Comic Book Resources

Sexton is Bruce Wayne, right? I mean, who else is it? A brand new character?

I kind of want Sexton to be Wayne, just to get to his inevitable return, but it seems like an odd way to bring him back into the fold, especially with the mini starting next month. Have there been any real clues to lead to this conclusion?

The ‘W’ on Dr. Hurt’s back looked kind of…bat-y. Has any writer ever made a connection between the letter and the silhouette of a flying bat? I know, it would probably be terribly forced, but this is the first time I’ve noticed a similarity between the two.

I loved the reveal at the end–Morrison has siezed on the one villain who has more issues with Dick than with Bruce.

Haven’t fully read the issue yet, but did peek at the Dr. Hurt pages.
So what’s the theory here? Is hurt an evil twin of either Bruce’s dad or of Bruce? Or is he the time lost Wayne who was a devil worshiper? Or some sort of evil demon that was released?

I bet he’s Bruce’s mentally damaged brother.

Wait no, that’d be SILLY.

Any chance that Sexton is the Joker investigating Bruce’s death in his own way?

I’d bet that Hurt is a descendant of the Satanist Wayne, part of an entire evil branch long disowned by the main family.

Have there been any real clues to lead to this conclusion?

I guess the way the cover of B & R #11 refers to #1 coud be a clue? The pose of Damian and Sexton is quite similar to Damian and Dick on #1, and it does say “Batman & Robin” above them. Also, it’s worth noting that only the alternate cover changes the title to “Batman Vs. Robin”; in this cover you have the Dick Grayson Batman versus Robin, does that mean that in the Quitely cover you have both (Bruce Wayne) Batman and Robin?

On the other hand, it would kinda anticlimactic if the mysterious masked man who everyone suspects is Bruce actually turns out to be him. I’m sure Morrison has a few more twists in store for the search for Bruce.

I’d bet that Hurt is a descendant of the Satanist Wayne, part of an entire evil branch long disowned by the main family.

I thought “Batman R.I.P.” hinted strongly that Hurt is a “tulpa”, i.e. a physical manifestation of the dark side of Bruce’s psyche, not a real person. It’d be kinda lame if he turns out to be some evil third cousin, though I guess he could be both.

By the way, someone told me the Satanist Thomas Wayne has appeared in some previous Batman comic, can anyone tell me which issue(s) that was?

So who is the guy at the end then? I’ve read the issue and it meant nothing to me.

A little talked about brilliant aspect of the covers of Batman and Robin has been the brilliant use of primary colors – when you put this cover and the one for #10 (with the strong red background) together on a comic book rack, they leap out from the other comics on the rack.

Overall a good review, but some of these compliments are kind of a reach. The use of primary color I’ve seen in the covers seems par for the course for modern comics, good but not especially brilliant.

Anyhow, this all leads to a twist at the end where we see who Talia has gotten to fully control Damian in battle with Dick – it’s a great continuity nod, and I am sure folks who complain that Dick never gets a good win against this character, well, they’ll be in for a treat next issue.

A continuity nod to what?

Also, what do you mean Dick never gets a good win against “this character?” Is “this character” Damian? They’ve fought before?

Tuomas: Technically, Morrison is referencing Batman #452-454 (“Dark Knight, Dark City”) with Alfred’s talk of Barbathos and summoning a demon, but Thomas Wayne didn’t appear in that story – he’s been retconned in.

The use of primary color I’ve seen in the covers seems par for the course for modern comics, good but not especially brilliant.

What other comic would you compare to Batman and Robin #1, #10 and #11′s use of primary colors?

A continuity nod to what?

Also, what do you mean Dick never gets a good win against “this character?” Is “this character” Damian? They’ve fought before?

No “this character” is a spoiler.

What other comic would you compare to Batman and Robin #1, #10 and #11′s use of primary colors?

You mean the figure in the foreground with nothing but a primary color for the background?

