shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:12:06 GMT -5
Batman #417
"Ten Nights of the Beast, p.1"
writer: Jim Starlin
pencils: Jim Aparo
inks: Mike DeCarlo
letters: Agustin Mas
colors: Adrienne Roy
editor: Denny O'Neil
grade: A
You've got to give Starlin credit for his ambition. In only four issues, he took a company crossover installment and made it wholly his own, introduced an emotionally evocative mystery for Batman that, true to real life, he solved incorrectly and won't get resolved for several more issues, he redefined Jason Todd and Dick Grayson's relationship to Batman (whether or not you're a fan of either), and now he's introducing a pre-planned and self-contained multi-part storyline, which rarely happened in comics at this time (The Lazarus Affair and Year 1 and Year 2 being the only times I believe they've happened for Batman).
Add to that the lengths Starlin goes to in order to create a thrilling and realistic-seeming story that's relevant to the politics and mass cultural anxieties of the time period -- a KGB assassin sneaking around right under our noses in an American city was certainly a lot more terrifying than a guy in leotards who just steals and then leaves questions to help you catch him. Add to that Starlin tying the KGBeast to the recent assassination of Anwar Sadat, the mysterious involvement of an Iranian shi'ite terrorist, in-fighting between the FBI and CIA, and a long list of agents who are given actual names and faces in this story (when does that ever happen?), and this story just feels impressively real. It seems inevitably real that global politics would eventually intersect with the world of superheroes, and Starlin makes such a meeting feel thoroughly grounded in reality, even while the central villain is a tad unrealistic and looks utterly ridiculous (seriously, who designed that costume??).
Aparo's art looks competent here, though rarely exceptional, but at least DeCarlo isn't doing it woeful injustice this time around. Additionally, Mike Zeck's cover is fantastic and weirdly appropriate for this story, in which a relatively traditional looking Batman intersects with an incredibly realistic looking city behind him. Comics meet reality; that appears to be the theme of this storyline.
Jason is barely a part of this storyline, dutifully playing the role of side-kick, but not given an opportunity to show any personality. It's funny, but I'm beginning to wonder if even Starlin likes the Jason Todd he created. Last issue proved Bruce only took him on as a disappointing replacement for Dick, he's given absolutely no chance to have a presence in this storyline, and I'm pretty sure he remains on the sideline when we return to the dumpster killer storyline after this one. As I've said before, this is my favorite depiction of Jason Todd, but Starlin doesn't seem to know what to do with him. I'm not sure we're going to get a solid Jason story again until Batman #424/425, the thematic setup for his downfall in Death in the Family. We've really only gotten a taste for his personality in two issues thus far, neither time was he a principal character, and the next time we spend any time with him, Starlin will already be setting him up for a potential death. Is Jason Starlin's Frankenstein monster?
The plot of this storyline was enjoyable and largely well plotted, but there were minor lapses in logic. The Beast's method of killing his second victim (tying a wire between two telephone poles to behead him while he rides by on a motorcycle) wasn't a very subtle way to kill someone and remain under the radar, especially when this was the second death in two days related to the Star Wars Defense Project. Isn't the KGBeast supposed to be this super secret assassin whose assassinations are always under the radar? Similarly, when he gets to the third victim, he breaks his neck and tries to throw him off of a roof. How is that not going to attract attention?
Also, I find it odd that the Soviets named their plan to take down the Star Wars Project "Skywalker." I had no idea the Soviets were such big fans of the Star Wars trilogy.
I will say that I loved Starlin devoting two entire pages to Batman trying to control a 120 foot fall from a rooftop. It was damn exciting and made Batman's rage at the end very convincing -- having done all that only to save a man who was already dead thanks to the Beast.
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: DEA agents bust what they expect to be Columbian drug smugglers, but all eight agents are swiftly killed by one large shadowy figure as the other looks on, KGB Agent Andrei Yevtushenko explains to Gordon and the FBI that a rogue KGB director killed himself after losing a political power struggle and (against the USSR's wishes) set a plan into motion for the KGBeast come to America and kill 10 specialists involved in the Star Wars Project, we learn that the Beast is cybernetically enhanced, trained in the use of most deadly weapons, and the USSR's greatest assasin, as well as the fact that he's already made two kills, the FBI does not want Batman involved, Batman listens in anyway and goes to warn a third person on the list but is too late, the CIA teams up with Batman to save the rest of the potential victims, we learn that the Beast is working with an Iranian Shi'ite terrorist, a fourth victim is killed, we learn that math scientist Silvia Burrows is the only potential victim on the list that can't be found by the FBI and CIA, as well as the fact that the tenth person on the list is the president (who is coming to Gotham in a few days), and Batman begins to construct a plan to lure the KGBeast to him.
Is Silvia Burrows going to end up being Lady Shiva? Is this her introduction? I know she makes her first appearance prior to Death in the Family, I doubt she was already around at this point since her terrorist background feels like the kind of thing only Starlin would have come up with, and "Silvia" and "Shiva" sound very similar.
Great story overall, but I'm already calling the ending. Batman fails to save everyone except Silvia Burrows (something's up with her since no one's been able to find her yet), and the story climaxes with him barely stopping the Beast from killing the president as he visits Gotham.
Looking forward to the rest, all the same. It's a good story.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:12:25 GMT -5
Detective Comics #584
"Fever Break"
writers: John Wagner and Alan Grant
pencils: Norm Breyfogle
inks: Steve Mitchell
letters: Todd Klein
colors: Adrienne Roy
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: B+
The second part of the Ventriloquist storyline is not as strong as the first, though I still found it enjoyable. Part of the problem lies in minor art errors that I found distracting. Adrienne Roy, who usually does a flawless job on colors, makes two notable errors in this issue, coloring Scarface's lawyer's hair two different ways on page 5, causing confusion as to who's head is being dunked in the soup, and neglecting to color Batman's eyes in the half-page close-up on page 8, which really bothered me. Breyfogle also makes a few blunders, especially on page 10, where a rioter on the street has a floating head and no body, and the Batmobile's car door appears to be traveling through a rioter's butt and making an energy impact there. Additionally, the visual of Batman running around with a headset on looks ridiculous (he's used micro technology for listening devices before -- why not here?) and Breyfogle does a very odd depiction of Batman swinging alongside the entrance of the funeral parlor. I had to really think about this one to figure out what advantage Batman was getting by doing that.
On the flipside, I really enjoyed how Breyfogle chose to depict Scarface, or maybe this was Wagner/Grant's choice. Scarface speaks even when far from The Ventriloquist, and his face seems to change expressions. All of this is explainable (The Ventriloquist can throw his voice, and the puppet's facial changes are subtle enough to be imagined), but it certainly casts a playful doubt as to whether or not Scarface really does have a life of his own.
I'm irritated by Scarface's repeated use of Gs instead of Bs. It just gets confusing to determine what he's saying, and I don't really understand the point. I'd originally assumed he was mimicking some famous mafia person's diction, but Wikipedia claims it's because the Ventriloquist can't make a B with his lips while throwing his voice. Whatever it is, it goes unexplained and is quite an obstacle to fully enjoying the issue.
The plot is sound, though I still don't get why those border inspectors saw the giant stitch across Fatman's belly, felt his fat, and still didn't seem to realize that 20 kilos of drugs were being smuggled inside of him. Wasn't that exactly the kind of thing they were looking for?
I also found the ending a bit disappointing. This was a very serious story about a poison in Batman's city that got him very personally involved, and yet, at the end, Batman has driven off and we end with a comic scene of Scarface attacking The Ventriloquist. It just didn't feel like a satisfactory ending to a story that had never been a comedy until this moment.
