|
|
Post by truertothecore on Nov 19, 2014 8:47:59 GMT -5
For sure they were! They were also better than the show itself. --- I couldn't get over those ugly covers (the Ostrander story) so I have only glanced through these comics IIRC. Prey is great, but the sequel "Terror" is terrible ( And to close the cycle, it features the Scarecrow. Grant and Breyfogle apparently decided to give him this odd "HAROO HRAAA" sound which will also show up in their further stories... I guess it is supposed to be some sort of terrifying laugh... but I don't know. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Nov 19, 2014 18:55:30 GMT -5
Do you plan on reviewing Ostrander's Gotham Nights miniseries? The first one, at least, is well worth the read. Still a year away, but yes, we'll be going there  |
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Nov 19, 2014 19:21:05 GMT -5
Despite coming out when I returned to comics in 1990, that arc of Detective was the last Post-Crisis issues I bought to "catch up." I read it once, didn't like it and haven't read it since.
|
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Nov 19, 2014 23:34:10 GMT -5
I think Ostrander really captures Batman's stoic nature nicely in this three parter. Batman is the one person whose thoughts we aren't privy to though I wonder if this was Ostrander's intention all along. In part one, he's clearly irritated by the existence of this comic and begins to grit his teeth when surrounded by the press after the first killing. After deciding that he needs to "have a word with this Fred Lasker", no meeting ever takes place. The abandoning of that thread coupled with the way Batman doesn't raise an eyebrow or say a word to or about the angry mob surrounding him (in broad daylight no less) at the start of part two makes me wonder if Ostrander decided that it would be best to not have Batman react at all.
It's interesting that in your continuing reviews Shaxper (and thank you for that) you're also looking at Doug Moench's Prey. I recall Batman's state of mind becoming a matter for public discussion here as well and while Moench refrains from having Batman question his sanity/his culpability for what others do in his city he does have him silently crush a glass in his hand when listening to Hugo Strange's televised opinion on the matter and leaving the broken pieces rest where they've been imbedded. The moment was clearly designed to suggest that there might be some kernel of truth to what he says. (Come to think of it, Grant Morrison went further than that with Arkham Asylum when he has Batman cut himself with a broken piece of glass intentionally) I think Prey is a great story (actually I regard it as LOTDK's best) but I'm grateful that the Tec arc didn't go down the same road.
"If I never existed men like him would find another reason to do what they do", is about all we get from Batman himself on the matter and that's all I think needed to be said. I mentioned recently in the excellent "Batman X Years Ago this Month" thread that there are certain tales that can only be told during a brief window of time and I think stories questioning whether or not Batman does more harm than good are one of those. It can be an intriguing question but only if it doesn't result in us wondering if the answer might be yes by story's end. If our confidence in the Caped Crusader isn't reaffirmed upon the resolution of the idea, or simply gets asked once too often, we have to start asking ourselves why which I think damages the guy in the long run.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Nov 20, 2014 10:25:43 GMT -5
It's interesting that in your continuing reviews Shaxper (and thank you for that) you're also looking at Doug Moench's Prey. I recall Batman's state of mind becoming a matter for public discussion here as well and while Moench refrains from having Batman question his sanity/his culpability for what others do in his city he does have him silently crush a glass in his hand when listening to Hugo Strange's televised opinion on the matter and leaving the broken pieces rest where they've been imbedded. The moment was clearly designed to suggest that there might be some kernel of truth to what he says. (Come to think of it, Grant Morrison went further than that with Arkham Asylum when he has Batman cut himself with a broken piece of glass intentionally) I think Prey is a great story (actually I regard it as LOTDK's best) but I'm grateful that the Tec arc didn't go down the same road. Without going back to look, I feel like Bruce taking Strange's critiques to heart was actually pretty overt. It is interesting that all three Bat titles on sale for this month share the theme of questioning Batman's psychology. Might have come from O'Neil himself. I remember when he pushed to have all Batman authors address Bruce's training over the course of several months. and we've seen times when all three titles appear to focus on Batman's post Year One early history. It's a great line. [/p][/quote] Good point. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 2, 2015 12:50:02 GMT -5
Legends of the Dark Knight #13  My reviews for the first two parts of this story can be found here and here"Prey, Part Three: Night Scourge!" writer: Doug Moench pencils: Paul Gulacy inks: Terry Austin letters: John Costanza colors: Steve Oliff assistant editor: Kevin Dooley editor: Andrew Helfer Batman created by Bob Kane grade: B+ It's becoming more and more clear the extent to which Moench his merging his own Pre-Crisis version of The Batman with the Year One reboot established by Frank Miller. On the one hand, this continues to feel like a smooth continuation of that story, with more meaningful relationship building between Batman and Gordon (I love their conversation out on the fire escapes in this installment), more Catwoman, more of Batman struggling to establish his relationship with the public and the police department, and more of Batman stumbling through missteps towards becoming the master crime fighter we know him as today. On the other, Moench