shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 22, 2015 16:18:30 GMT -5
Having grown up reading comics during the excesses of the early 1990s, there are very very few company-wide crossovers that I enjoy and respect in hindsight as an adult, but I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Armageddon 2001. Yes, the end of the story had to be completely rewritten at the zero hour thanks to a company that didn't yet understand how to respond to early internet fanboy spoilers, and yes the story ended on a totally unfair cliffhanger that took two follow up limited series that no one actually wanted to trudge through in order to arrive at a totally unsatisfactory ending, but the premise, the writing for that first issue, and the idea of having every DC annual tell a future story of the current hero--it was all such a winning combination. this was the only time in history that I went out and bought every annual released as part of a company-wide crossover, and I've never regretted that decision in hindsight. Batman Annual #15  "The Last Batman Story" writer: Alan Grant pencils: Jim Fern inks: Steve Leialoha colors: Adrienne Roy letters: John Costanza asst. editor: Kelley Puckett editor: Dennis O'Neil grade: C+ What had the potential to be an awesome future Batman story really doesn't end up going anywhere special. Beyond the early excitement of Tim Drake quitting out of frustration ten years in the future, the Joker being pronounced sane and becoming a talk show host, and most of Batman's rogues gallery being brutally murdered (presumably by Bruce or by Tim), the story spins its wheels for a long while before revealing the safest possible solution to all of this -- The Joker never really went sane, and he was killing everyone in an effort to frame Batman and put him on Death Row. Ho-hum. That being said, there's still a lot worth discussing about this issue. For starters, I believe it's the first time we've had Alan Grant working without Norm Breyfogle. He turns in some nice narration to make up for the loss of visual style  but Fern ultimately proves to be too much of a liability, turning in steroid induced Batman images that are unclear, often anatomically impossible, and desperately pleading for a comparison to the work of Rob Liefeld. I guess some fan boys wanted this approach back then. But, I mean, seriously, here's the final panel of the entire story, and I honestly don't know what's going on. Did Batman just die? The story's title would suggest as much, but the artwork just seems to suggest he's passing gas.  Beyond that, there are really three things worthy of note in this story: 1. Alan Grant's contribution to Post-Crisis ContinuityOne of the most interesting things this story does is present both Killer Moth (in his death) and Killer Croc as mainstay Batman villains who had been around for a long time ten years from now, suggesting that they're already established villains now. And yet this is both villains' first ever Post-Crisis appearance. 2. Alan Grant's perpetuation of his own continuityIn addition to the Ventriloquist's death being briefly depicted, we get no less than TWO references to Harold the Hunchback, showing brilliant inventions he's still producing for Batman ten years down the line  (I was really starting to think Grant had forgotten about him! He hasn't been mentioned in five months now) Additionally, Grant just refuses to give up on Anarky, his original bid for the next character to assume the Robin mantle prior to Tim Drake being chosen by O'Neil.  Not only does Anarky get ample time in this story; he ends up playing a more meaningful role than Tim Drake. Tim debates about breaking Batman out of prison but is indecisive and, utimately, unable. Anarky is the one who gets in to the prison where Batman is being held and, more impressively, convinces Batman to escape, having Anarky take his place. Grant never exactly portrays Tim as a chump, and he definitely depicts Anarky as being a bit unstable, but there's no doubt which of the two played a more critical role to the story. 3. Alan Grant's treatment of the JokerGrant has not been allowed to touch the Joker until now, as he was only brought out briefly in the wake of Death in the Family, handed to Wolfman, and then put back on the shelf, but in this technically non-continuity story, it would appear Grant was given more free reign. Considering the kind of stories he prefers to write -- grounded street-level stories about psychologically twisted villains, one would THINK Joker would be right up his alley, and it's not like he hasn't now had four years writing for the Bat Office to think about this, but the work he turns in is a disappointing and shameless rip-off of how Alan Moore depicted The Joker in The Killing Joke.  ...only less funny. It's all there -- the pandering to the reader as audience, the fake sympathy and modesty, even the style of humor employed. But if you don't believe me there, how about this fan service that comes a few pages later?  Note the intended irony here that, this time, Batman is the one who has been replaced with a stand-in. That is the full extent of what Grant has brought to the character of his own. In the end, I think it's safe to say that this story generally fails to achieve anything memorable beyond establishing the existence of Killer Moth and Killer Croc in the Post-Crisis Batman continuity. plot synopsis in one sentence:
