web stats

CSBG Archive

A Year of Cool Comic Book Moments – Day 253

Here is the latest cool comic book moment in our year-long look at one cool comic book moment a day (in no particular order whatsoever)! Here‘s the archive of the moments posted so far!

Today we have a nice little treat – the introduction of this forgettable new hero in the 27th issue of a comic anthology…

The Batman story in Detective Comics #27, by Bob Kane and Bill Finger, is basically a rehash of a Shadow story, but it’s still a cool little intro story…

“The” moment for me is when Batman kills that guy. Early Batman was hilariously messed up.


Punching the bad guy into a vat of acid certainly was dramatic.

I’d have to say batman putting the rat in a “dead” headlock and throwing him off the roof to his death. That’s pretty hardcore. Think of how many deaths he’d have prevented if he’d met Joker that night. :)

I love the captions: The Batman does this, The Batman does that…I was almost expecting it to say “The Batman puts the lotion in the basket”

It is so weird to see Batman in the suburbs. I’m used to seeing him against the backdrop of huge foreboding towers of concrete, steel and glass, not running around on the roof of a two or three story house surrounded by shrubs and bushes.

How long was it until Gotham City was named and became a part of the Batman mythos?

“Bad-gadgets? Screw that. All I need to fight crime is my trusty pipe-wrench. Yeah, I’m that hard core.”

i would agree that the early run of batman had the character totaly messed up but that for some reaosn the way Bob Kane though the character should act at the time. for batman was just starting out . in comics

Ah, for the good old days when the idle rich in town would hang out with high-ranking police officers, drink and smoke heavily while on duty, then tag along on murder investigations to relieve their boredom. If only the Rockefellers had been brought in on the Lindbergh baby case.

Reading it today, the acid tank is definitely the moment, since we aren’t used to seeing Batman kill now. Then, without 70+ years of continuity behind it, I would imagine the moment would have been the last three panels, where we basically see Gordon say “Bruce is a nice guy, but what a flake” and then we find out he’s the hard-ass (well, hard-ass in purple gloves) that we watched mess up criminals for the last four or five pages.

Look at the size of the gas chamber the bad guy used to murder guinea pigs! He must have killed those cute and cuddly little animals in their droves.

Whatever happened to that “Bat-Man” character? Surely he’s due some kind of revival.

I loved how in the Authority/Batman special, one of the Bats they meet is this guy, purple gloves and all.

A mildly interesting character, but too derivative of the Scarlet Pimpernel, Zorro, and the Shadow. I don’t think he’ll last.

Whatever happened to this “Bat-Man” guy, anyway? Did he ever appear again, or what?

Also, he needs a new costume. What’s with the antenna-like ears and the little purple gloves? I doubt he’d strike fear into the hearts of many criminals.

Ah, the early years of Batman. When he truly was a murderously deranged psychopath.

I like how Bruce Wayne just dumps out his pipe grit on the dead guy’s carpet before he leaves.
Stay classy Bruce.

The” moment for me is when Batman kills that guy. Early Batman was hilariously messed up.

Eh. I think he’s actually less messed up than the current one who not only refuses to kill the mass murdering Joker but will actively risk his life to rescue him and even fight people who DO try to kill the Joker. Now THAT’S messed up.

Love this issue by the way.

I like how the narration says the thugs don’t notice the Bat-man…in the very frame where they DO notice him.

One hilarious thing about Bob Kane’s early Batman adventures…that hilariously awkward and inefficient judo throw in the “flying through space” panel gets recycled SOOOO much in the first few dozen issues.

Are you all kidding? The moment has to be the big reveal that bored playboy Bruce Wayne, who’s been hovering around the fringes of the story, is the bad-ass Bat-Man! Golly, who knew that was coming! It’s a shocker!

All right, maybe a little over the top, but I do think that’s more of the “moment” then simply killing the bad guy, which was pretty standard at the time.

One thing that has always bothered me: the bad guy has a secret lab in the basement. But at the end of the scene the Bat-Man leaves it through the sky-light of a two story house. That’s a big basement!

Lou, it seems to me that back then all police commissioners had playboys haning around with them, from The Shadow as Lamont Cranston to S.S. Van Dine’s Philo Vance. If you make fun of that, consider that in reality, police commissioners don’t personally investigate crimes.

When the criminals shout the “Bat-Man’s” name, why don’t they put quotes around it?

Why didn’t the “Bat-Man” break the glass chamber from the outside rather than trap himself within it and THEN break it?

Did he use a regular hankie to plug the gas–perhaps the same one he uses to sneeze or mop his brow? Or was it a special bat-hankie?