I'm assuming we'll never hear about the "fever" drug again, which is disappointing. The manufacturers are still in business, and the junkies are still in withdrawal in Gotham. In real life, someone would step in and fill the middle-man void. I hate to see stories in which a complex criminal empire is ended with the arrest of one boss. It's never that simple. Designer drugs like fever are a true urban disease for which there is no simple cure. You don't remove one person and eliminate the problem. I'd like to see this become a consistent undercurrent of tension in Batman's world. Chances are, it won't be.
Jason Todd still goes unmentioned. No surprise there.
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: Fatman, the henchman from last issue, is touring the drug factory in Mexico, is killed under orders from Scarface, and is used to smuggle the drug into the states via his corpse (pretty damn dark for a comic of the time period!), Batman roughs up Scarface and the Ventriloquist, not getting that The Ventriloquist really believes Scarface is in charge, Batman plants a bug on Scarface so that he can overhear all that is said, he runs around town fighting crime with a headset on for days while listening for any incriminating information, he hears about Fatman's corpse and attacks Scarface and his men at the funeral parlor, packets of fever burst open during the conflict, driving Batman mad with rage, he stops himself from murdering The Ventriloquist and runs off to call the police, Scarface and The Ventriloquist are captured, the Ventriloquist offers to turn State's witness in exchange for freedom, and Scarface comically attacks him in their cell.
Why did they allow him to keep Scarface with him in his cell anyway?
Really, not a bad story at all, but not as strong as the first part.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:13:48 GMT -5
Batman #418
"Ten Nights of the Beast, P.2"
writer: Jim Starlin
pencils: Jim Aparo
inks: Mike DeCarlo
letters: John Costanza
colors: Adrienne Roy
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: A
I've been giving the title of this story arc some thought, and I have no idea why it was chosen. At no point in the story are the ten days that this storyline presumably lasts for made important. The only countdown is the number of people on the list (several of which are often killed in a single night). We're not counting down the days or anything, so why "TEN NIGHTS of the Beast?" If you're going to name a story arc (which was rarely done back then), make it count.
This issue is essentially more of the same from the first part, which is a good thing. I don't think the quality has changed much. It's still an exciting mad dash to figure out where the KGBeast will strike and stop him, and it's still full of realistic intrigues and tensions, particularly when the CIA agent and KGB agent engage in a surprisingly astute debate about the Star Wars Project and its potential ramifications on the Cold War. Yevtushenko accurately predicts the bankruptsy and subsequent fall of the Soviet Union that comes as a result of the Star Wars project, as well as the fact that the program, itself, proves, to be useless, and yet Starlin also does a fair job of representing both perspectives in the argument. Fascinating.
A few more lapses in logic in this issue. The Beast (who is clearly no longer concerned with being discrete after killing an entire Republican fundraiser party) is clearly made out to be Batman's superior (and I love his unorthodox method of fighting with knees and elbows), but he's given the opportunity to fire guns directly at Batman twice in this issue and, both times, he completely misses even while Batman is out in the open. How can the world's most dangerous assassin, and Batman's admitted superior, be such a bad shot?
I'm also a bit tired of the whole anxiety of Batman facing someone who's better than him. Didn't we just do this with The Reaper in Year 2? Batman should be the best at what he does by Year 9 or 10 (whichever this is) with his commitment to training and his mission. The Beast might pose new and different challenges to him, but he shouldn't be considered "better" across the board. He might have cybernetic implants and training with lethal weapons that Batman does not use, but I don't buy that he's received better training and developed better skills. How could anyone be more driven than Batman?? Motivation is his superpower.
Why did they make such a big deal about Silvia Burrows and the fact that no one could find her last issue if she was going to end up just as dead and unimportant as the four victims that came before her in this one? And how did the Beast know they'd drink orange juice (or even that particular bottle of orange juice since there were two in the refrigerator) when they got up?
Batman and Robin assume the Beast has a leak on the security force protecting the victims since he knew the secret new location of the Republican fundraiser dinner that everyone was driven to at the last moment. Isn't it just as possible (and, in fact, more feasible) that the Beast just tailed the head chef or impersonated one of the drivers?
So, I assume Batman intentionally leaked the false location of the senator. Was this just to give him a chance to trap the Beast, or will he be able to determine who the leak is from this?
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence:
The Beast finds and kills Silvia Burrows at her boyfriend's house, the Beast poisons and kills an entire Republican fundraiser party in order to get at the fifth victim on the list, Batman chases and fails to catch him, he and Robin (who gets all of three lines in this story) determine that the Beast must have an informant on the security team protecting the victims, Batman and Gordon agree not to tell anyone where they'll be hiding the next two potential victims (why only two? Four are remaining, and three are currently in town. The list doesn't have a specific order), The FBI agent who's been giving Gordon a hard time is furious at not knowing the location (and his agents, who were all named last issue, are long since forgotten), the CIA agent and KGB agent get into a debate about the Star Wars program, Batman interrogates a bunch of weapons dealers until he finds out what the KGBeast will be using and how he'll be using it, Batman sets up a phony ambush site with a dummy senator, The Beast takes the bait, but Batman has no real plan for taking him down, so the Beast gives out a severe beating and escapes, leaving Batman to finally realize he's facing someone who's "better at this game" than he is.
Good issue, once again. The excitement is high and still surprisingly grounded in reality and politics.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:14:02 GMT -5
Re: The Starlin Interview
I found this excerpt from the Back Issue 48 interview:
"In the one Batman issue I wrote with Robin featured, I had him do something underhanded, as I recall. Denny had told me that the character was very unpopular with fans, so I decided to play on that dislike"
I find this quote interesting because it's completely off. Starlin is referring to Batman #424, towards the end of his run, when it's implied that Jason killed the rapist bad guy, setting him up for a downfall in Death in the Family two issues later. Yet Starlin was writing Jason as that same impulsive boy-down-the-wrong-path a year earlier in Batman #415. He was writing Jason that way from day one, when he unnecessarily and recklessly put Scarecrow in a catatonic coma, even though Jason wasn't set up to be that kind of character by the end of either Collins' nor Barr's runs.
So...was Starlin doing this because fans didn't like Jason (only a year earlier than he says he did), did fans not like Jason by the time of #424 because Starlin had already been doing this with Jason for a year, or is Starlin just using fan reaction to justify his own choice to write off Jason as a doomed kid because he didn't like the idea of a kid sidekick?
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:14:13 GMT -5
Post-Crisis Jason Todd in review (thus far)
For the sake of keeping tabs on where Jason has been Post-Crisis:
The first glimpses of Jason, as portrayed in stories by fill-in writers presumably directed by Denny O'Neil, depict him as being generally no different than his pre-Crisis counterpart, and (in fact) no different from the classic Dick Grayson Robin.
Max Collins began his run with Jason being a troublesome street punk (which fans overwhelmingly hated), but he evolved Jason to the point of being a good-natured, fun-loving, wise-crack making sidekick by the end of his run who was well in control of his anger.
Mike W. Barr began with a younger, happier Jason Todd than even shown in pre-Crisis continuity, but he ultimately reconciled this with Collins' approach, showing a happy, good-natured kid with some sincere anger deep at his core that rarely comes out.
Jim Starlin chucks all this out the window and uses Collins' origin story to make Jason into a truly troubled character. Yet Starlin only writes Jason into two stories (Batman #415 and #416) and then pretty much leaves him out of every story for the next year, finally giving him a central role in #424 that sets up the potential death that was already planned for him at this point (and that storyline began two months later).
