Tweet
Batman Death of the family #17 any thoughts???
-
-
+++++++++++++++++++SPOILERS++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++
I really enjoyed the first issue of this story. An excellent Joker story that recalled some of the past and set up a story that I thought would be very good. However, the nature of the crossover bouncing into all the Batman-related books, including Teen Titans and Suicide Squad really became monotonous and really killed any momentum the story had and along with it any excitement I had for the story and the titles. Similar to how I felt about Blackest Night as an event. The issues of Green Lantern and Blackest Night were very good, but all the tie ins were overkill.
Same with this event. I enjoyed the issues of Batman and some of the others, but it went on and on without going anywhere. Too long, too much. Get to the point.
It's hard for me to judge the final issue of the story because by the time I got to it, I just wanted the story to end. In and of itself issue 17 was a solid conclusion for a story that pretty much had to leave the chess board reset at the end, but I did not care for one of Batman's conclusions at the end of the story.
One of the key plot points in the crossover event is why hasn't Batman just killed Joker and been done with it on any of the assorted occasions he's apprehended him. Fair question. We've all wondered at one time or the other.
We all know John Wayne or Clint Eastwood or Stallone or Arnie would have offed a character like the Joker without much of a second thought in films. And good riddance.
But maybe because the Batman strip was originally intended for kids or because several times the Joker seemed to die at the end of stories only to be brought back. But at some point Batman developed a code against killing and that had been good enough. Batman was so moral that he would not purposefully kill even to arguably serve the greater good. He didn't believe it was his right to take another life. He had hope of reformation.
But Snyder, who is a really good comics writer, cheapens Batman's character to me in the final issue by having Bruce explain that morality isn't the reason that he hasn't offed the Joker. It's because he is scared "Gotham" will send him a worse adversary if he does, possibly a zombie Joker or a Joker raised from the dead.
So now Batman's not super moral but rather superstitious? To me that's worse than stealing Superman's red briefs — and that is a serious affront in my mind. It really flies in the face of everything we know about Batman as a man of logic, reason and science. To me Snyder blew the whole story with that explanation and his editors should have been aware of how far afield such an explanation takes Batman from his established character. -
>So now Batman's not super moral but rather superstitious?
Sure. He saw a bat flying through the window as an omen, and he's kinda crazy; holding a grudge for a LONG time.... It's a weird concession though; trying to find some sort of novel, semi-believable explanation for why he doesn't kill. (Any more. Original Bats would just straight up shoot you, or drop you out a window.)
>at some point Batman developed a code against killing
There's the problem: Batman didn't develop a code against killing; his EDITORS did, and then you needed to retro fit the idea to the character. Hence 50's wacky Bats, 70's righteous hero, this.... The new way is kinda interesting; but you're right that it hilights a superstitious side we've only seen the tiniest glimpses of, and it eludes to a spirituality conspicuously absent from the series.
Don C.Comment
-
Batman's code against killing was adopted while his original creators were working on the character, so I consider it more of an evolution of the character than editorial tampering, although DC/National editorial did adopt a more wholesome persona around the time Batman lightened up.
I haven't read this series, but I'd have a hard time swallowing the explanation of a supernatural reprisal as well. Batman's code against killing made sense once the murder of his parents as his origin settled in. Although even I have trouble with Batman NOT ending the Joker's threat, especially after his body count escalated and became much more personal in the 80s and beyond.
I still can't buy that the always vain Joker would ever ask to have his famous face cut off. The whole leather belt thing just looks ridiculous.
ChrisComment
-
See, I've never bought into Batman being crazy. Maybe emotionally stunted or even damaged, but he deals with reality and functions in reality well. In my mind, he's extreme, obsessed relentless and determined, but not crazy.
There is method behind the seemingly "crazy" things he does. I've always bought the idea that he doesn't murder because murder is wrong and while he is seeking to bring justice, he has not appointed himself the judge. The conclusion he arrives at at the end of the issue 17 would allow him to kill Riddler or Penguin Or any other villain other than Joker. But, he hasn't or doesn't, so the conclusion just doesn't ring true, to me.