Ten years in the future, Tim Drake has given up being Robin, hoping that becoming a senator will allow him to make a bigger difference, someone is killing off Batman's rogues' gallery, Batman gets framed for it and, upon believing he has accidentally killed The Penguin, he turns himself in and is put on Death Row, but he realizes the Joker has set him up and allows Anarky to take his place in prison so that he can prove it; in the final confrontation, the Joker manages to accidentally kill himself (it's truly implausible, not even worth explaining), and it looks like maybe Batman died too. Hard to tell. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 22, 2015 17:56:20 GMT -5
Having grown up reading comics during the excesses of the early 1990s, there are very very few company-wide crossovers that I enjoy and respect in hindsight as an adult, but I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Armageddon 2001. Yes, the end of the story had to be completely rewritten at the zero hour thanks to a company that didn't yet understand how to respond to early internet fanboy spoilers, and yes the story ended on a totally unfair cliffhanger that took two follow up limited series that no one actually wanted to trudge through in order to arrive at a totally unsatisfactory ending, but the premise, the writing for that first issue, and the idea of having every DC annual tell a future story of the current hero--it was all such a winning combination. this was the only time in history that I went out and bought every annual released as part of a company-wide crossover, and I've never regretted that decision in hindsight. Batman Annual #15 "The Last Batman Story" writer: Alan Grant pencils: Jim Fern inks: Steve Leialoha colors: Adrienne Roy letters: John Costanza asst. editor: Kelley Puckett editor: Dennis O'Neil grade: C+ Thinking that cover looks awfully familiar, I went over to my 1990s Batman box to see if I have it. (Do I actually have it? Or do I just remember it from a house ad or a promotional poster?) I have it! And I don't remember the first thing about it. Even after reading your summary and analysis, I am drawing a complete blank. And I'm pretty sure that I didn't read anything else under the "Armageddon 2001" banner. I pulled it out. I might read it. Or I might just put it back in the box unread two or three days from now. |
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Dec 22, 2015 19:32:30 GMT -5
I enjoyed Armageddon 2001 as well. I got most of the annuals, but skipped Hawk & Dove. That probably explains why I didn't hate the ending as much as some. Armageddon: Alien Agenda is one of the worst mini series I've ever read. Armageddon: Inferno brought back the JSA, so it's great by default.  Superman, Action and Flash were the three Annuals I liked the most. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 22, 2015 19:56:52 GMT -5
Superman, Action and Flash were the three Annuals I liked the most. As much as I remember loving the annuals, the only one I actually remember is the one where Superman went bad. Can't recall if that was Superman or Adventures of Superman. I'm pretty sure Action has him being sworn in as president on the cover. |
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Dec 22, 2015 20:11:38 GMT -5
Superman, Action and Flash were the three Annuals I liked the most. As much as I remember loving the annuals, the only one I actually remember is the one where Superman went bad. Can't recall if that was Superman or Adventures of Superman. I'm pretty sure Action has him being sworn in as president on the cover. It has to be Superman because that's the "rerun" of DKR. Adventures has him leave Earth after Lois' death and find love with Maxima. (to see what shaxper thought of her debut see today's post over in the Superman thread...synergy!) |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 22, 2015 20:14:24 GMT -5
As much as I remember loving the annuals, the only one I actually remember is the one where Superman went bad. Can't recall if that was Superman or Adventures of Superman. I'm pretty sure Action has him being sworn in as president on the cover. It has to be Superman because that's the "rerun" of DKR. Adventures has him leave Earth after Lois' death and find love with Maxima. (to see what shaxper thought of her debut see today's post over in the Superman thread...synergy!) I just got outdone plugging my own review threads! How much am I paying you by the hour? |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Dec 22, 2015 23:38:56 GMT -5