The point of all this being that there really is no definitive post-Crisis Jason Todd. The character we tend to envision (the one I like that everyone else but Judd Winnick hates) is based either upon his first appearance as a troubled teen in Batman #408 (even though he quickly evolved out of this over the course of a few brief issues) or Starlin's depiction of him in Death in the Family (which uses the origin from #408 and some select prior events to set Jason's death up as a thematic inevitability for the character). Most people aren't even aware of (or just don't think of) Starlin's only two other Jason stories in Batman #415 and #416l. Our entire perception of this character is really just based upon Batman #408 and Death in the Family, whereas he was handled very differently and/or wholly omitted in nearly every other post-Crisis story that occurred over that two year span.
Just thought this was interesting to note. There truly was no definitive post-crisis Jason Todd until Starlin got the final word on him by killing him off while repeating his revised and heavily abridged origin story at the beginning of each installment of that story line.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:14:58 GMT -5
Detective Comics #585
"The Ratcatcher"
writers: Alan Grant and John Wagner (interesting that Grant is credited first this time)
pencils: Norm Breyfogle
inks: Ricardo Villagran
letters: Todd Klein
colors: Adrienne Roy
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: A
I am loving this run. Truly solid stories and art featuring a non-Batjerk Batman, and Grant and Wagner really write fantastic villains. I'd never heard of the Ratcatcher before, but he's awesome. I love his quirky insane personality, constantly legitimizing his actions with "the powers vested in me by Gotham City Sanitation Department." His M.O, using large quantities of rats on command, is also darn intriguing and quite a challenge for Batman. Ratcatcher is pretty much the perfect villain for a Batman video game. Can you imagine that battle?
It looks like someone writing for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon was reading this issue. The Rat King, a villain with the exact same powers, will make his first appearance in an episode approximately one year from now.
Breyfogle's art is really connecting in this issue, as are Villagran's inks. My only complaint is that, whenever Breyfogle does one of those striking up-shots from beneath Batman's head, he makes the nose covering too short. It looks like the Adam West cowl.
Love the writing of this issue, particularly the eerie prattle of the blind guy who goes on about only saying what he saw, and the Judge's compelling inner narration as he tries to escape from an unknown villain (at this point in the story). I found this portion thrilling and intense. The writing felt like exactly what would be going through my head in that situation.
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: Batman is waiting to bust some human "rats," we then shift to an underground make-shift prison with a number of prisoners, including the aforementioned babbling blind man and "Judge" who escapes to get help, we follow Judge through his terrifying trek to freedom while Batman breaks up the illegal weapons deal he's been waiting for, Judge is discovered and pursued by Ratcatcher and his army of rats, he barely makes it above ground, and he appears, covered by rats, as Batman is finishing up with the arms dealers, leaving Batman to discover him dead and with his jugular severed, Batman is intrigued by the rats and follows them long enough to see someone leading them into the sewer, he pursues and meets Ratcatcher as the police discover that "Judge" is actually Judge Wyatt Hogan (I assume he's a real judge who has been missing), Ratcatcher introduces himself to Batman and makes no effort to conceal what he's been doing, truly believing it's right, he then realizes that he's told Batman too much and sets the rats upon him, Batman fights back, but Ratcatcher floods the sewer with raw sewage, leaving Batman knocked out and drowning.
Can't wait to read more!
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:15:07 GMT -5
Batman #419
"Ten Nights of the Beast, p.3"
writer: Jim Starlin
pencils: Jim Aparo
inks: Mike DeCarlo
letters: John Costanza (presumably. No one is credited)
colors: Adrienne Roy (presumably. No one is credited)
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: A
An even trade-off this issue, as the gaps in logic grow wider and the intensity/excitement accelerates. It's incredibly fun to finally watch the Batman best the KGBeast, pulling off one ridiculously cool reversal as the Beast is about to sever a cable while Batman is crossing it. I'm a bit confused as to how Batman suddenly became better than the Beast though. Just last issue, he was sure The Beast was his superior, and we didn't see him do any extra training or planning to bring about this new outcome. Still...it was darned cool.
And, even though it was darned cool, that awesome stunt essentially erased the long-running tradition of a de-powered, realistic Batman going back to Frank Robbins' time. Even Miller and Barr worked hard to show a realistic man with realistic limits working hard to better himself, yet the stunt Starlin allows Batman to pull in this issue is only marginally physically possible, and even then would require an absurd amount of luck. This has got to be the most absurd stunt I've ever seen Batman pull in copper/modern age history. Still, it was amazingly cool.
The logic gaps:
1. Just last issue, Batman was able to stay ahead of the Beast by shaking down every weapons dealer in town (except for the ones he just busted in the most recent issue of Detective). How, then, did the Beast get his hands on a portable stinger rocket launcher with which to shoot down an airplane, how did Batman not predict that course of action (real life terrorists have done this), and why wouldn't Batman have tracked down the custom weapons designer the Beast is working with at the end of the issue who, we're outright told, the police know about?
2. If the information is still getting leaked to the Beast, why continue to risk Gordon's career and create distracting tensions by keeping Agent Parker and the KGB agent out of the picture?
3. With 7 of the ten people on that list already dead, why are they still taking the targeted congressmen to hotels and fundraisers? We just saw the Beast kill all the attendees of a fundraiser last issue. At this point, don't you just lock them in a secure bunker until the Beast is dealt with? Surely, they'd see the wisdom in this.
4. The Beast has them all trapped in a stalled elevator and, rather than firing a missile launcher or grenade at them, takes his time gingerly throwing cement blocks down at them, giving Batman all the time he needs to climb the cable, miraculously being missed by every single block the Beast throws at him. Come on!
5. The world's greatest assassin gets hit in the hand with a dart and automatically stops firing at Batman to nurse his hand for several seconds, allowing the police to arrive and confront him. Really?
6. Batman traps the Beast by tying a cable around his hand, so the Beast cuts off his hand. Ummm...couldn't he have cut the cable instead, or even dragged Batman to some back alley where he could beat the snot out of him again? This extreme decision was exciting, but it definitely didn't seem warranted.
7. Did we really need Batman to dramatically reveal at the end that the final target is "RONALD REAGAN, The President of the United States"? We already knew the final target was "the President" two issues ago. Does Starlin truly expect his readers to be up on contemporary Cold War politics, yet ignorant of who the President of the United States is?
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: A plane carrying another victim is blown up, Batman and Gordon learn to late that the Beast used a portable rocket launcher to do it, Agent Parker is still furious about being kept out of the information loop and is going to the mayor about it (for what it's worth, we still don't know anything about the post-Crisis Mayor of Gotham City), Batman and Robin have a brief dialogue in which Batman explains that Agent Parker's involvement in a radical student group in the '60s does not make him a Communist informant, Batman, Gordon, the FBI, and the CIA are escorting the next two victims in a hotel when the Beast blows up one with an explosive doorknob, leaving Agent Parker to huddle the everyone into an elevator (even a five year old knows this is an idiotic idea), the plant in Agent Parker's division appears to be Agent MacDonald, Agent MacDonald(?) cuts power to the closed Elevator car, allowing the Beast to start hurtling cement blocks at them, Batman manages to pursue him after he kills a legion of cops, The Beast swings across a cable to a different rooftop, Batman pursues, the Beast starts to cut the cable, so Batman uses his own explosive to cut the cable, uses the cable (which is now cut at both ends) like a whip while in mid-air to snag the Beast's left arm, The Beast cuts his left hand off to get away, it turns out that the CIA director and other previous victim secretly made their own escape plans and survived that airplane attack at the beginning of the issue, and Batman acknowledges that they have three days to figure out how to prevent the Beast from killing the President when he visits Gotham.
Very exciting issue full of fantastic action sequences, even though it did seem quite a bit dumber at times.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:17:15 GMT -5
Detective Comics #586
"Rat Trap"
writer: John Wagner and Alan Grant
art: Norm Breyfogle
inks: Todd Klein
colors: Adrienne Roy
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: A+
Wow. Just when I thought it couldn't get better, we're given a story that's infinitely more powerful than its predecessor.