Going by June solicitations for Marvel:
http://newsarama.com/comics/marvel-june-2010-solicitations-100323.html

Marvel Her-oes #3
Namora #1
Dark Tower #2
Skydoll #2 (if you count white as primary color)

Deadpool Merc with a Mouth #3
Amazing SPider-Man #634 (white and red)
New Avengers #1
Age of Heroes #2
Avengers the Origin #3
Black Widow #3
Darkstar and Winter Guard #3 (has 3 primary colors, red white and blue)
Hulk #23 McGuiness cover
Thor and the Warriors 4
Rawhide Kid #1
Wolverine Weapon X

Like I said, it’s not bad or anything, I just think it’s a little excessive to call it “brilliant” or treat it as so special. There are lots of covers with no backgrounds and just a primary color used as the background. For all we know Quitely just was too pressed for time to do the backgrounds. And as far as the choice of primary colors, primary colors are simply more popular than secondary colors. Always have been. That’s why primary colors are traditionally used for heroes and secondary for villains.

You’re way off base.

New Avengers #1 is the only one remotely similar to what DC’s designers were doing with Batman and Robin #1, 10 and 11, and that isn’t really even all that similar.

Another one:
http://i.livescience.com/images/deadpool_corps_1_cover.jpg

Maybe I just don’t understand exactly what you’re liking so much in those covers, so I’ll just agree to disagree then.

Greg, thanks for the information! I’ll have to check out those issues.

I think those covers are similar, New Avengers being the closest, but much more striking on the Batman & Robin covers. It helps if you compare the B&R side to side which you can find here.

Also, as a semi-regular cover theme, it’s a little more special on B&R as opposed to just looking at one month of covers.

http://www.cooliris.com/tab/#cs=11&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcomicbookrealm.com%2Ftools%2Fgallery_viewer.php%3Fs%3D23667

balls.

I loved the reveal at the end–Morrison has siezed on the one villain who has more issues with Dick than with Bruce.

Ding Dong Daddy Dowd? Wow, didn’t see THAT coming.

It blows my mind (and excites it) that what is essentially a set-up issue (and a set-up arc really) can be executed in such a way as to make it just as engaging (if not more so) than all the other Batman and Robin arcs. Wonderful stuff!

Hasn’t anyone noticed all of the question marks that are kind of zip-a-toned into the blue background of the cover? Could Sexton be the Riddler?

Tuomas: Coincidentally, that arc is next in line for a Comics You Should Own flashback – I’ll probably post it next week. If you’re interested in reading a bit about it!

Sexton is Bruce Wayne, right? I mean, who else is it? A brand new character?

Him being The Joker is a popular theory on the Batman board at CBR, or even Thomas Wayne (Bruce’s father).

I bet he’s Bruce’s mentally damaged brother.

Wait no, that’d be SILLY.

Nah, that’s gotta be who Hurt is.

What other comic would you compare to Batman and Robin #1, #10 and #11′s use of primary colors?

Batman and Robin #2 and #3?

Like I said, it’s not bad or anything, I just think it’s a little excessive to call it “brilliant” or treat it as so special. There are lots of covers with no backgrounds and just a primary color used as the background. For all we know Quitely just was too pressed for time to do the backgrounds. And as far as the choice of primary colors, primary colors are simply more popular than secondary colors. Always have been. That’s why primary colors are traditionally used for heroes and secondary for villains.

No, we know why they did it, thanks to the collected edition that came out yesterday – there’s sketches from Morrison with notes about the want for bright colours, and a text piece explaining that he wanted bright colours to contrast the darker colours used for RIP.
So it wasn’t Quietly being behind at all.

He also talks about how DC were a bit nervous about this approach to colours, and that market research shows that yellow covers don’t sell as well as other colours in printed objects, so they had to fight to get B&R#1 to be yellow, so it is kinda special.

No, we know why they did it, thanks to the collected edition that came out yesterday – there’s sketches from Morrison with notes about the want for bright colours, and a text piece explaining that he wanted bright colours to contrast the darker colours used for RIP.
So it wasn’t Quietly being behind at all.

He also talks about how DC were a bit nervous about this approach to colours, and that market research shows that yellow covers don’t sell as well as other colours in printed objects, so they had to fight to get B&R#1 to be yellow, so it is kinda special.

Awesome! I had no idea that they did that – that’s hilarious! I love it when things come out to tell me how I am right.