Having grown up reading comics during the excesses of the early 1990s, there are very very few company-wide crossovers that I enjoy and respect in hindsight as an adult, but I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Armageddon 2001. Yes, the end of the story had to be completely rewritten at the zero hour thanks to a company that didn't yet understand how to respond to early internet fanboy spoilers, and yes the story ended on a totally unfair cliffhanger that took two follow up limited series that no one actually wanted to trudge through in order to arrive at a totally unsatisfactory ending, but the premise, the writing for that first issue, and the idea of having every DC annual tell a future story of the current hero--it was all such a winning combination. this was the only time in history that I went out and bought every annual released as part of a company-wide crossover, and I've never regretted that decision in hindsight. Batman Annual #15 "The Last Batman Story" writer: Alan Grant pencils: Jim Fern inks: Steve Leialoha colors: Adrienne Roy letters: John Costanza asst. editor: Kelley Puckett editor: Dennis O'Neil grade: C+ What had the potential to be an awesome future Batman story really doesn't end up going anywhere special. Beyond the early excitement of Tim Drake quitting out of frustration ten years in the future, the Joker being pronounced sane and becoming a talk show host, and most of Batman's rogues gallery being brutally murdered (presumably by Bruce or by Tim), the story spins its wheels for a long while before revealing the safest possible solution to all of this -- The Joker never really went sane, and he was killing everyone in an effort to frame Batman and put him on Death Row. Ho-hum. That being said, there's still a lot worth discussing about this issue. For starters, I believe it's the first time we've had Alan Grant working without Norm Breyfogle. He turns in some nice narration to make up for the loss of visual style  but Fern ultimately proves to be too much of a liability, turning in steroid induced Batman images that are unclear, often anatomically impossible, and desperately pleading for a comparison to the work of Rob Liefeld. I guess some fan boys wanted this approach back then. But, I mean, seriously, here's the final panel of the entire story, and I honestly don't know what's going on. Did Batman just die? The story's title would suggest as much, but the artwork just seems to suggest he's passing gas.  Beyond that, there are really three things worthy of note in this story: 1. Alan Grant's contribution to Post-Crisis ContinuityOne of the most interesting things this story does is present both Ambush Bug (in his death) and Killer Croc as mainstay Batman villains who had been around for a long time ten years from now, suggesting that they're already established villains now. And yet this is both villains' first ever Post-Crisis appearance. 2. Alan Grant's perpetuation of his own continuityIn addition to the Ventriloquist's death being briefly depicted, we get no less than TWO references to Harold the Hunchback, showing brilliant inventions he's still producing for Batman ten years down the line  (I was really starting to think Grant had forgotten about him! He hasn't been mentioned in five months now) Additionally, Grant just refuses to give up on Anarky, his original bid for the next character to assume the Robin mantle prior to Tim Drake being chosen by O'Neil.  Not only does Anarky get ample time in this story; he ends up playing a more meaningful role than Tim Drake. Tim debates about breaking Batman out of prison but is indecisive and, utimately, unable. Anarky is the one who gets in to the prison where Batman is being held and, more impressively, convinces Batman to escape, having Anarky take his place. Grant never exactly portrays Tim as a chump, and he definitely depicts Anarky as being a bit unstable, but there's no doubt which of the two played a more critical role to the story. 3. Alan Grant's treatment of the JokerGrant has not been allowed to touch the Joker until now, as he was only brought out briefly in the wake of Death in the Family, handed to Wolfman, and then put back on the shelf, but in this technically non-continuity story, it would appear Grant was given more free reign. Considering the kind of stories he prefers to write -- grounded street-level stories about psychologically twisted villains, one would THINK Joker would be right up his alley, and it's not like he hasn't now had four years writing for the Bat Office to think about this, but the work he turns in is a disappointing and shameless rip-off of how Alan Moore depicted The Joker in The Killing Joke.  ...only less funny. It's all there -- the pandering to the reader as audience, the fake sympathy and modesty, even the style of humor employed. But if you don't believe me there, how about this fan service that comes a few pages later?  Note the intended irony here that, this time, Batman is the one who has been replaced with a stand-in. That is the full extent of what Grant has brought to the character of his own. In the end, I think it's safe to say that this story generally fails to achieve anything memorable beyond establishing the existence of Ambush Bug and Killer Croc in the Post-Crisis Batman continuity. plot synopsis in one sentence:
Ten years in the future, Tim Drake has given up being Robin, hoping that becoming a senator will allow him to make a bigger difference, someone is killing off Batman's rogues' gallery, Batman gets framed for it and, upon believing he has accidentally killed The Penguin, he turns himself in and is put on Death Row, but he realizes the Joker has set him up and allows Anarky to take his place in prison so that he can prove it; in the final confrontation, the Joker manages to accidentally kill himself (it's truly implausible, not even worth explaining), and it looks like maybe Batman died too. Hard to tell.