What strikes me as being the most interesting about this issue is the reversal it so subtly accomplishes. What was haunting in the first installment (the cells with those faceless prisoners -- one chanting about what he saw) is now turned comical (we see the compassionate looking prisoners, and they keep telling the blind one to "shut up"), whereas what was comical (The Ratcatcher's quirky personality and his "by the power invested in me by the Department of Sanitation") turns haunting as we see the extent of his cruelty (he even uses that trademark line to execute the blind guy, the most harmless and least resisting of his prisoners). That definitely threw me.
But beyond even that, this was just a very gritty, down to Earth, and realistic story, from the realization that this guy had been at large for 15 years (Batman doesn't catch all the bad guys right away), Batman and the police's inability to save some victims (including that poor sanitation worker who was just guiding the police through the sewer), Batman getting knocked unconscious by high pressured sewage and then only coming to his senses after vomiting, the prisoners being forced to eat live rats, Batman having festering infections after being bitten and then drowned in sewage, his being terrified of the rats after the first encounter and having to resort to burning them, the amount of detail the morgue goes into about the skin funguses, infections, and infestations in the Judge's body from having lived in the sewers for so long, and even one of the survivors commenting on how relieved he isto breathe the air and the other being so concerned about contacting his wife -- they felt like real people.
Both Starlin and Wagner/Grant seem set on creating real villains and victims in their stories, no longer content with bright colored thieves in leotards with gimmicky M.O.s. This was one creepy, no holds barred story that felt too extreme for even those CSI shows. And, even still, it was fun and exciting. That's a weird balance to muster, but Wagner, Grant, and Starlin are all doing it right now.
Interesting, by the way, that Breyfogle does his own inking this issue. Man, it looks good, especially on page 3, panel 4 and page 7, panel 5. Those are the kinds of inking decisions you just don't impose on someone else's pencils. The penciler and inker need to share a vision in order to accomplish that or, better yet, be the same person. So why can't Aparo ink his own work in Batman if Breyfogle can do it here? Maybe he didn't want to?
So, regarding the story, how did none of the Ratcatcher's prisoners get sick and die after being kept in the sewer for 15 years with fungi growing on their skin, raw sewage in the proximity, and nothing to eat but dirty rats who crawl through that sewage on a daily basis? I suppose it's possible that's how the one prisoner went blind, but it seems more likely that the Ratcatcher blinded him out of some sense of perverse justice since he was the witness whose ability to see led to Ratcatcher's arrest. That's really the only logic gap I see here.
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: We finally meet the Ratcatcher's prisoners and feel their hopes and fears as Ratcatcher returns to tell them that the escaped Judge is dead and that they'll be staying in their cells until they die, Gordon is puzzled as to why a criminal court judge who had been missing for 15 years had been living in a sewer and why a pack of rats attacked him, the police go into the sewer with a sanitation worker to investigate, Batman wakes up, having survived the drowning, and slowly recovers from severe illness, we learn that the Ratcatcher is Flannigan, a mentally unstable former sanitation worker who killed a man for insulting him and then sought revenge on the people who put him behind bars by kidnapping and imprisoning them in the sewer, the rats attack the police and kill the sanitation worker, forcing them to flee to the surface, Gordon connects the facts about Flannigan and his victims, Flannigan begins executing his prisoners now that the police are onto him, Batman torches all of the rats with gas and a torch from a maintenance crew setup, Batman takes down Flannigan and returns the two surviving prisoners to the surface.
Fantastic issue in that, even though this was a "minor" Batman adventure with only a few lives at stake (rather than the fate of the Cold War in Starlin's run), I invested so much care into those lives because of the writing. Three prisoners in an underground holding cell meant far more to me than the life of Ronald Reagan in Starlin's run (not that his isn't amazing work as well). I doubt Wagner and Grant will be able to top this.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:17:25 GMT -5
Batman #420
"Ten Nights of the Beast, p.4"
writer: Jim Starlin
pencils: Jim Aparo
inks: Mike DeCarlo
letters: John Costanza
colors: Adrienne Roy
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: A-
The final part of Starlin's Cold War epic attempts to pull out all the stops and, in doing so, creates a few more problems for itself. Generally, while this issue maintains much of the excitement of the previous installments, it begins to feel far more ridiculous, particularly the opening scene in which Batman kidnaps the president. Aparo's pencils made the image of Batman swinging away with Reagan under his arm look truly and laughably ridiculous, especially when the president doesn't seem to be the least bit alarmed by this in the helicopter only five panels later. Then you've got the diversion Batman creates for the Beast, in which Gordon impersonates the president, even though the Beast is likely going to kill him, although maybe not since Gordon does nothing to disguise himself (not even taking off the glasses) other than wearing a wig. And just how did Robin happen to be ready to swing out and intercept the terrorist's glider when they had no idea how the attack would be made? Then you've got the ridiculous amount of coincidences and conveniences involved in Batman fighting the Beast one on one, especially the gun jamming at just the right time in order to save Batman from being killed. If the Caped Crusader was that sloppy and that willing to jump into something so over his head on a regular basis, there's no way he would have survived as a crime fighter for ten years by this point.
Of course, we also have to talk about how Batman finally beats the beast -- locking him in a room in the sewer. I get the power of the decision -- he's essentially choosing to kill the Beast, understanding that he won't be imprisoned if he's captured alive, but this is just the lamest way to "off" someone in comics. The world's greatest assassin, who has repeatedly shown his resourcefulness and is equipped with a custom made weapon that can shoot bullets, project a bayonette, and even fire tear gas, isn't eventually going to find some way out of this room that was never designed to be a prison cell? He's certainly got time. Maybe that maintenance crew will even come back and wonder why the door is closed. I kept expecting to see Batman turn some valve that would unleash rushing water into that section of the sewer, drowning the Beast, but he's just left him with every opportunity to escape.
I was also very bothered by the lack of connection between Batman and Detective in this issue. It's been obvious from almost the beginning that O'Neil could care less what the two titles are doing and whether or not they intersect, but in this particular issue, we have Batman in a sewer right after he had a particularly difficult experience in a sewer in Detective. You'd hope for some kind of acknowledgement of this and, instead of getting one, Starlin goes so far as to have Batman tell us:
"Fortunately, I had a case that brought me down here before. I have this section of pipes and passages memorized. That's how I know about the back door."
I don't know if Starlin is trying to reference Wagner/Grant's Ratcatcher story (I doubt it), some other past adventure (we've seen Batman in the sewers before pre-crisis), or if he's just making something up, but that "back door" definitely did not appear in the Rat Catcher storyline, in which Batman was far too overwhelmed and pressed for time to worry about memorizing anything. This little clause just further solidified the fact that the two Batman titles have nothing to do with each other at this point.
Regarding Agent MacDonald, did anyone else find it a little hard to believe that an agent who rose through the FBI and its strict background/profile requirements would go on to sell out the life of the president of the United States for a measly $40,000? You couldn't retire on that even in the late 1980s.
Mike DeCarlo is growing on me. I especially like his choice to only darken the lower half of Batman's cowl. I don't think I've seen anyone else try that before...or would that have been an Aparo decision?
