|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Apr 28, 2016 8:31:53 GMT -5
I haven't read anything of Batman older than 80's. Maybe a scatter of really late 70's Batman or Detective Comics. But when did he go from what the comics were, when the Adam West show was going on, to what I would read in the 80's? Was there a transition period, or did they gradually move from the camp to the serious? Is there a writer, editor, or even artists responsible? Was it lack of sales that prompted DC to move away from that direction?
I know I always blame Miller (and rightly so in my opinion) for the Batman we have now; a cynical ___hole. But if we still had camp Batman in the 80's, it makes you wonder if we'd be where we are with Batman today. Now granted, I didn't read much camp Batman (a few stories in Greatest Batman and Joker Stories Ever Told TPB), but I didn't care for what I did. And I don't like Miller and Morrison doing what they did to Batman. I like the middle ground. The 80's and 90's Batman.
So yeah I just got to thinking about that last night, and figured if anyone knew it'd be someone from this forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Apr 28, 2016 8:47:52 GMT -5
Adam, I would love to weigh in on this, just don't have the time right this moment.
I think that the camp phase in both Batman titles was less obvious than you might expect, and was actually motre prominent in non-Batman titles and at other companies that jumped on the camp bandwagon, e.g. Mighty Comics' Mighty Crusaders.
Just do a quick scan of Batman and Detective covers during the heyday of the TV series. No correlation at all in tone or style. Oh, there's the famous "Batman" watching the Batman show cover, and a Joker cover with Gaggy, but (and I'm relying on memory just now) not a whole heckuva lot of the "BAM! POW!" stuff that was so much a part of the TV show.
Have to go, but check out those covers and compare them to others and you'll see that far from going through a camp phase in his own titles, Batman never had to make as dramatic a transition as he did when the "New Look" was introduced.
|
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Apr 28, 2016 9:00:01 GMT -5
Denny O'Neil was doing dark Batman way before Miller, but Miller usually gets credited as the guy that rescued Batman from camp. Having read both Miller and O'Neil Batman, I would say that O'Neil Batman, while dark, is still very much portrayed as a superhero. Whereas Miller's Batman borders on "unhinged sociopath" territory.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2016 9:35:04 GMT -5
To me, I did not care for the seriousness of Batman and my love of Batman was in the early days up to the mid-70's and having said that and I agree with Randle-El that O'Neill and Miller changed Batman forever. Having said that, I was sad that Batman became more gritter and the dreaded costume change(s) to be all black and dark - hence the Dark Knight Persona of which I abhor seeing these days. That's why I don't care for Batman Movies of which Christian Bale made and because of that it's changes everything that I love about Batman.
The proper nickname for Batman is the Caped Crusader first and foremost ... while the Dark Knight to me is a very, very, very far in 2nd place and that's breaks my heart when Frank Miller changed everything about Batman of which Randle-El summons up perfectly and I quote from him "borders on "unhinged sociopath" territory" and that's why I don't read any Batman Comic Books after the 1980's because it's break my heart completely.
That's all I have to say about Batman!
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,408
|
Post by shaxper on Apr 28, 2016 9:55:27 GMT -5
Batman #217 was the start of a new direction for the franchise, intended to make the character serious and dark again, and as divorced as possible from Adam West. It was also the beginning of Batman's longest solo stint, as well as his first time without Robin since 1940.  Beyond that, Batman still went on to have some campy stories (particularly under David V. Reed), but the Wein/Conway/Moench continuity that began in Batman #307 and continued through Batman #399 and Detective #566 achieved a careful balance of darkness while Batman remained an unfailing hero. However, seemingly in response to Miller's Dark Knight Returns, Batman #400, though still aligned in the same continuity as the past hundred issues, featured a far more violent, unstable, and Miller-like Batman. After that, the whole thing reset Post-Crisis, and Denny O'Neal's office was a mess of inconsistency from 1986 up until 1991. Sometimes Batman was very dark; sometimes he still had a little camp. I offer a pretty simple breakdown of this here. To read more about all that, I recommend checking out my review thread: Batman #300 and up  |
|
|
|
Post by Red Oak Kid on Apr 28, 2016 10:11:56 GMT -5