Would the hankie count in a trivia contest as the first bat-gadget ever used?

So many questions….

People named Stryker are always bad guys, aren’t they? There must be whole clans of Strykers growing up to take over the family business–namely, evil.

But y’all are being a little harsh when you say the “Bat-Man” killed Stryker. He punched Stryker once in self-defense, to stop Stryker from gunning him down. Stryker stumbled backward and hit the metal railing. The “Bat-Man” couldn’t have expected the railing to break, so there was no intent. He didn’t mind that the killer met a fitting end, but he wasn’t responsible for it.

I’m not sure how a prosecutor would view this case: an act of self-defense leading to an accidental death. But if he caught the “Bat-Man,” I doubt he’d charge him with anything.

Sure, the prosecutor COULD claim the “Bat-Man” hit Stryker hard enough to break the railing. But the “Bat-Man’s” lawyer would counter that no metal railing should ever break from a single blow. Stryker’s heirs might have a good case against the railing manufacturer, but that’s about it.

In short, I’d say the “Bat-Man’s” actions were legally justified. They didn’t constitute a crime such as murder or manslaughter.

Some links on the subject:



Fans commonly believe that the “Bat-Man” killed crooks early in his career. I hope those beliefs aren’t based on this story. What’s the first story where the “Bat-Man” CLEARLY intended and caused a criminal to die? Because this story isn’t it.

P.S. For another trivia contest, what’s the first story where our hero was called the Bat-Man without quotes? And the first story where he was called the Batman without a hyphen?

What’s the first story where the “Bat-Man” CLEARLY intended and caused a criminal to die? Because this story isn’t it.

Nah, it’s not this story. This story just adds to the whole “early Batman did not give a crap if crooks lived or died” thing.

What is remarkable is how much was there from the very beginning. Leaving aside the dated art, the simplistic dialog and the purple gloves, the guy from BATMAN: YEAR ONE is clearly present. By extension, the vengeful dude that packed folks into the movies last summer is there as well.

That strikes me as an important point for revampers. Maybe they should look to the original first to see what has fallen away over time, rather than over-value their own childhood nostalgia for … say … the Super Friends.

Awesome stuff. No one did Bat-Man quite like Bob Kane. I gotta ask this again: Hey Cronin! How about a week or two dedicated to moments from a characters creator-controlled era? Give us some Siegal & Shuster Superman, some Marston Wonder Woman, and Lee & Ditco Spider-Man. Even the decades-later writers who try to take those characters “back to basics” never come close to the original vision. I mean, early Superman was throwing wife-beaters over tall buildings and kidnapping world leaders in order to make them talk out the problems they were warring over. Wonder Woman got tied-up more often than Bettie Page ever thought of. Bat-Man carried a gun and shot people! None of these characters were ever as cool under other writers than they were with the original.

And so, it began.

I can’t believe another 20 years have passed since the huge 50th anniversary bonanza and the first Burton movie. Seems like this year went by with very little media fanfare, especially given how DC killed him off on his 70th!

There are many ways to rob a house I suppose but rarely is there a robber with enough class to do it in an orange pin-striped suit with matching shoes. Why couldn’t that guy have fallen into a vat and come up looking like a clown?

For me if there’s one thing that really stands out when you look at Batman’s first appearance vs the character he’s become today. Is that in his very first panel albeit as Bruce Wayne he’s smoking!

Feel free to do a Comic Book Legends Revealed on the subject. Consider the above my comments on the “legend.” Namely, did early Batman really kill evildoers? Or is that a myth generated by his harsh but not murderous attitude in comics such as DETECTIVE #27?

This is so hilarious.

Early Batman killed a lot. For instance, he guns down Hugo Strange’s monster men and hangs one of them by the Batplane until he strangles to death in one early story, clearly intending to kill them by his dialogue. He shoots and kills the Monk and Dala with silver bullets from a pistol, although, as the undead, that’s not really “killing” them as much as the other examples… even standard Batman would kill vampires. He kills the crimelord the Wolf by kicking him in the throat and then tells us it’s the first time he feels sorry for killing a guy, since the Wolf was an MPD case and a police officer in his other life. (Speaking of characters needing a revival… the Wolf was too good to toss away that early…) No, it’s no urban legend… early Batman would kill you without a second thought if it was the best way to end the fight, and rarely regret it.

Leave a Comment



Review Copies

Comics Should Be Good accepts review copies. Anything sent to us will (for better or for worse) end up reviewed on the blog. See where to send the review copies.

Browse the Archives