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: Batman figures out what arms dealer the Beast will go to too late (he's already dead), President Reagan arrives at the airport and is promptly kidnapped by Batman as Gordon prevents Agent Parker from firing on Batman for doing so, they explain to Reagan that they don't trust Parker's division to protect him and Reagan agrees, they feed false info to Parker about how they'll be transporting Reagan next as Batman reveals that he knows who the informant is and has a plan for him, the Beast's terrorist accomplice attempts to suicide bomb the decoy president (Gordon), but is stopped by Robin, Batman takes the informant with him to the "real" transport site, and the Beast arrives as both he and the agent try to kill Reagan, the informant is killed, and Batman drives the Beast off and pursues him into the sewers after revealing that everyone was wearing bulletproof jackets (after if became apparent that no one was dying from the bullets, why didn't the world's greatest assassin just aim for the head?), after a long fight with the Beast in the sewers, Batman corners him in a room, and though the Beast beckons him to come in and fight to the death, Batman just locks and barricades the door and walks away, he returns to indirectly inform Agent Bundy that he has killed the Beast and then gets into his limo as we discover that Alfred had been impersonating Reagan all this time.
Though this issue was guided by strong ideas (especially Batman's decision about how to handle the Beast), the minor flaws finally began to bother me a bit this time.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:17:36 GMT -5
Detective Comics #587
"Night People"
writers: John Wagner and Alan Grant
art: Norm Breyfogle
letters: Todd Klein
colors: Adrienne Roy
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: A-
A fascinating idea for a street-level Batman story in which a late night radio disc jockey narrates the heart and soul of a Gotham evening as we watch Batman doing his rounds, a criminal on the loose, and the numerous citizens of Gotham that both intersect with. One problem though...Doug Moench already told the exact same story (albeit with a different criminal) way back in Batman #360. I wonder if Wagner or Grant read this story and subconsciously remembered it here or if the two writing teams came up with the same narrative setup to introduce a new villain by sheer chance. Whatever the case, it worked then, and it works here.
It's interesting that such a grounded, realistic-feeling, street level story results in the creation of Grant/Wagner/Breyfogle's first supervillain (not yet named in this issue). In fact, I could be wrong, but I believe this is the first super-powered villain Batman will confront in the post-Crisis continuity outside of the events of Millenium, unless you count the KGBeast (Starlin mentioned in passing that he was cybernetically enhanced).
Batman's attitude is growing harsher in this issue. Check out the way he interrogates an informant who has decided not to inform him, and how guiltless he feels about the apparent death of the cocaine smuggler. The Pre-Crisis Batman that Moench, Conway, and Wein were writing wouldn't have been that remorseless. The characterization from DKR, Year One, and Batman #400 are starting to catch up with Batman in this and in the conclusion to Ten Nights of the Beast that we just saw in this month's issue of Batman. He's nowhere near as over-the-top as Miller's Batman, but he certainly crosses the moral line a little more willingly than he used to in order to accomplish his ends.
Breyfogle's art is looking so much stronger. Though his inking looks great (particularly the fire-lit derelicts), I think the strength of the art in this issue owes more to the creativity that being given the freedom to do his own inking has inspired. Just check out page 13, panel 1 and page 15, panel 1. Wow. I also found it interesting how differently he drew Batman's face when shown from the perspective of the informant he was threatening to beat -- wide and muscular to the point of ridiculous proportions. My only regret with his art was on page 3, panel 3. That pale eye showing through the cowl is creepy, and Batman shouldn't be showing that level of shock/surprise at hearing the sounds of a standard mugging. I want to see him looking more professional and in control than this.
Finally, what's up with the newscast in which a police officer is quoted as stating that the stabbing of that one derelict was "the most savage, brutal slaying this city has seen in a long time"? Nothing about the art suggested this, and this also once more illuminates the complete lack of coordination in the Bat Office. Wouldn't the dismembered women being left in dumpsters in Starlin's run qualify as more "savage" and "brutal" than a knifing?
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: DJ Dark provides narration over the radio waves that adds a flavor to the Gotham night, as a prison guard discovers that Derek Mitchell, serving life for murder, has escaped, Batman stops a mugging, the escaped Mitchell kills a derelict while his friends discuss random half memories from the past (nice characterization there), Mitchell begins reflecting on his mission of revenge, seemingly implying that he was set up and was paid to do the job for "Kadaver" (that HAS to be a pseudonym), Batman harasses an informant who has decided not to inform him about a cocaine deal, the informant gives in, Mitchell is spotted by police officers and hides in the back lot of a chemical plant, Batman busts the cocaine deal (on a boat) but the dealer jumps off the ship, lightening strikes the back lot where Mitchell had been hiding, and all seems to be returning to normal as Mitchell rises from his hiding spot, eclipsed by shadows, but clearly transformed.
Not a bad issue overall, though its striking resemblance to the aforementioned Moench story bothers me a bit, as does the lack of a clear center or focus for the events of the issue. Why was the cocaine deal an important part of this story (it certainly wasn't very interesting on its own)? How about the mugging and the derelicts? They all had a bit of character, but the pieces didn't seem clearly interrelated in a thematic way. Where was the center of this story? DJ Dark didn't really provide one with his narration (though it was damn amusing when Batman turned off the radio and told him to "shut up").
Pretty solid issue, but I know Grant and Wagner can do better.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 15, 2014 12:17:48 GMT -5
Batgirl Special #1
"The Last Batgirl Story"
writer: Barbara Randall
pencils: Barry Kitson
inks: Bruce D. Patterson
letters: John Costanza
colors: Carl Gafford
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: F
Ten years ago, Barbara Gordon was the primary character in Batman Family, a top selling DC comic. A lot has changed since then, first demoting Batman Family to the primary feature of Detective Comics, then the backup feature, then just giving Barbara poorly written back up solo stories, then leaving her out entirely, then bringing her back for the Crisis on Infinite Earths just so that she can annunciate just how useless she suddenly feels as a hero, and then finally ending her career with this terribly executed special.
I honestly don't know where to begin. First off, so much of this story absolutely makes no sense, beginning by flashing back to Batgirl's previous run in with Cormorant (who?? when??? where???) in which she appears to die but then doesn't, and it's absolutely not clear how this happens. Just as we're trying to make sense of all this (I can't find a reference to "Cormorant" in any comic book story outside of this one), Barbara is visited by her close friend Marcy, and they immediately begin making tons of references to scraps of back story that none of us are familiar with, even going so far as to say that Batgirl was "theirs." I assume all of this makes sense if you read Batgirl's Secret Origins issue that was written a year earlier by the same author, but Randall really should have taken some strides to explain some of this to the casual reader. 9 pages in and this story is already pissing me off.
Worse yet is the lame attempt it makes to take up feminist issues. On the one hand, the issue centers on Barbara trying to take down a female vigilante killing rapists and wife beaters, and virtually every man in this story is a condescending jerk to women, but while this lousy attempt to take on feminist issues by simply demonizing all men is painful enough to watch on its own, its similarly interesting just how stereotypical Randall is in her treatment of Barbara. She was once a tough, strong-willed crime fighter by night, as well as a tough, strong-willed politician by day. Now she's only known by others for being Gordon's "kid," and she spends the entire story doubting herself and acting like a coward just because she's still haunted by the memories of this Cormorat guy once trying to kill her (uhh, hasn't every villain she's ever faced?). It was particularly devastating when, on page 7, she begins to finally suit up to become Batgirl and then decides to go to sleep instead.
Being a feminist should mean the exact opposite of seeing all women as victims who are intimidated by men. Batgirl once stood for something -- now she's just another victim and barely a hero at the end for beating up the guy who once scared her.
But it doesn't matter anyway, because this issue unceremoniously ends Barbara's career. Even though her doubts about being a crime fighter were entirely entwined with her feeling of victimhood at the hands of Cormorat, finally finding the inner strength to defeat him does not give her the confidence to go on fighting crime. Quite the inexplicably opposite, she goes ahead with her plans to give up being Batgirl and, instead of giving this any serious reflection or meaningful goodbye, Randall spends the last frame having Barbara playfully decide about what to do with the costume.
