|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2018 9:33:44 GMT -5
Number 6 -- Was more a normal Comic Book and I've didn't think that DC Comics did a tremendous disservice of making both Vickie Vale and Black Canary -- more a cheesecake than anything else and that alone kind of bother me a bit. The story was okay -- and nothing was really outstanding at all. Good assessment. #6 was just an average comic book. Compared to #1-5 it was decent. Compared to other comics not so great. |
|
|
|
Post by sabongero on Jun 18, 2018 10:41:05 GMT -5
Number 6 -- Was more a normal Comic Book and I've didn't think that DC Comics did a tremendous disservice of making both Vickie Vale and Black Canary -- more a cheesecake than anything else and that alone kind of bother me a bit. The story was okay -- and nothing was really outstanding at all. Good assessment. #6 was just an average comic book. Compared to #1-5 it was decent. Compared to other comics not so great. I have to admit, when you first started this series review, all I remembered was the venom the series generated about ten to twelve years ago, and I just remembered the negative feelings towards the series, as far as the story went, with the exception of the fantastic Jim Lee illustrations. However, after a decade has passed and looking at it from the perception of a writer who is not held back by two DC Editors assigned to the job, and had hit after hit after hit in Hollywood movies while this series was still ongoing, albeit very late in release dates... I kind of enjoyed the very bad storytelling of Frank Miller. From the success of his works in movies, he might have gotten a big head, and decided to mess with the fanboys, or this might very well be how Frank Miller wanted to tell a Batman story without the hindrance of DC Editors telling him to amend parts of the story or hold him back from making it come across as very bad. After all, let's remember, in Batman Year One, Frank Miller, with DC Editors at the helm was able to reboot Catwoman as a prostitute with DC Editors green-lighting that character assassination of Selina Kyle in the Post Crisis Universe of the mid-1980's. If he got away with that with DC Editors at the helm, imagine what he could've done if DC Editors didn't hold him back in Year One. So his interpretation of Black Canary, Wonder Woman, Batgirl, and the other supporting characters and guest appearing characters in this series is pure unchecked Frank Miller. And looking at that point of view, I can now actually like this series for the hilarity and awesome weirdness that is an unchecked Frank Miller story of the Goddamn Batman and his Goddamn supporting cast and Goddamn "Teammates." |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jun 18, 2018 19:51:38 GMT -5
From the success of his works in movies, he might have gotten a big head, and decided to mess with the fanboys, or this might very well be how Frank Miller wanted to tell a Batman story without the hindrance of DC Editors telling him to amend parts of the story or hold him back from making it come across as very bad. I think some fans have either forgotten or were just never aware that Miller actually first returned to the Dark Knight timeline in 1994 with Batman/Spawn (the one penciled by Todd McFarlane). The issue was simply awful - about 40 pages or so of Batman calling Spawn a "twit" or a "punk" and the two brawling to a standstill in an alley. I bring this up because I think there's an assumption by some that Miller could have written something decent with All Star and Dark Knight Strikes Back, but decided to either "mess with the fanboys" or see what he could get away with. I considered the possibility after reading Dark Knight Strikes Back that the guy was so fed up with being asked to do a sequel that he intentionally wrote and drew the worst comic he could in the hopes that nobody would bother him about it again. The fact that he had already written the worst Batman story ever told with Batman/Spawn however, made me question that notion. Now that Miller has gotten Batman/Spawn, Dark Knight Strikes Back, and All Star Batman under his belt I think it's more likely that Miller has simply lost the ability to produce comics at even a fundamental level. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jun 20, 2018 19:29:12 GMT -5
From the success of his works in movies, he might have gotten a big head, and decided to mess with the fanboys, or this might very well be how Frank Miller wanted to tell a Batman story without the hindrance of DC Editors telling him to amend parts of the story or hold him back from making it come across as very bad. I think some fans have either forgotten or were just never aware that Miller actually first returned to the Dark Knight timeline in 1994 with Batman/Spawn (the one penciled by Todd McFarlane). The issue was simply awful - about 40 pages or so of Batman calling Spawn a "twit" or a "punk" and the two brawling to a standstill in an alley. I bring this up because I think there's an assumption by some that Miller could have written something decent with All Star and Dark Knight Strikes Back, but decided to either "mess with the fanboys" or see what he could get away with. I considered the possibility after reading Dark Knight Strikes Back that the guy was so fed up with being asked to do a sequel that he intentionally wrote and drew the worst comic he could in the hopes that nobody would bother him about it again. The fact that he had already written the worst Batman story ever told with Batman/Spawn however, made me question that notion. Now that Miller has gotten Batman/Spawn, Dark Knight Strikes Back, and All Star Batman under his belt I think it's more likely that Miller has simply lost the ability to produce comics at even a fundamental level. I like Dark Knight Strikes Back. Although that doesn't mean I entirely disagree with your point. I've checked it out of the library a couple of times over the last three or four years, and I was thinking I was about due to read it again. |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jun 21, 2018 0:26:38 GMT -5