The only other covers that I can find comparable to Batman and Robin in cover design theory are the Rian Hughes/Salvador Larroca collaboration for the “Stark: Disassembled” arc.

Awesome! I had no idea that they did that – that’s hilarious! I love it when things come out to tell me how I am right.

There’s interesting stories behind the odd designs on #2 and #3 – #2 was a communication break-down between Morrison and Quietly, and Morrison originally intended it to be a model city with a corpse crushing it that Batman was overlooking, and #3 was designed to be part of DC’s ‘weird covers’ theme month, of which they never heard of again after designing it, and for all Morrison knows was a practical joke played on them, as no one else did it.

It’s a really good behind the scenes bit at the back – Morrison gives a lot more info on the process than you usually get, and there’s really cool designs – alternative costumes for Batman and Robin, and even a map of Red Hood’s van.

Awesome! I had no idea that they did that – that’s hilarious! I love it when things come out to tell me how I am right.

What exactly were you right about?

What was in dispute is whether it was brilliant and whether backgrounds with primary colors are rare. The former is subjective (I still don’t find it particularly brilliant) and the latter is not rare (I showed over a dozen covers with primary color backgrounds).

No, we know why they did it, thanks to the collected edition that came out yesterday – there’s sketches from Morrison with notes about the want for bright colours, and a text piece explaining that he wanted bright colours to contrast the darker colours used for RIP.
So it wasn’t Quietly being behind at all.

When I was saying “For all we know, it could have been Quitely saving time,” that was a reference to the utter lack of backgrounds, not the color choice.

And whether or not Morrison made notes about there being bright colors in order to contrast the darker colous used for RIP, that doesn’t change the fact that blank backgrounds with primary colors aren’t particularly novel, groundbreaking or brilliant a concept. I will admit that the specific background color yellow may be rare, but not the other three primary colors as I showed with my examples commonly are used as background colors

What was in dispute is whether it was brilliant and whether backgrounds with primary colors are rare. The former is subjective (I still don’t find it particularly brilliant) and the latter is not rare (I showed over a dozen covers with primary color backgrounds).

Brilliant is subjective, but you also said it wasn’t special – and as they broke a ‘rule’ of publishing to do one of them, I’d say it is.

Also, anyone who has seen the covers on your list, some of which haven’t come out yet, can see the difference between them and the B&R covers.

When I was saying “For all we know, it could have been Quitely saving time,” that was a reference to the utter lack of backgrounds, not the color choice.

Morrison designed the covers in thumb nails – and this was all done with a massive lead time.

that doesn’t change the fact that blank backgrounds with primary colors aren’t particularly novel, groundbreaking or brilliant a concept.

That’s BS.

Go look at comics on the shelf – those one’s stand out.

but not the other three primary colors as I showed with my examples commonly are used as background colors

Not in the pop style these are – using blue doesn’t mean it’s a bright blue like the B&R covers.

Be like the chap arguing that the picture of Beast could have easily been Black Panther, so Brian shouldn’t have said it was obviously beast on the secret avengers cover, if it makes you feel better.
It doesn’t change that the B&R covers are unique looking, add to the feel of the books, and a great idea.

Here’s a link to the DC blog which has excerpts from the extras – http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/2010/04/07/batman-redrawn-part-1-with-grant-morrison-and-frank-quitely/

It doesn’t change that the B&R covers are unique looking, add to the feel of the books, and a great idea.

Hey, if you guys really think so that’s your perogative. Like I previously said, I agree to disagree.

I only spoke up again when Brian gloated that he was “proven right” about something, which he wasn’t. Nothing in the extras proved him right, at least not about his original assertions, which were that (1) the idea was particularly “brilliant” or (2) that using primary colors in the background and figures in the foreground was particularly novel.

At best it proved that the yellow cover was unique, so I’ll give him that one specific cover, but his original challenge to me was about primary colors in general, not just yellow specifically.

Here’s a link to the DC blog which has excerpts from the extras – http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/2010/04/07/batman-redrawn-part-1-with-grant-morrison-and-frank-quitely/

Thanks, Funky!