If I could punch Barbara Randall for this one, I would (and wouldn't that be ironic considering the theme of this issue).
But who am I kidding? Alan Moore's going to do far worse to Barbara just next week...
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 25, 2014 19:50:37 GMT -5
Batman 421
"Elmore's Lady"
writer: Jim Starlin
pencils: Dick Giordano
inks: Joe Rubinstein
letters: John Costanza
colors: Adrienne Roy
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: A
Denny O'Neil may be the worst Bat Office editor I've read up to this point in terms of coordinating his books/artists/vision for a character, but he knows how to sell an event and, beyond that, he's done a heck of a job picking his writers up to this point. Max Collins is the only one I'm not so sure about and neither was O'Neil, but he gave him a free pass on Batman after writing "One Batman Too Many," a story that impressed virtually everyone. My point in all this being that, while this is the most frustratingly uncoordinated Bat Office possible for a guy tracking continuity in an age of comics so devoted to continuity that it just rebooted its entire universe, at least the writing is amazing in both titles at this point.
Batman #421 is certainly my favorite Starlin issue thus far. I'm impressed, first off, that we're returning to the unsolved case of the dumpster killer half a year after Starlin began it. In the real world, Batman couldn't afford to obsess over a case until he solves it, and certainly the threat the KGBeast posed to the entire United States took precedence. I really respect this decision to side-table the Dumpster Killer and return to it at this point. However, I do find it odd that no reference was made to the case in all the months between. In considering the magnitude of the Ten Nights of the Beast storyline, as well as the fact that it was its own self-contained and named mini-series within the Batman title (rare for the time period) I wonder if it was Starlin's initial plan for the mini-series that The Cult became. What if this was never intended to interrupt the Dumpster Killer storyline? It sure seems like the Dumpster Killer is the storyline Starlin's been passionate about telling from Day One, only interrupted by Millenium, a need to do something with Jason Todd, and finally Ten Nights of the Beast. Knowing the sense for sales and spectacle that O'Neil seems to have, I can clearly see him giving Starlin calls mid-script to impose these kinds of things on him. Can anyone lend some insight to this? Am I on the right track?
I love the characterization of Elmore, the bum, in this issue, as well as the revelation about his wife and what happened to the missing 11th victim. Were Alan Moore writing, he could have told a complete double length story just about this, but Starlin gives us a generous enough sense of the perverse and warped, then moving on with the story. As Batman moves on to interrogate the Steel Dragons, ultimately being asked to knock one out so that he doesn't look like an informant, I was thoroughly charmed. Starlin really gives a characterization to Batman's streets and the people on them -- it's lighter than the Gotham Wagner and Grant are painting, but it certainly carries its dark streaks as well (i.e. the Dumpster Killer).
Nice twists and turns in this mystery as we discover how the killer(s) is/are using different vans and how the owners of those vans always have the alibi of being in jail on the nights of the killings.
However, with all of this great writing (I don't think Starlin has really let me down yet, with the possible exception of that confrontation between Dick and Bruce) I still don't have a handle on who Starlin's Batman is. We've seen him be a confused monster to Dick who really cares deep down inside, a vigilante so obsessed with vengeance that he crosses his own moral boundaries in the initial Dumpster Killer story, and we see him both burning with a thirst for justice and so kind that he stays behind to comfort an old woman who was held hostage in this issue. In fact, Giordano manages to portray him as almost casually chipper, even as he maintains the default frown, as he agrees to knock out that Iron Dragon informant. Check out the casual wave goodbye he gives afterward. This Batman, though serious and furious at what the Dumpster Killer has done, seems...happy? I guess this issue feels like it's come out of the Mike W. Barr run, in which Batman has a dark streak a mile wide, but also has the ability to bury that streak and be fun loving. I just don't think I've seen Starlin characterize him this way yet.
Artwise, While I miss Aparo's pencils in this issue (though, thankfully, there are no notorious pages worth of cut and pasted frames) and I'm even starting to miss DeCarlo's style of inking Batman's cowl, Giordano and Rubinstein do a nice job in their place. As mentioned earlier, I love how Giordano handled that sequence with the Iron Dragon informant (and it seemed entirely in keeping with what Starlin was writing there), though my one major disappointment with this issue (and I even remember my frustration with this when reading the issue as a kid) is that the corpse on page 8 still looks alive. The whole question is whether or not Elmore's "wife" is the missing corpse and, when we see her, she's sitting upright with her eyes seemingly focused on the approaching characters. We have to flip through a page of ads and carefully judge Batman's reaction over the next few panels to be sure she really was dead. That panel really bothered me.
No Jason Todd in this issue. No surprise.
Over all, an incredibly strong issue. I just wish I understood Starlin's Batman by this point.
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: Batman is reflecting on the Dumpster Killer and how unprepared he is for a criminal who does this kind of thing for pleasure instead of gain (apparently Starlin didn't read The Killing Joke, on shelves this same week), he and Gordon have figured out the killer's pattern but can't figure out why an 11th victim didn't surface when she should have, Batman thinks back to Kate Babcock (killed by the DK last time around), we're introduced to a well-meaning but cognitively burnt out dum named Elmore, Batman saves him from a beating and is invited to meet his new "wife," this proves to be the 11th victim (Elmore rescued her from the dumpster, explaining why Batman couldn't find the 11th victim when he expected to), Batman learns from Elmore what van the people who dumped her were using, he traces it to the Iron Dragons who show that they were in prison on that night (an alibi that a van owner in the previous story had), Batman quickly figures out that the same cop was on duty at the impound lot on those nights, he shows up at the lot to find the cop, the cop sees him and calls the people he's been "renting" these vans to, they kill the cop, but the cop leaves a clue written in blood: "cugino" ("cousin," in Italian), Batman investigates the cousin and his partner and is told that if he doesn't leave, he'll be sued for breaking and entering, and as a defeated Batman leaves, the two argue and ultimately decide to kill another girl as a means of taking down Batman.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 25, 2014 19:51:25 GMT -5
Batman: The Killing Joke
writer: Alan Moore
pencils: Brian Bolland
colors: John Higgins
letters: Richard Starkings
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: B+
So much to discuss in this one, and I suppose it begins with The Joker. One brief cameo in Batman #408 and a largely out of continuity story by Mike W. Barr aside, we haven't seen him post-Crisis. From Denny O'Neil's point of view, DKR redefined Batman into something darker and scarier, and it was wildly profitable and bought him tons of acclaim as an editor. It must have only made sense to reinvent Batman's arch-nemesis in the same way.
In recent years, one could easily argue that Ras Al Ghul had surpassed Joker as Batman's primary antagonist but, from a story perspective, Ras was an international villain and would require Batman to repeatedly leave Gotham (and his element) in order to battle him regularly and, from a sales perspective, the Joker was more easily identifiable to the wider audience, and so this story re-establishes the Joker as Batman's primary antagonist, while redefining him as a darker villain for the late 1980's at the same time.
What's interesting is trying to determine what place TKJ was supposed to have in the wider continuity. I've argued before that I believe O'Neil intended DKR to be “in continuity” at first, envisioning it as the future (or at least a possible future) for Batman up until the two continuities diverged with the death of Jason Todd. In contrast, while TKJ redefines a post-Crisis Joker who behaves very differently from the Joker(s) we've seen before, Moore goes out of his way to acknowledge past continuity, from the Red Hood origin story that is so meticulously adhered to and cleverly altered, to Batman pulling up to Arkham in the 1940s Batmobile and pulling up a Dick Sprang era Joker profile on the Bat Computer. In many ways, this feels like it was intended to be a timeless story with no clear ties to a specific continuity, drawing from the full spectrum of Batman's past legacy and future. Of course, then, the story goes out of its way to cripple Barbara Gordon and have both the Joker and a doctor comment that she'll probably never walk again. It's for that reason that I still suspect the decision to cripple Barbara Gordon was a last minute decision suggested/imposed by O'Neil in order to make the departure of a character he had no interest in pursuing a bit more sensational. And the double meaning of "The Killing Joke" only works if someone dies in this story (no one does). Perhaps Moore originally intended to show the limitless madness of the Joker by having him murder a bit character rather than cripple Barbara. As always, just a theory.