Interesting that you used Batman laughing to illustrate your point about this issue's art and the bottom two panels in Arkham to comment on the writing. I would have done the reverse since the latter moment between the Joker and Batman looked odd to me when I bought this new. In the second panel of two, it looked to me as if Batman were slumped lazily in his seat and what's supposed to be his bicep and part of his forearm looked to me like a saggy chest and beer-gut.
The Batman laughing scene was also weird to me when I read it because it took me a moment to realize what was going on. The Joker had just died and Batman laughs - oh, I get it, 'Batman's having the last laugh' - I thought that was just an expression. But yeah, mirth one moment; grim determination the next - really an odd sequence of events given that they should be happening within a split-second of one another.
You mentioned Ambush Bug twice - did you mean Killer Moth?
Joker being released from Arkham is just stupid though it might have worked in another era. I remember Jerry Robinson commenting on Jack Nicholson's portrayal as the Joker in the '89 film. He described it as a "tour-de force" but worried about presenting the Joker as a psychotic terrorist since Robinson felt there was really nowhere else you could take the character after that. Sadly, a prescient observation seeing as how the character really hasn't become anything more since Killing Joke/Death in the Family except perhaps extreme. A Joker who decides to redefine himself (even if just as part of some ploy) could be interesting, but yeah, who would want to be a guest on this show, who would want to sit in the audience, who would want to take responsibility for what he's certain to do?
I think Fern would return for at least two issues of Detective Comics down the road. I wasn't entirely put off by the art, but when you're alternating between Jim Aparo and Norm Breyfogle every month, it comes as a shock to see any cracks developing in the armour.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 22, 2015 23:53:04 GMT -5
You mentioned Ambush Bug twice - did you mean Killer Moth? ...twice  And yet I swear this plot feels recycled from something done in the Silver Age somewhere. I can't exactly place it. Maybe it was when Joker was running his own TV network back in Detective #365? Been a long time since I read that one, so I may not be remembering it right.  There were far worse panels than the ones I included in the review, but they weren't as confusing as that final panel. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 24, 2015 10:09:05 GMT -5
I remember Jerry Robinson commenting on Jack Nicholson's portrayal as the Joker in the '89 film. He described it as a "tour-de force" but worried about presenting the Joker as a psychotic terrorist since Robinson felt there was really nowhere else you could take the character after that. I am a fervent opponent of the death penalty. I think it is a useless and inhuman punishment, which lowers us to the level of the punished criminals. But if lived in the DC Universe, I would have a hard time defending my beliefs. Not because The Joker or Zsasz deserve to be killed (none deserve it) but because the authorities can't keep them behind bars. Every second which those people are alive some innocent is risking his/her life. The writers created such an unstoppable monster that Gandhi or Mother Teresa would have difficulty defending his right to live. Killing him would be like stopping a natural disaster. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Dec 24, 2015 11:51:40 GMT -5
I wonder what Jerry Robinson would think of the Joker cutting his face off?
I bought a few recent issues of Detective Comics lately (starring Bunny-Ears "Jim Gordon" Batman) and it looked like a young woman calling herself the Joker's Daughter was wearing the Joker's face. I thought the Joker had got his face back and stapled it to his head? Did he lose it again? Look, if the Joker can't keep track of his face, he shouldn't be allowed to have one.