I think some fans have either forgotten or were just never aware that Miller actually first returned to the Dark Knight timeline in 1994 with Batman/Spawn (the one penciled by Todd McFarlane). The issue was simply awful - about 40 pages or so of Batman calling Spawn a "twit" or a "punk" and the two brawling to a standstill in an alley. I bring this up because I think there's an assumption by some that Miller could have written something decent with All Star and Dark Knight Strikes Back, but decided to either "mess with the fanboys" or see what he could get away with. I considered the possibility after reading Dark Knight Strikes Back that the guy was so fed up with being asked to do a sequel that he intentionally wrote and drew the worst comic he could in the hopes that nobody would bother him about it again. The fact that he had already written the worst Batman story ever told with Batman/Spawn however, made me question that notion. Now that Miller has gotten Batman/Spawn, Dark Knight Strikes Back, and All Star Batman under his belt I think it's more likely that Miller has simply lost the ability to produce comics at even a fundamental level. I like Dark Knight Strikes Back. Although that doesn't mean I entirely disagree with your point. I've checked it out of the library a couple of times over the last three or four years, and I was thinking I was about due to read it again. You're not alone in liking it. Quite a few creators whose opinions I respect - and I definitely respect yours - like it but I just remember whoever was in charge of DC at the time praising the series prior to its release with words such as "breathtaking" and "stunning". There's a lot of stuff I dislike about Miller's Batman work (and even some stuff I begrudgingly admit to enjoying) but my ire tends to redirect itself at different times. Sometimes it's the misogyny (if Miller wanted to express his disdain for women, did he really have to put Selina Kyle into a Wonder Woman outfit and have the Joker beat her to a pulp? Wouldn't just the beating alone have been enough to get it out of his system? He's really got to take it out on Wonder Woman at the same time too?), sometimes it's simply what he did to Superman (yeah, yeah, at the end of the day it's only a comic book, I should probably just relax), but Dark Knight Strikes Back marked the point when I think DC adopted its "If it sells, that's all that matters" attitude towards making comics. Sure, they're a business and making money should be their first priority (I hate to say it, but it's true) but if it wasn't at this point that DC said "You know what, who cares what we put into these things anymore? If people want to buy them just to laugh at what we're doing, what's the problem?" then Strikes Again at least serves as the best example of that mentality being put into practice. All Star Batman, Neal Adams' Odyssey, a lot of those big events, etc could have been good works which still made money (if bad comics with big names on it sell, why not put out good comics with those same big names?) - and I suspect Adams at least, would have welcomed any advice on his writing (he had originally hoped to have gotten help from Miller on the dialogue at least which I know, is exactly what I wouldn't have wanted, but it does suggest that he'd have been OK with someone coming in and saying, "You know, this might work better if...") but I just think the success of Strikes Again is what led DC to believe that they didn't even need to read what they were putting out anymore so long as the cover says 'MILLER/LEE/WHATEVER' on it. Wasn't there some issue of All Star which had to be recalled or apologized for because the word 'c*nt' was applied to Batgirl (just what is it with Miller?) in it and not properly blacked out? Anyhow... My apologies for derailing this thread (hopefully only very briefly) with a rant about a different series from the one being discussed (and this has been an informative, enjoyable thread). It's just that I'm one of those readers who doesn't really believe that a comic can be so bad it's good - if it's bad it's bad (and since I'm getting into Mr. A territory I'll just stop here). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2018 7:39:07 GMT -5
I think some fans have either forgotten or were just never aware that Miller actually first returned to the Dark Knight timeline in 1994 with Batman/Spawn (the one penciled by Todd McFarlane). The issue was simply awful - about 40 pages or so of Batman calling Spawn a "twit" or a "punk" and the two brawling to a standstill in an alley. I read this also. I thought it would be great to see McFarlane draw Batman (again- he did 3 issues of Detective Comics) with his style of drawing exaggerated capes. The art was inconsistent with Spawn's mask disappearing & reappearing from panel to panel. And that dumb panel of Spawn with a batarang embedded in his face. Also Miller's writing was juvenile. His "vision" of who Batman is... That is not what I want Batman to be. |
|
|
|
Post by sabongero on Jun 22, 2018 13:04:39 GMT -5
I think some fans have either forgotten or were just never aware that Miller actually first returned to the Dark Knight timeline in 1994 with Batman/Spawn (the one penciled by Todd McFarlane). The issue was simply awful - about 40 pages or so of Batman calling Spawn a "twit" or a "punk" and the two brawling to a standstill in an alley. I read this also. I thought it would be great to see McFarlane draw Batman (again- he did 3 issues of Detective Comics) with his style of drawing exaggerated capes. The art was inconsistent with Spawn's mask disappearing & reappearing from panel to panel. And that dumb panel of Spawn with a batarang embedded in his face. Also Miller's writing was juvenile. His "vision" of who Batman is... That is not what I want Batman to be. Well, let me dig that one out and take a look at it. If it's as bad as you guys are saying... then it's gotta be Goddamn BAD!!! But... I might get entertained by just how bad it is. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2018 10:15:20 GMT -5