From the perspective of a Batgirl fan, this is inevitably a frustrating issue, especially since all Barbara does is get coffee for her father, worry about glue stains, refer to her job at the library in the past tense (as if all her life consists of now is getting coffee for Jim), never once mention having been Batgirl, and look horrified beyond the ability to act simply by having a gun pointed at her. How upsetting to the feminist within me. She's already functioning as a useless appendage before she obtains two of her own. I believe the pre-Crisis Batgirl would have disarmed Joker or maneuvered out of the way long before he fired that gun. Once you get to Joker undressing her and taking pictures of her, this story just gets so thoroughly demeaning to women. Barbara's only usefulness in this story is as a victim (with sexual abuse strongly implied) and a tool for breaking her father's spirits. She has no importance as an actual character independent of him.
It's important to keep in mind that the origin story Moore provides for the Joker here is clearly depicted as being unreliable. The Joker seems to have a sincerely difficult time recalling his true origin and describes it as being “multiple choice.” This helps to explain why certain parts of the origin work well for drama but don't quite make sense, like Joker going crazy the moment he emerges from the chemical waste. He hasn't seen his reflection yet, so why would the act of falling in the chemicals drive him insane when finding out his wife was dead or being confronted by Batman didn't trigger it before that time? What about the act of falling and seeing his wrist looking white is the final push that sets him over the edge? Again though, it doesn't really matter since it's an unreliable flashback.
By the way, anyone else find it disturbing how much he looks like actor John Tuturo in those flashbacks?
So lets get to my biggest problem with this issue. Okay, so we're trying to redefine the Joker here, and yet it's clearly established that this is the Joker that Batman's been fighting since 1940, not a rebooted criminal with a new past and set of characteristics. So what prompts him to suddenly become so much more dangerous and perverse? He's trying to prove a point to Gordon – but why? This is a very significant change for the Joker (and was probably intended to be), but Moore never bothers to tell us why he's suddenly seeing his (possible) past everywhere he looks, why he's suddenly trying to turn others crazy and prove to them why one bad day can change everything, or why he's suddenly so willing to cross the lines he carefully observed before. To be clear, the Joker had been an established murderer long prior to TKJ, but this intentionally sadistic attack on the Gordons certainly surpassed the demented cruelty he'd exhibited before.
I always preferred the approach Doug Moench tried in Detective #532 in which the Joker is thoroughly aware of the rules of the game he plays with Batman, knows how to break those rules and win, but prefers to color within the lines and play the game to its logical conclusion. He's not just some crazy and unpredictable nemesis – he's smart enough and funny enough to see the setup for the joke and wants to help it get to the punchline. That type of Joker might not even actually be insane; he just enjoys playing the role (possibly as a means of hiding from some deeper truth about himself) I like that character a lot better. It's more complex and more sophisticated, regardless of how shocking and spectacular this approach might be, but then again, this is Denny O'Neil's Bat Office, and Denny knows that shocking and spectacular writes his paychecks.
Interesting, still, that although the Joker seems far more insane in TKJ than he ever did before, he also clearly portrays insanity as being a choice. I'm not sure I believe him on that one, especially when Batman offers to help him reform and he says, "No, it's too late for that. Far too late," seemingly with sincere regret.
So, in the larger scheme of things, here's what TKJ does for Batman continuity:
1. Batman and The Joker had previously been depicted as uniquely linked/connected (going at least as far back as Batman #321, where they almost seemed like a bickering married couple), but Moore makes a bigger deal of it, making much of the reading public aware of that notion for the first time.
2. The Joker had been a merciless killer since as far back as Batman #251, but Moore pushes that sadistic cruelty to a new level of unpredictability, with seemingly nothing off limits.
3. Barbara Gordon is paralyzed.
Beyond that, it's a compelling story that is well told and very cinematic in its visuals. Bolland did a great job on art, masterfully assisted by John Higgens on colors, though Bolland's Joker looks a little too Brit Pop Rocker for me, and The Joker's pouty-face when asking Batman, "Why aren't you laughing?" has always disturbed me in a way that it probably wasn't supposed to.
So it's a strong story, and an important story, but I'm not entirely pleased with how it reduced Joker to a raving homocidal maniac without any real subtlety to him beyond his origin story and the pathos Batman feels toward him, and I'm definitely not pleased with what it did to Barbara Gordon. Had this been an out-of-continuity one-shot (as we all thought it was when it first hit the stands), I would have been a lot happier with it. But it was a sensational shake-up for the sake of being a sensational shake-up, and that's what the fans crave.
Last edited by shaxper; 07-11-2011 at 08:00 PM.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 26, 2014 7:20:04 GMT -5
Detective Comics #588
"Night People Part Two: The Corrosive Man"
writers: John Wagner (?) and Alan Grant
art: Norm Breyfogle
letters: Todd Klein
colors: Anthony Tollin
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: B
According to Alan Grant, this is the first issue he wrote solo after John Wagner dropped out due to low sales and, subsequently, no royalty payments. Grant claims he kept Wagner's name on the book for fear that DC would drop him without his more famous (at the time) partner.
I wonder if that's why this issue feels a bit more uneven, or whether it's because the issue strives to extend itself beyond this run's comfort zone, taking on a super-powered villain and telling a more complicated/intricate tale in three parts. Whatever the case, there are times where this issue definitely doesn't feel as strong as its predecessors.
For one thing, The Corrosive Man just isn't working for me. It was one thing to have to accept that lightening + hazardous chemicals = super powers, but now on top of the inexplicable ability to melt anything, he's also entirely impervious to an onslaught of bullets, and, though Grant takes great pains to show that he can't drive because he'll burn through the seat and steering wheel, his clothes stay on him just fine (even his shoes). True, they were in the explosion with him, but I find it a little hard to accept that the seat of his pants has the same organic chemical reaction that his flesh and body do, burning the seat of the truck while his hands burn the steering wheel. I don't think Grant considered this very carefully. It wouldn't have been hard to tastefully portray the ambiguous, smokey shadow of a Corrosive Man sans-clothing.
For another thing, I'm a bit disturbed by how easily two police officers decide to fire upon The Corrosive Man, not because he's done anything wrong (they're not even positive it's Mitchell) but because they are afraid of being accidentally burned by him. Batman even remarks "Somebody's doing some serious shooting." I would assume that trained police officers would run before repeatedly firing at a potentially innocent victim of a chemical hazard and shouting "Drop, Damn you! Drop!"
Additionally, we've got Kadaver's henchman, who protests that he doesn't like to kill and initially refuses to even go out and do it again, yet he took the pains to carve up his first victim to make it look like it was done by a maniac; he did such a good job that it was considered the most savage killing seen in Gotham in years. Someone who fears killing and hates it would probably stab and run, not having the ability to spend extra time with the corpse, cutting it up more than necessary. I find it hard to believe that he'd even be physically capable of doing this, not wretching and shaking uncontrollably to the point that he couldn't control the knife. Average people can't just decide to brutally dismember a corpse because their boss tells them to.