|
|
|
|
Post by sabongero on Mar 2, 2016 18:32:01 GMT -5
May 3, 2014 23:07:31 GMT -5 shaxper said: _________________________________________________ The highlights of the run, thus far: Batman Annual #11 -- "Mortal Clay," by Alan Moore, is absolutely one of the greatest rogues gallery stories ever written, in this case starring Clay Face III. I am really interested in reading this one. Even though this is one of Alan Moore's earlier superhero works, I hope that this one contained a lot of psychological depth as his later mid to late 80's superhero works had. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Mar 2, 2016 21:03:47 GMT -5
May 3, 2014 23:07:31 GMT -5 shaxper said: _________________________________________________ The highlights of the run, thus far: Batman Annual #11 -- "Mortal Clay," by Alan Moore, is absolutely one of the greatest rogues gallery stories ever written, in this case starring Clay Face III. I am really interested in reading this one. Even though this is one of Alan Moore's earlier superhero works, I hope that this one contained a lot of psychological depth as his later mid to late 80's superhero works had. Oh, absolutely it did. Some might even argue he did it best here. |
|
|
|
Post by foxley on Mar 3, 2016 1:40:30 GMT -5
I am really interested in reading this one. Even though this is one of Alan Moore's earlier superhero works, I hope that this one contained a lot of psychological depth as his later mid to late 80's superhero works had. Oh, absolutely it did. Some might even argue he did it best here. I, for one, would. This still feels like a Batman story, rather than an Alan Moore story that happens to have Batman in it. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,821
|
Post by shaxper on Mar 31, 2016 10:42:27 GMT -5
OMG! Detective Comics #630 is coming soon! I can hardly wait! Only took four months. Sorry about that! Between starting the Justice League In the Post-Crisis Era reviews, launching The Usagi Yojimbo Dojo Annex, doing a review thread for Read A Graphic Novel Week and trying to balance being a full-time teacher and father, I haven't been getting to my reviews as much as I would have liked to in the past few months. Well I have the day to myself for once and am trying to get back into the saddle with my review threads today  Detective Comics #630  "And the Executioner Wore Stiletto Heels" writer: Peter Milligan pencils: Jim Aparo inks: Mike DeCarlo letters: John Costanza colors: Adrienne Roy asst. editor: Kelley Puckett editor: Dennis O'Neil Batman created by: Bob Kane grade: A- Milligan really nails it this time. Let's see, we've got Alan Grant-style shock and gore:  excellent usage of the (up until now) completely under-used abilities Batman trained to master in the Post-Crisis that O'Neil so diligently forced down his writers' throats:  mystery elements that take real work to unfold and generally lack holes and wild leaps on the part of Batman, a brilliant new antagonist (Stiletto) whose ability is to supernaturally persuade people with his words:  And a truly fascinating moral dilemma for Batman in which, on one hand, it's his duty to bring in a killer. On the other, the FBI agent to which Stiletto would be handed over is crooked and in league with the mobs that want Stiletto dead:   So Batman ends up risking his life to save the life of a man who he is going to turn over for execution. It's a powerful quandry and yet ultimately a wasted one, as Bruce arrives at no new understanding of himself nor his code. In fact, I'm a bit lost as to why he's just looking at the clock at the end, counting down the moment to Stiletto's scheduled execution, even though it's revealed that Stiletto escaped and will not be killed.  There's perhaps, a suggestion that Stiletto caused Bruce to forget all about him, so maybe Bruce is just reabsorbing old info? There's no suggestion that he is second-guessing himself or extracting some deeper meaning from the experience, so it's just a very odd lull at the end, disrupting the flow of an otherwise flawless story. Important Details:1st appearance of Stiletto (Saul Calvino). I really hope some writer brings him back later on. GREAT villain. Minor Details:- I like the way in which Milligan references his previous Dark Knight, Dark City storyline here:  Instead of remembering the event with tremendous clarity and a sense of high importance, Milligan shrugs it off, acknowledging that Batman has so many adventures and is unlikely to care about the specifics of a past one that has since been resolved. Of course, considering the emphasis he placed on Bruce's photographic memory earlier in the story (again, this series of panels) this just might be further proof that Stiletto persuaded Batman to forget all about that stretch of time, Batman only having been reminded by the murder of Two-Tone. - And, speaking of Two-Tone, can conjoined twins really be bi-racial?  I suppose they are usually fraternal and not identical, and that fraternal twins born of a multi-racial couple can have drastically different skin tones. It just never occurred to me that this was genetically possible. - Finally, I love the idea of a villain whose code-name is The Seventh Seal. Not sure how he earned it, but it makes sense since he's turned state-informant and could easily blow the lid on all organized crime in Gotham. More importantly, it's the title of one of my absolute favorite films of all time. Plot synopsis:
The death of a villain called Two-Tone reminds Batman about a semi-recent case involving a villain known as Stiletto, who had escaped from prison, was wanted by the mob and their assassin (Two-Tone), was also wanted by a corrupt FBI agent working with the mob, and all Batman went through to safely deliver him to the authorities in time for his execution, even though he ultimately escaped. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Mar 31, 2016 12:00:12 GMT -5
Two-Tone is hilarious! They should bring him back and team him up with the Polka-Dot Man or the Zodiac Master.
|
|