 #7. Nov 2007.Before I recap the issue I want to comment on the delays. #1 cover date was Sept 2005. This issue's cover date was Nov 2007. There was a one year delay between #4 & #5. I went back and added cover dates to previous issues to highlight the delays. We see Batman take on the thugs attacking Black Canary. BC becomes turned on by watching Batman beat up the thugs. It's implied they have sex with their masks on outside on the docks. Batman takes her home then takes Jocko (the Grayson's murderer whom he captured last issue) back to the Bat Cave. He gives Dick a choice... he can kill Jocko or let him live. Dick beats the crap out of Jocko who tells them who ordered the murders of the Graysons.... Sample dialog: " They're shooting scared. Shooting stupid. Killing their own. Life is good". "We keep our masks on. It's better that way". "Gotham City's full of cockroaches. They scramble away. That's unless you step on them & step hard. I step hard". "I'm the goddamn Batman & I can call my goddamn car whatever I want to call it". "Her tongue's a little bit sandy. She's a smoker. Cigars. Cuban. I haven't kissed a smoker in weeks."   Thoughts: Not quite as bad as #1-5. Still has stupid immature dialog. The fight scenes with Batman exploded with action. The whole "sex scene" with BC was implied and written from the view of a 12 year old. The scene in the cave with Grayson was a little over the top but Dick passed the test. Some of Batman's inner thoughts show Miller dialing back the sheer craziness of Batman from the first 5 issues. |
|
|
|
Post by bdk91939 on Jun 24, 2018 20:11:29 GMT -5
I wonder what Oliver Queen thought about that scene?
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Jun 24, 2018 20:54:48 GMT -5
Black Canary is a smoker? She of all people ought to take care of her voice!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2018 20:19:54 GMT -5
#8. Jan 2008. The issue starts with The Joker with a beautiful attorney whom he just had sex with. However he gets more pleasure killing her afterwards. Then back to the Bat Cave as Dick asks Batman who the Joker is. Some back & forth conversation between the two of them before Batman leaves telling Dick to work on a costume. Batman dumps Jocko & sees Green Lantern's ring signal. He goes to talk with GL and states he will meet with him later (next issue) to talk about Hal's concerns. Alfred helps Dick make a Robin Hood styled costume. Then a scene with Joker & Catwoman. The issue ends with Dick in his costume with a hood (similar to Damian's current costume!). He calls himself Hood. Batman tells him to lose the hood & calls him Robin.   Thoughts: This issue wasn't as bad as others. Miller writes the Joker well. No redeeming qualities. Just pure evil. Even the conversation between Batman & Dick is fairly normal. Most of the issue Batman is more subdued than in previous issues. Sure there is still some "dumb" thoughts from Batman but even those have been dialed back. I'm not sure what happened. Either Miller was told to dial back some of the craziness or even he got bored writing everything so over the top. Lee's art was even better than his usual poster worthy art. This issue was just a pleasure to look at as far as the art. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,220 
|
Post by Confessor on Jun 28, 2018 20:41:59 GMT -5
Jeez, that Batman & Black Canary page from issue #6 is just excruciatingly bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2018 21:28:45 GMT -5
The 8th issue started out with the Joker's being bad to the bone dating the gorgeous attorney, making love, and killed her just for the heck of it ... all Joker's wanted to do. Then, things gotten a little out of place ... and I find that picture of Hal (Green Lantern) Jordan eating a hot dog and soda and calling out Batman -- so bizarre that this is definitely a Miller's idea of handle him. Miller did a great job with the Joker and the way Batman telling Dick (in that style of fashion) to lose the Hood and be Robin again is a stroke of Miller's ideas that wasn't all that bad.
I just find this issue a tad bit of everything ... and it's wasn't that good nor bad; the art was very good and that's made this issue just above bearable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2018 8:13:16 GMT -5
More thoughts: Besides the "immature" dialogue the other thing that bothered me was the "bizarre" timeline that occurred in this series. I mean Alfred made a costume for Dick while Batman was out dumping Jocko & meeting with Hal. That had to take less than an hour. Also Dick has been in the cave in his pajamas since issue 2... how long has it been since the events of issue one? Does time pass slower in the Cave? That is bad & lazy writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2018 8:20:55 GMT -5
More thoughts: Besides the "immature" dialogue the other thing that bothered me was the "bizarre" timeline that occurred in this series. I mean Alfred made a costume for Dick while Batman was out dumping Jocko & meeting with Hal. That had to take less than an hour. Also Dick has been in the cave in his pajamas since issue 2... how long has it been since the events of issue one? Does time pass slower in the Cave? That is bad & lazy writing. You are right on the nose -- I didn't see this coming ... this is bad writing period. |
|