Honestly, it's probably a line that will be thrown away in the future and basically forgotten unless Snyder or some other writer continues to reference it. It's certainly not a "with great power come great responsibility line." But I do believe it was the impetus behind Snyder's story. There are other holes in the story, particularly with the tie-ins, but the stories themselves aren't worth worrying about.Comment
-
I can buy Batman's "Code", but just as has been brought up .."The fear of Gotham sending him a worse more dangerous Joker, is crazy...I think he should have offed him after Jason died, those years ago...But we do know one thing....Joker makes.$$$$$$. I do think Snyder copped out from what he was leading to with harm coming to a member of the family....Oh well, still bought it, still read it (twice to make sure I didn't miss something)...still a Batman fan!!Comment
-
Much ado about nothing...Think OUTSIDE the Box! For the BEST in Repro & Custom Packaging!Comment
-
Don't get me wrong....it was ok. But all the hype going in was it was going to be the "ultimate" Joker story. It wasn't....Think OUTSIDE the Box! For the BEST in Repro & Custom Packaging!Comment
-
"The Joker's Utility Belt", "The Joker's 5-Way Revenge", "The Laughing Fish"...can anyone really top those?
ChrisComment
-
Think OUTSIDE the Box! For the BEST in Repro & Custom Packaging!Comment
-
What bugs me about the hype for this is Scott Snyder bragging that this was going to be scary and creep people out. But the whole "face attached by a belt" just smacked of desperation...Think OUTSIDE the Box! For the BEST in Repro & Custom Packaging!Comment
-
I"'ll say this, Snyder did build suspense. I was genuinely wondering what would happen to Alfred after the first issue, and what might happen to various members of the bat family, but Snyder didn't deliver a payoff, which was really anticlimactic.
Tomasi and Gleason made the best use of Joker's removable face, turning it upside down was pretty creepy.Comment
-
Problems I had with this story.
1- Way to long
2-Art wise not all that great
3-Joker LEATHER FACE RIP-OFF dumb idea.
4-Story promised things and never delivered or followed up on it.
5- HOW THE HECK DO WE READ ALL THE DIFFERENT PARTS, I for one cant really fit them inot where in the time line of this story they fit in. MAYBE EXCEPT FOR BATGIRL which, I thought had the best story line.
6- Disappointing story conclusion.
7-After this story, is the bat family still together? or are they each going in seprate ways.
8- No more interconnected stories for a long long time please.
What do you all think?Last edited by MEMEGO; Feb 14, '13, 9:42 AM.Comment
-
I don't feel like the story delivered, but I don't know what would have had to happen for me to feel like it did.
It really felt like much ado about nothing. Nothing really changed, or maybe the change was too subtle for my feeble mind. Batman called a "family meeting" that no one showed up to. Does that mean there is a rift? If so, the actions of the characters didn't come off that way. It was more like this was bad, we're all ok, let's just have some space. Or was it supposed to mean that they don't trust Bruce anymore and you can call but we're not coming?
It was too vague. And, yes, life can be vague, but this is a continuing comic, basically an action soap opera. Super hero comics aren't supposed to be vague. Making the story vague isn't artistic; it's unfulfilling.
Bruce's reveal about the Joker only caring about their costumed IDs, doesn't work for me either. Did he not know Barbara Gordon was Batgirl when he crippled her? I seem to remember - and I may be wrong - that his murder or almost murder of Jason had some kind of connection with Joker knowing who his mother was.
The whole conclusion didn't work for me. Maybe my expectations had something to do with it, and maybe I didn't pay enough attention while reading it. But I never have felt event fatigue quite as severely as I have with this one. Hopefully Snyder will serve up some well-crafted shorter form stories after this. Because after the Court of Owls story, which was flat to me, too, and this, I'm tired of Batman. That's something I never thought I'd say.Comment
... But "5-Way Revenge" proved how ruthless he can be with those who cross him while "Laughing Fish" 
Comment