your Father's Business, everyone is looking at you to pick-up the ball, no hesitation, and keep the Business going. And not just going, but going STRONG, and going the way your employees/co-workers and customers EXPECT things to go. Suddenly, Mr. Know-It-All doesn't know everything, and is faced with all kinds of new responsibilities, things you never even thought of, to make sure your Father's Business doesn't tank.

Dick Grayson is the Son who has suddenly and without warning more-or-less been forced to take-over his Father's Business. Sure, he did the job alongside his Father for years, and even left town and hung-out with some kids his own age for awhile and did a few jobs on his own to prove he could. But while he was gone, Father still did the job back home; you mean to tell me Dick knows EVERYTHING that happened during those years? Every little note, trick, and secret Bruce learned while being Batman by himself, and with numerous different sidekicks? Rules changed, the game changed, the job changed. Things change.

Dick isn't suddenly going to step into his Father's shoes and just make it work, and be a confidant, cocky dude while doing it. Know why? Because THAT would be foolish. THAT would be unreal. Because not only does he have to prove to himself he's good enough to be Batman, permanently or otherwise, but now he's got his "employees/co-workers" to both watch and prove himself to (Robin, Batwoman, Tim, Alfred, Barbara, Commish Gordon, etc.), PLUS he has his fellow Superheroes to show that yes, Bruce is dead, but also yes, Dick Grayson can handle it. You just can't tell me the first time Dick shows-up to a JLA meeting wearing the cape-n-cowl, he's not feeling the raised eyebrows, the murmurs, the whispering, the unsureness of it all. When you have might-as-well-be-Gods like Superman and Wonder Woman not too sure you're capable of the B.S. Batman has to put up with, not saying that's the case but it sure COULD be, that's gotta make you sweat a little.

Hope this maybe helped bring a different kind of perspective to the issue. Thanks for the article, as well as everyone's comments! All awesome and engaging! PEACE!!!

Big Money

I've read Batman & Robin, Detective, Gotham City Sirns, and Streets of Gotham. I've liked them all and I have to give praise to all involved. Yes, I even liked Sirens. If only to read Dini's Catwoman. Now I just wonder when The Outsiders will run into Richard and Damien. 10-1 Metamorpho will try and smack Robin the first time he opens his mouth.

I didn't want to read all the comments before posting this, so someone else might have mentioned it, but Bruce actually met Talia before he met Ra's. I believe they united against someone named Dr. Darrk or Darkk (there was some double letter in there) in a Denny O'Neil scripted story.

"Because that’s a terrible idea. The best aspect of Tim Drake’s character was that he took on the Robin role because he felt Batman needed a Robin. He did it because he wanted to, because no one else would. It wasn’t some tragedy spurring him on, but a desire to do good. And now they’ve lumped tragedy upon tragedy upon him to the point of ridiculousness. Having him snap and go bad would destroy everything about the character that anyone ever liked."

Not if it's a red herring and Tim became the main bad guy ala Matches Malone in order to make Dick become the Batman that Gotham needs. Tim's a smart guy. You don't think he could take over the villain game on his own with the hidden motive of making sure the legacy he personally got involved in didn't crumble? Better than turning him from 2nd banana to the apple in the bottom of the bowl.

Not if it’s a red herring and Tim became the main bad guy ala Matches Malone in order to make Dick become the Batman that Gotham needs.

No offense but you trying to explain the idea makes the idea sound even worse. Sounds like something that would come out of a Christopher Nolan movie.

"No offense but you trying to explain the idea makes the idea sound even worse. Sounds like something that would come out of a Christopher Nolan movie."

...I'm honestly curious as to what exactly was so "horrible" about "Batman Begins" or "Dark Knight", which I'm assuming considering the discussion those are the movies you're referring to?

They may not be the most PERFECT renditions of the Batman mythos ever, but as far as on the big screen? As close as we're gonna get. I just don't see how anything in those movies could be classified as "horrible" by any Batman fan's standards. A few things wrong here and there? Sure. But I don't think a movie can become the 2nd highest grossing film of all-time by being "horrible".

...Sorry to quote "horrible" so many times...Hahaha...must have seen the word in another person's post, and got them confused somehow. D'oh!

Also, I know people's opinions are what they are...I really am wondering, T., why those films turned you off so much...

…I’m honestly curious as to what exactly was so “horrible” about “Batman Begins” or “Dark Knight”, which I’m assuming considering the discussion those are the movies you’re referring to?

He'll argue it till he's blue in the face, but it comes down to that it's not 'his' Batman.

He’ll argue it till he’s blue in the face, but it comes down to that it’s not ‘his’ Batman.

Wrong. That's not my argument. Don't listen to FGJ, despite what he says I list tons of valid reasons as to why it's not just a bad Batman movie, it's just a bad movie period. It's 80% plot hole and 20% plot for starters.

If you're really interested, you can read my views on the movie here:
http://therawness.com/why-i-hated-the-dark-knight/

I have neither the time nor the patience to read everything you wrote T, but a couple of points:

A: Batman killed Two-face because someone life was DIRECTLY in danger and Batman had no choice. To kill the Joker would just be gratuitous. While I'm sure you would like to make Batman's life easy, Dark Knight was willing to challenge Batman's morality.

B: "He actually looks like he’s bordering between creepy and harmless." Bullshit. Joker's never looked harmless. Joker was based on this guy: http://anyeventuality.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/themanwholaughs.png He sure looks harmless.