Adam, I would love to weigh in on this, just don't have the time right this moment. I think that the camp phase in both Batman titles was less obvious than you might expect, and was actually motre prominent in non-Batman titles and at other companies that jumped on the camp bandwagon, e.g. Mighty Comics' Mighty Crusaders. Just do a quick scan of Batman and Detective covers during the heyday of the TV series. No correlation at all in tone or style. Oh, there's the famous "Batman" watching the Batman show cover, and a Joker cover with Gaggy, but (and I'm relying on memory just now) not a whole heckuva lot of the "BAM! POW!" stuff that was so much a part of the TV show. Have to go, but check out those covers and compare them to others and you'll see that far from going through a camp phase in his own titles, Batman never had to make as dramatic a transition as he did when the "New Look" was introduced. I agree that the Batman comics published during the TV show were not camp. The TV show was camp. Everything on the show was done tongue in cheek. Non comic book readers probably assumed the tv show was a reflection of the comic. But it wasn't. And the Batman covers Prince Hal references were not totally accurate representations of the tone of the story inside. The DC comics of this time were notorious for having cover images that you could not find inside the comic.(I can't swear this was the case for the Batman watching the Batman TV show cover but in general, DC covers were misleading.) The Batman stories of this period may have used colorful villains more than they would have without the tv show, but otherwise, it is misleading to say the Batman comics were camp. Camp is in the eye of the beholder. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Apr 28, 2016 10:37:03 GMT -5
The "New Look" stories of the 1960s are silly. I love them. They are wonderfully silly. But they are very silly nonetheless. Pick up a 1960s Carmine Infantino Batman story and read the first caption out loud. It sounds just like the narration on any episode of the Batman TV series. Here's the cover to Detective Comics #337.  The caveman gets in a fight with his rival way back in prehistoric times. The rival looks just like Bruce Wayne without a haircut. The caveman gets frozen in a crevice, gains super-powers and is wakened in modern times. His only thought is "revenge" against his rival, so he goes after Bruce Wayne! This is not some kid of outlier. Just look at the covers of Batman and Detective from the 1960s and you will see a lot of dingdongy plot ideas. It's true you don't have Adam West's dry delivery and Burt Ward's super-enthusiasm. Maybe it's not exactly camp but let's not pretend this is somehow more realistic or serious than a story from the Jack Schiff era. adamwarlock - See if your library system has Batman in the Sixties and Batman in the Seventies. It would be an inexpensive way to see some of the transition for yourself. (And also to read a lot of great Batman stories! I think the first Poison Ivy is in Batman in the Sixties.) |
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Apr 28, 2016 11:19:58 GMT -5
Adam, I would love to weigh in on this, just don't have the time right this moment. I think that the camp phase in both Batman titles was less obvious than you might expect, and was actually motre prominent in non-Batman titles and at other companies that jumped on the camp bandwagon, e.g. Mighty Comics' Mighty Crusaders. Just do a quick scan of Batman and Detective covers during the heyday of the TV series. No correlation at all in tone or style. Oh, there's the famous "Batman" watching the Batman show cover, and a Joker cover with Gaggy, but (and I'm relying on memory just now) not a whole heckuva lot of the "BAM! POW!" stuff that was so much a part of the TV show. Have to go, but check out those covers and compare them to others and you'll see that far from going through a camp phase in his own titles, Batman never had to make as dramatic a transition as he did when the "New Look" was introduced. I agree that the Batman comics published during the TV show were not camp. Nope, nuthin' camp going on here.  |
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Apr 28, 2016 11:28:35 GMT -5
Ya'll have given me a lot of information to digest and research.
Hal -- I'll look through some covers on my lunch hour coming up soon. I think a lot of my impressions of Batman is based on covers I have seen, other than the two TPB I mentioned of actual stories I've read earlier than the 80's. So I have certainly been judging a book by it's cover. This is why I came here to get a better understanding.
Randle-- My impression, and hearing others make similar sentiments I was thinking Mr O'Neil had a big hand in it. But was uncertain where, when and just how much was him and maybe not DC publishing decision.
Mecha-- I guess the only excuse I have is being less than familiar with this persona of Batman, and having grown up with Batman The Animated Series, Tim Burton's Batman and of course Batman comics of the time. I won't say that I couldn't enjoy them at all. Maybe the select stories I read were just not to my liking, but it's not necessarily the camp aspect. I think I will take Hoosier's advice and check my local library and read some more.
shaxper-- I really am going to try and be more active in your thread, as those are the Batman comics that I like the most. I have that Batman #217. And it was displayed on the wall and I bought it just because of the cover. I also did that with #227 as well, and ended up enjoying both of the stories inside. And I will check out your links too when I can. Thanks for the examples I can examine.
Red Oak-- The examples of colorful characters reminds me of a older Detective (not old old, maybe late 70's or still in the 80's; I don't have as many Detective comics as I do Batman) comics issue with Crazy Quilt on it, and the cover is like patch work of all these colors. I think Robin is on the cover as well. I bought it out of curiosity, and this might be an example of my misuse of the term camp to describe something just more light hearted than the Batman personas that followed.