Kadavar bothers me as a villain because all of his playfulness feels like a pale imitation of the pre-Killing Joke Joker. His flare for the dramatic (enacting horror scenes for sheer pleasure as he converses with his underling) and his playful sense of humor feel a bit too familiar, even if the focus of such energies is on enacting horror scenes rather than being a jester. He's far from the unique creative flare that drove the creations of The Ventriloquist and The Ratcatcher.
In contrast, I really did appreciate the bums in this issue. I loved their discussion about how Batman wouldn't ignore the murder of their colleague last issue had he been rich, one of their admissions that, had they all been rich, none of them would care what happened to bums, Kadavar's henchman's clever way of dividing them in order to kill one, and the gentle social critique of how we see bums in this issue when it turns out that the henchman killed the wrong one last issue (they all look the same to him, I suppose).
Beyond that, this was a pretty average issue with an average villain and an average plot in which Batman works to stop him. Not sure it's really going to warrant three parts.
The plot in one ridiculously long sentence: DJ Dark continues to narrate as we see the transformed Mitchell involuntarily burn a fireman's hand off and then purposely (?) burn the entire firefighter to a pulp while still trying to figure out what's happened to him, two cops see him and panic, unloading their clips on him and trying to kill him, Batman hears the shooting and arrives, he automatically tries to take down Mitchell, we cut to a guy looking like a bum who reports to Mr. Kadavar, a flambouyent crime boss who is playing around in a coffin in a basement adorned with torture devices, he makes a lame attempt to scare his henchman and plays with make-up and props while telling the underling that he killed the wrong bum last issue (that's right -- it wasn't Mitchell) and must go out again, though the underling does not want to, we cut back to Batman who is unable to take down Mitchell, Mitchell tries to drive away but burns through the seat and steering wheel, the bums discuss the murder from last issue and the Batman's lack of interest in their plight, Kadaver's underling misdirects them and then kills his target, but Batman sees the commotion and attacks the underling. To be continued.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,811
|
Post by shaxper on May 26, 2014 7:20:26 GMT -5
Batman #422
"Just Deserts"
writer: Jim Starlin
pencils: Mark Bright
inks: Joe Rubenstein & Steve Mitchell
letters: John Costanza
colors: Anthony Tollin
editor: Denny O'Neil
Grade: B
Before we even start discussing the issue, I think it's important to note that this is the first issue of Batman or Detective I've reviewed to carry the "created by Bob Kane" credit. I wonder what prompted this. We'd already seen lots of subtle hints in the industry that many disagreed with this statement, believing that Bill Finger deserved (at least) equal credit. Maybe this was a response to that, or the reflection of a new agreement with Bob Kane?
Anyway, this is the final installment in the Dumpster Killer(s) storyline. In it, we're finally following Karl, the main dumpster killer, as he uses his cleverness to try to circumvent Batman. Karl is a surprising balance of sick delusion and brilliant pragmatism. He understands people remarkably well, yet he believes that abducting, raping, dismembering, and dumping women is a political statement designed to undo Women's Lib (it makes slightly more sense when Karl explains it). The fact is, he's an intriguing villain and very well written.
Batman, in contrast, is pretty boring in this issue. Gordon warns him about going over the line when taking in the dumpster killer and worries that he hasn't seen Batman get this personally involved in and worked up over a case in a long time, but we never actually see this in Batman beyond the moment where he justifiably takes out Karl with a punch while thinking "I'll tear this wimp apart with my bare hands," but he doesn't. He breaks his jaw and it mends quickly. No indication of a lack of self-control or a burning rage of any kind. Batman is passionless in an issue where Starlin clearly wanted to present the opposite, especially as both the narrative framing and the art keep trying to present Batman and Karl in parallel to one another, almost like arch enemies.
The entire story is supposed to be a discourse about vigilantism and whether or not it's ever okay to cross the line. Gordon worries Batman will, Batman punches Karl a little too hard, Robin nearly tears an abusive pimp apart and needs to be told to stop, the sister of one of Karl's victims is the one who ends up killing him as the result of weeks of planning, and Batman sermonizes about her actions at the end, explaining that they are wrong. The problem is that the story seems to disagree -- we cheer for Judy when she performs the act, and she seems darn cool in the end when she confidently explains that no jury will ever convict her. In fact, she seems much cooler than Batman, who utterly failed to do anything to stop Karl and ended up looking like a chump in contrast. Sure, it's easy for him to sermonize now that someone else killed Karl, but would it have been so easy for him to see it that way had there not been a Judy to take Karl down when the courts failed to?
And I thought we were finally getting a read on Robin, presumably frustrated with their inability to put Karl away and expressing it by tearing into that pimp, leaving a bewildered and somewhat shocked Batman to ask "What's going on in that head of yours, Jason?" without receiving a reply. One might expect this to be the issue that ideologically divides the two, leaving Jason frustrated by Batman's limitations within the law and impressed by Judy's results. However, in that rooftop sermon in the end, when Batman says, "Judy was wrong," a thoughtful looking Jason responds "I'll buy that," and the sermon quickly shifts back to Batman with no further attention given to Jason as Batman rambles on with four more paragraphs of bland musings. Jason is just a sounding board once again.
It's weird. Sometimes it seems like Starlin sees exactly where he wants to take Jason and does a beautiful job of getting him there, and sometimes Jason just becomes this waste of a supporting character. I want a better read on that character and fear I won't get one until he's dead.
Art-wise, Bright and Rubenstein do a great fill in job this issue. I was particularly impressed with the complexity of Batman's facial expression upon discovering Karl's body on page 19 - satisfied, perplexed, professional, all at once. My only regret is the artistic license they take with Batman's cape. When it dramatically blows in the breeze on pages 6, 10, 11, and 22, it grows much much longer than the length of Batman's body. In contrast, on page 20, you can clearly see that Batman's cape doesn't touch the ground when he walks. It's a minor detail, and I know that many many artists who come after will do the same thing, but it annoys me a bit.
An interesting side note is that Gordon refers to Batman's "status as Gotham's semi official vigilante" in this issue. This is the first we've heard, post-crisis, about Batman being officially sanctioned in any way. Is this the result of his working with the CIA and the President in Ten Nights of the Beast, is this something he had before that, or does "semi official" mean that it isn't really official at all -- it's just understood that Gordon asks him for help and trusts him?
The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: Karl and Vito, the Dumpster Killers, know that Batman is onto them, Vito is freaking out while Karl remains eerily calm and promises that he has a plan to commit one more killing in order to get the Batman off of their backs, Gordon warns Batman about going over the line, Batman and Robin attempt to tail Karl and Vito and fail, Karl kills Vito for fear that he'll talk, Batman confronts him at his apartment (having found his knife) and knocks him out/arrests him, Karl goes to trial, but the knife is thrown out as evidence since Batman procured it instead of the police (an interesting problem you'd expect Batman to run into more often), Karl is freed and makes plans to kill one last woman who's been following him before leaving town for good, Batman and Robin, helpless to stop him, take on other crimes, including a pimp that Robin nearly kills, Karl grabs the last woman, but she pulls out a razor and slits his throat, killing him, Batman and Gordon question the killer, who turns out to be Judy, the sister of Karl's second victim, who has been stalking him and planning to kill him all this time, she accepts the murder charge but coolely brags that no jury will convict her, and Batman muses on a rooftop about the importance of working within the limits of the law, even though he'd sometimes like not to.
Overall, I think the idea behind this final installment in Starlin's pet storyline was a darn powerful one, leaving both Batman and Robin to explore where they fall in relation to the strict limitations of the justice system (and potentially setting Robin up to be very different from Batman in that respect), but it just pulled all of its punches. Robin beating up the pimp and Judy killing Karl aside, this was a pretty emotionless issue.
|
|