continues to infuse Miller's emotionless borderline sociopath with inner reflections and doubts that feel far more similar to the brooding and introspective character Moench was writing half a decade earlier. In addition, though, the Night Scourge, a Batman imposter who gives Batman a bad reputation, feels like a blatant updating of Moench's Night Slayer / Thief of Night character, and Catwoman enticing Batman by reminding him that he's attracted to her because "you know you love the dark side" is straight out of a central conflict in Moench's run just before the Crisis screwed everything up. Were Moench to continue beyond these five issues, all that would be missing would be a Jason Todd Robin and a Harvey Bullock to take us fully back to all that Moench had been developing before his run got cut short. And blending that world with the darkness of Miller's Year One and Paul Gulacy's artwork would have made for the best Batman run ever, especially with Moench's less endearing characters now absent (Vicki Vale, Julia Pennyworth, and Nocturna -- though I loved Nocturna, even if Moench was clearly sick of her by the end). But I digress. Regarding the story, itself, I love how Moench is characterizing Hugo Strange. His arrival at, and stubborn adherence to, a logical but incorrect theory as to who Batman must be is totally believable and also fits Strange's overconfidence in himself, all while further signaling that his estimation of himself, his abilities, and his motives, is not to be fully trusted. The sheer amount of projecting he's doing by the close, publicly condemning those weak-minded individuals enticed by The Batman's example when he's secretly addressing only himself, is positively enthralling. My one major problem with this story, though: taking a well-trained cop and hypnotizing him for an hour or so is enough to create a vigilante who can walk into a well-defended smuggling ring and take everyone out without even a fire arm to aid him? Artwise, Gulacy just keeps getting better and better. While Catwoman's chest is improbably large and hanging far too loose in a skin-tight costume in which she's supposed to be able to do all sorts of acrobatics, everything else looks so thoroughly real and so richly expressive, all at the same time. Just check out this sample panel below. Did Batman ever look this amazing?  One thing I'm curious about, though: It's been a standard convention since LOTDK #1 to ink the pages in black, but this cuts out partway through this issue, just as Strange is hypnotizing Cord. Is Gulacy trying to tell us something, or was this just a "wouldn't it look cool...?" moment? Overall, now that the plot is beginning to take shape, I'm not in love with it yet; Batman fighting for the public's approval feels tired at this point, even if it's being done well, and Batman's presence and internal journey is sorely missing this time around, but I generally love what Moench is doing with this world and its inhabitants, and I have high hopes that the next two issues will be much better. Clearly, something was off with the pacing in this issue: it takes nine pages to get to the title page, and even the cover depicts events that first transpire towards the very end of the book. I think, once Hugo Strange and Batman's internal journeys come to a head, this will have just been the awkward middle section of what will shape up to be a great story arc. plot synopsis in one sentence: Hugo Strange is on a date with the mayor's daughter and gets told off by her, he then brainwashes Detective Cord to become the Night Scourge, a Batman imposter, in order, presumably, to fulfill his own inner desires and publicly discredit Batman as inspiring other dangerous vigilantes at the same time, Gordon is unable to aid Batman while the public is against him, leaving Bruce unsure what to do, Catwoman gets attacked by Night Scourge, Batman comes to the rescue, and Catwoman ends up taking Batman out, leaving him dazed on a rooftop while Strange sends Cord out, this time dressed like Batman, to kidnap the Mayor's daughter right in front of him. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jan 2, 2015 13:46:47 GMT -5
I do love Gulacy's art here, and this is by far my favorite Hugo Strange story.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 2, 2015 14:51:39 GMT -5
I do love Gulacy's art here, and this is by far my favorite Hugo Strange story. I'm always surprised by how the character has been so under-utilized over the years. I think I've only read three stories with him in it: Batman #1, the Bronze Age Gerry Conway story arc, and this. I definitely feel he's portrayed best here. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 2, 2015 15:13:02 GMT -5
Suicide Squad #48  "In Control" writer: John Ostrander and Kim Yale art: Geof Isherwood letters: Todd Klein (seriously, how many books was Klein lettering each month??) colors: Tom McGraw editor: Dan Raspler grade: n/a As this thread progresses, the most difficult question I continue to ask myself is what is worthy of inclusion in these reviews and what is not? With a Nightwing, Robin, and Catwoman ongoing series all on the way, as well as Batman allies and villains popping up regularly in other titles, it seems clear that I can't review EVERYTHING. Still, I figured this issue, revealing how Barbara Gordon became Oracle after the events of The Killing Joke, was important enough to include; in fact, I've been looking forward to reading it for a long time. Unfortunately, absolutely no new information ends up getting revealed. We flashback to the her paralysis in The Killing Joke again, and we learn that the event still understandably haunts her to this day (I really respect her blaming herself for being foolish enough to not be on her guard when opening the door; a criticism that's really lodged at Alan Moore, I think, for making a formerly accomplished solo hero so helpless in that story), but nothing new is added. We've known Barbara Gordon was Oracle since Suicide Squad #38, or, really, as far back as Batman Annual #13 if you bothered to read the Who's Who entries at the back. And, while there was some debate as to whether The Killing Joke was meant to count in continuity when it was first published, Barbara's paralysis has since been mentioned in the pages of Batman, so this issue isn't even the first to count those events in official continuity. So, really, nothing special about this issue unless you're looking to see Barbara Gordon in a moment of understandable self-loathing and helplessness. I prefer her as a cool and confident bad-ass, personally. plot synopsis: In addition to various events occurring that concern the Suicide Squad and are beyond the scope of this thread, Barbara Gordon has a session with her therapist where she relives the events of The Killing Joke, reflecting after about how helpless she feels now that a new villain is coming after her. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jan 2, 2015 15:33:49 GMT -5
I do love Gulacy's art here, and this is by far my favorite Hugo Strange story. I'm always surprised by how the character has been so under-utilized over the years. I think I've only read three stories with him in it: Batman #1, the Bronze Age Gerry Conway story arc, and this. I definitely feel he's portrayed best here. The retelling of Batman #1, Batman and The Monster Men is pretty good too. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 2, 2015 16:01:31 GMT -5
Batman 3D  writer: John Byrne art: John Byrne 3D effects: Ray Zone editor: Archie Goodwin grade: D (for the lead story), B- (for the work as a whole) Was there ever a character to appear in print more frequently than Batman in the early 1990s? In addition to three monthly titles, there's a new graphic novel practically every month (next month, it's Bride of the Demon). The cashing in is so plentiful that so many of these stories are farmed out beyond Denny O'Neil's Batman office and, thus, are not intended to count in continuity, so why do I keep reviewing them? Well, I suppose one of these non-continuity works could prove influential to a later Batman story. But that certainly isn't the case with Batman 3D. I'm still confused as to how this project happened. Byrne left the Superman titles on very very bad terms with folks at DC (including creators who didn't even work in that office) so how he ended up doing this story for DC less than three years later is beyond me. Perhaps someone at DC felt they owed him, or they were just that hungry to pump out another Batman graphic novel with a familiar name on the cover. Certainly, Byrne wasn't as hot a name to sign in 1990 as he had been in 1986. But, from Byrne's perspective, this must have been a dream come true. We know that he always wanted to write Batman, taking umbrage at having been dropped from the Untold Legend of Batman limited series a decade earlier and having worked so hard to incorporate Batman into his Superman stories repeatedly, and often making them more into Batman stories than Superman stories in the process. We also know from his work on Superman that he had a fondness for bringing Atom Age corniness back into superhero comics with updated writing and artwork. Thus, doing a Batman one-shot where Batman faces every possible Atom Age Bat-contrivance (a team-up of some of his top Atom-Age rogues, depicted at their Atom-Age best, and providing the classic death traps and riddles) in a 3D format that was, in itself, a throwback to the 1950s (and especially the original 1953 Batman 3D one-shot), was totally up Byrne's alley, though it certainly didn't make for great reading. For one thing, I REALLY don't like traditional 3D. I always find the format cumbersome and requiring of too much effort on the part of my eyes. Plus, while 3D worked really well with the simplistic images of 1950s comics (the reprint of the 3D story from Batman #42 looks really good here!), the busier artwork of the modern age lends itself less well to the format. The only time the 3D really worked and felt earned in Byrne's story is on the third to last page, where Byrne provides a nice view of the Batcave with Bruce at the center of it. For another, this story is simplistic, derivative, and not all that original. I honestly stopped reading halfway through. It had nowhere good to go. Byrne's artwork is decent in attempting to balance the simplicity of a throwback Atom-Age story with a modern depiction of The Dark Knight, but those visuals really don't fit the excitement and drama of the cover, and I have to say that many of the pinups included later in the volume do far more to catch my attention and do justice to the 3D format. Alex Toth, Bret Blevins/Al Williamson, Barry Windsor Smith, George Perez, Mike Mignola, and Klaus Janson all turn in artwork that truly looks even more impressive with 3D applied to it. So I enjoyed the pin-up section and the reprint from Batman #42, but the Byrne story, itself, proved entirely unremarkable and unnecessary. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jan 2, 2015 16:42:44 GMT -5
I never knew this even existed...and it sounds as if that's a good thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Jan 2, 2015 21:55:06 GMT -5
I do love Gulacy's art here, and this is by far my favorite Hugo Strange story. mine is Englehart/ Rogers from (mainly) Detective #471 & 472  |
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Jan 2, 2015 21:58:29 GMT -5
I never knew this even existed...and it sounds as if that's a good thing. Unless you're desperate for a Batman #42 reprint... avoid |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jan 2, 2015 23:53:22 GMT -5
I do love Gulacy's art here, and this is by far my favorite Hugo Strange story. I'm always surprised by how the character has been so under-utilized over the years. I think I've only read three stories with him in it: Batman #1, the Bronze Age Gerry Conway story arc, and this. I definitely feel he's portrayed best here Isn't it Hugo Strange that's the doctor in the Arham Asylum OGN? I'm assuming I must be mistaken, since surely you guys have read that... |
|