The last time this happened was when I was reading the second Seaguy mini-series and I wrote that it seemed to me almost like Morrison was writing the character as if he were aging (like in the first series he’s a total kid, in the second series he’s grown up a bit and it seems like the next series he’ll totally be an adult) – and then someone linked me to a Morrison interview where he said that that was exactly what he was going for!

I love it when Morrison backs me up.

Hey, if you guys really think so that’s your perogative. Like I previously said, I agree to disagree.

You can agree to disagree.

I think you’re still plainly offbase with your criticism, but you can agree to whatever suits you.

Hey, if you guys really think so that’s your perogative. Like I previously said, I agree to disagree.

Not to throw gas onto a low-level fire, but your posts and opinions read to me rather more like trolling than opinions.

The Deadpool cover is about the only example/link you provided to support your argument.

It’s subjective to say that primary colours don’t ‘stand out’ or ‘pop’ more than other covers on the market do, but it is OBJECTIVE to say that in the current market the use of them is rare. By no means limited to B & R, but rare nonetheless.

I venture a guess – and only a guess – that B&R’s covers may in fact cause a resurgence in their use now.

Is the use of them in B&R brilliant? That is a matter of opinion. I certainly think it is clever and eye-catching, but that is my tastes.

Not to throw gas onto a low-level fire, but your posts and opinions read to me rather more like trolling than opinions.

How is, “good review overall but I think you’re getting carried away on this ONE aspect of your review” trolling? I only disagreed on ONE aspect of the review and complimented the rest of it. Give me a break.

The Deadpool cover is about the only example/link you provided to support your argument.

That’s an outright lie. I gave a bunch of examples.

Maybe you think that’s the only example you agree with, fine, but don’t say it’s the only example I provided.

I love it when Morrison backs me up.

Yeah, he did back you up iin the instance of Seaguy.

T.: Here’s what you wrote initially.

“You mean the figure in the foreground with nothing but a primary color for the background?”

Most of the examples you gave don’t fit the standard you set yourself.

Marvel Her-oes #3 : Landscape and sky with cloud patters aren’t “nothing but a primary color for the background.”
Namora #1 : One cover has black and blue colors, the other has wavy water patterns. Neither are examples of covers with “nothing but a primary color for the background.”
Dark Tower #2 : Varying degrees of blue and gray shades to suggest smoke rising, again far from “nothing but a primary color for the background.”
Skydoll #2 (if you count white as primary color) : Did you miss the geometric flower shapes on the upper left and lower right corners?
Deadpool Merc with a Mouth #3 : Different shades of blue and spots of white to visualize water, again far from “nothing but a primary color for the background.”
Amazing SPider-Man #634 (white and red) : The red part actually has artwork of Spidey and Kraven, so it’s not just “white and red.” Also, white and red are two primary colors, not “a primary color.”
Darkstar and Winter Guard #3 (has 3 primary colors, red white and blue) : Your own description of the cover violates your own standard of “a primary color.”
Rawhide Kid #1 : There are silhouetted figures on the background besides the white color.

Also, with the exception of Deadpool Corps, all the other examples you gave are books that aren’t going to hit the shelves for another couple of months. That’s like trying to argue that Simon & Shuster’s creation of Superman was not unique by listing all the other superheroes created after Action Comics #1 came out.

Batman and Robin #1 had a Batmobile in the background. #11 has subtle question marks in the background (it’s not a flat solid color). So I assumed a few objects or subtle designs in the background were okay in picking matching examples.

Sorry, that was me.

Too bad a candle-flame battle erupted, ‘cuz I thought my suggestion that Sexton might be the Riddler was quite trenchant.

Reread the issue. Sexton’s response is completely natural if he’s someone that 1) has no idea that Bruce Wayne is Batman; and 2) has no idea that Bruce Wayne is missing. Plus, Bruce Wayne would sure as hell know how to throw an authentic accent – he is the master of every craft he chooses! Whereas Ed Nigma is kind of an incompetent.

@ John Pontoon

While I agree that Sexton could in fact turn out to be Edward Nigman, there are a couple of flaws in your logic: ie. The Riddler DOES know that Bruce Wayne is Batman, he was the one orchestrating the ‘Hush’ storyline from behind the scenes a few years back just for the sake of messing with Bruce’s head.