Hoosier-- That's a good example of the one I just tried to describe above. They are more like outlandish than camp. And I'll concede again, that maybe my term was not the best choice to make. But Batman as Mr O'Neil and writers in the 90's (I especially got hooked on Legends of the Dark Knight) had him fighting Werewolves (one of the first LOTDK I ever bought) and grotesquely infected monsters, the Ogre, murdering magicians, Man-Bat, etc... so I time misplaced caveman seeking revenge on Bruce Wayne seems so outlandish or even camp to me. But as I mentioned above, if I can find some older Batman collections at the library I will give them more chance than I have up until now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Apr 28, 2016 11:43:31 GMT -5
It's true you don't have Adam West's dry delivery and Burt Ward's super-enthusiasm. Maybe it's not exactly camp but let's not pretend this is somehow more realistic or serious than a story from the Jack Schiff era. adamwarlock - See if your library system has Batman in the Sixties and Batman in the Seventies. It would be an inexpensive way to see some of the transition for yourself. (And also to read a lot of great Batman stories! I think the first Poison Ivy is in Batman in the Sixties.) Oh, I agree that these were not Dark (as in psychopathic) Batman. I was just making the point that the show's camp style was more prevalent outside the Batman titles than within them. And all camp may be lighthearted, but all lighthearted isn't camp. The New Look Batman stories were like the other Schwartz titles (Flash, GL, Atom, etc) in tone and characterization. I don't agree that Miller rescued Batman from camp; Adams and O'Neil had given us a more realistic Batman than we'd seen during either the Schiff years or during the New Look, a detective with a deep desire for justice, not vengeance. Miller's Batman was more of a vengeful, fascistic loner who might have been a big hit with the Bundy family.  I'd agree that the big change after the New Look era to serious Batman was indeed the "Robin goes to college" isssue in which Batman closed Wayne Manor, moved into Gotham and lived in the Wayne Foundation penthouse. O'Neil seemed to be influenced then by the Shadow, with Batman living in the city, scaring crooks, and assuming different identities to do his detective work. ("Matches" Malone comes to mind.) However, I'd also argue that the sheer presence of Neal Adams as a cover artist alone exerted an enormous influence on the DC line as well as on the Batman titles. Irv Novick was no Adams, perhaps, but he became a frequent (if not regular) artist on covers and insides and it was clear that the Adams Batman we'd seen on B and B covers and here and there on Batman was making everyone take notice. The Batman we saw on the B and B covers inhabited a different world from the stylish and slick Kane and Infantino covers that we'd grown used to seeing. |
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Apr 28, 2016 11:46:43 GMT -5
I agree that the Batman comics published during the TV show were not camp. Nope, nuthin' camp going on here.  Point taken, but I never argued they weren't influenced at all by the TV show, just that it wasn't as predominant as one might think. Consider...   |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Apr 28, 2016 13:16:27 GMT -5
Let's not forget Frank Robbins's role in the creation of a more serious Batman. He wrote bunches of Batman stories in the late 1960s and early 1970s. He created Man-Bat. It's true that a lot of those stories contain silly elements and plot developments (not unlike Dennis O'Neil's stories). But there's definitely a shift away from the overtly silly stuff in the later New Look stories when Frank Robbins takes over as writer. I would cite "Die Small, Die Big!" in Detective Comics #385 as an excellent example. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,408
|
Post by shaxper on Apr 28, 2016 13:39:51 GMT -5
Let's not forget Frank Robbins's role in the creation of a more serious Batman. He wrote bunches of Batman stories in the late 1960s and early 1970s. He created Man-Bat. It's true that a lot of those stories contain silly elements and plot developments (not unlike Dennis O'Neil's stories). But there's definitely a shift away from the overtly silly stuff in the later New Look stories when Frank Robbins takes over as writer. I would cite "Die Small, Die Big!" in Detective Comics #385 as an excellent example. Frank Robbins wrote the above-mentioned Batman #217. |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Apr 28, 2016 15:35:55 GMT -5
No time for a long comment but I wanted to let Mech know that the "Dark Knight" label actually came before "Caped Crusader," being coined by co-creator Bill Finger way back in Detective #45 (November 1940), three issues before the first use of "Dynamic Duo" and several years before that of "Caped Crusader" (can't pin its first use down to a specific issues as I haven't finished my analysis of Golden Age Batman stories yet but the phrase hadn't appeared as of the end of '42).
Cei-U!
I summon the esoterica!
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,408
|
Post by shaxper on Apr 28, 2016 15:52:27 GMT -5
No time for a long comment but I wanted to let Mech know that the "Dark Knight" label actually came before "Caped Crusader," being coined by co-creator Bill Finger way back in Detective #45 (November 1940), three issues before the first use of "Dynamic Duo" and several years before that of "Caped Crusader" (can't pin its first use down to a specific issues as I haven't finished my analysis of Golden Age Batman stories yet but the phrase hadn't appeared as of the end of '42). Cei-U! I summon the esoterica! And here I was waiting for you to back me up on the whole Batman #217 thing  |
|
Point taken, but I never argued they weren't influenced at all by the TV show, just that it wasn't as predominant as one might think.