C: Gyllenhaal was SO ugly you couldn't believe that Batman couldn't be interested in her? Did you stop to consider Batman mightn't be as shallow as you?

D: So you didn't like the morality in Dark Knight. And as morality = politics, you didn't like the politics in Dark Knight. So you didn't like Dark Knight because it wasn't politically correct.

Wow T, politically correctness gone mad! You disliking something because of its politics, that's a little hypocritical isn't it?

“He actually looks like he’s bordering between creepy and harmless.” Bullshit. Joker’s never looked harmless. Joker was based on this guy: http://anyeventuality.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/themanwholaughs.png He sure looks harmless.

He looks creepy but he doesn't blatantly look like a psychopathic killer. I've actually seen the silent movie, I know. The beauty of Batman and the Joker is the clash of the demonic looking dark guy being the force for good and the smiling bright guy being the force of evil. When they both look and sound like dark demonic people it's just relentlessly grim and depressing.

Batman killed Two-face because someone life was DIRECTLY in danger and Batman had no choice. To kill the Joker would just be gratuitous. While I’m sure you would like to make Batman’s life easy, Dark Knight was willing to challenge Batman’s morality.

It was shown that Batman could save people from falling with ease whenever he wanted. He could jump out a window and contort himself to break Maggie Gyllenhaal's fall from a window. He could shoot a Batline without effort and catch the Joker's leg when he fell from a building. I just didn't buy that he absolutely HAD to kill Dent based on the feats he was doing elsewhere in the movie. Just like the rest of the movie, the plot simply REQUIRED him to kill Dent so it had it happen regardless of whether it made sense or was inconsistent with the rest of the movie. That was another problem I had with the movie, things just happened simply because the writers needed them to happen, regardless of how illogically set up they were.

C: Gyllenhaal was SO ugly you couldn’t believe that Batman couldn’t be interested in her? Did you stop to consider Batman mightn’t be as shallow as you?

Better question: Did YOU ever stop to consider that Batman MIGHT be as shallow as me? Because whenever he is shown with a love interest in a comic book, is the love interest not INVARIABLY shown as a visual stunner? If that makes me shallow, then I guess every writer and artist who ever created a Batman love interest in the history of the character's existence is shallow as well. And I guess the Batman character is as shallow as me since in every medium he's appeared his love interests have been attractive until now.

D: So you didn’t like the morality in Dark Knight. And as morality = politics, you didn’t like the politics in Dark Knight. So you didn’t like Dark Knight because it wasn’t politically correct.

Strained syllogism. Moral arguments do not automatically equal political arguments. Faulty premise.

I'm willing to concede the Two-face point that's just one thing.

"He looks creepy but he doesn’t blatantly look like a psychopathic killer."

He looks a hell of a lot like a blatant psychopathic killer to me.

"Better question: Did YOU ever stop to consider that Batman MIGHT be as shallow as me? Because whenever he is shown with a love interest in a comic book, is the love interest not INVARIABLY shown as a visual stunner?"

You don't get it. You said it was a PLOT HOLE because Batman COULD NOT (not just MIGHT NOT) be attracted to someone who wasn't a stunner. You said they wrote it WRONG because it COULD NOT happen.

"I guess the Batman character is as shallow as me since in every medium he’s appeared his love interests have been attractive until now."

YES up until now he has been shallow. BUT IT WAS CHANGED FOR THE MOVIE. They didn't write it WRONG they just wrote it DIFFERENTLY so long as it POSSIBLE within normal human behaviour. It isn't wrong just because you didn't LIKE it.

"Moral arguments do not automatically equal political arguments."

NAME ONE. Taxation = moral. Law and order = moral. National defence = moral. Civil rights = moral. Health care = moral. Education = moral. I can't think of any more but I'm sure I can justify them all.

Or is this just some conservative excuse to vote for immoral policies.

Instead, what I’ve seen over the first two issues of Batman and Robin is some of the best straight-up superhero comics I’ve run across in years.

My toddler grabbed "Batman and Robin" and sits down to "read" it on a daily basis. He is interested in superhero action figures and is totally obsessed with the Fleisher Superman cartoons, but has never shown the slightest interest in any other comic. I am pretty sure that is the ultimate "jumping on point".

Of course, the mistake was in ever allowing Dick Grayson to age at all. But at the time it was an amazingly cool idea, and I loved 1970s “teen wonder” Robin and later, Nightwing, and now the new Grayson Batman. But the math doesn’t really work.

I am of two minds about this. The progression of Dick Grayson and Wally West were two of my great pleasures as comic reader. However, the aging of both has made the DC Universe less accessible both to new and casual readers.

As it stands, my preference would be that they just attached dates to all the major events of the DCU. Start Batman's career in 1939, or 1984, whenever. Lay down twenty absolute sign-posts with dates. Then, just set the individual stories in whatever period that interests the writer. It would be sort of like what they've done with the "Year One" era in allowing Matt Wagner and Loeb & Sale takes on that period.

[...] Hatcher of Comics Should Be Good makes me think I should give Batman and Robin a second look. Frankly, I was put off by the [...]

Because whenever he is shown with a love interest in a comic book, is the love interest not INVARIABLY shown as a visual stunner?

So in the film they added a little depth to the character?

By showing he preferred a woman with brains and a strong sense of justice to a supermodel?

The bastards!

You were right all along - what a terrible film.

(Of course, this operates on the assumption that Maggie Gyllenhaal isn't a looker - which she is search her name or watch Secretary - it wasn't the best looking she's been in a film, but she's still a looker).