Batman R.I.P.

[Saint]

I can say that in my experience, whenever this comes up, someone inevitably asks me what happens, and all I can say is, "well...so far Bruce Wayne has been dosed with weaponized meth and heroin, and then he was dumped on the streets, where he talks to a Bat-Mite that probably isn't there, and beats the holy hell out of people in a multi-colored, pieced together Batsuit. The guy out to get him may or may not be Thomas Wayne, and Alfred may or may not be Bruce's real father." Needless to say, once all of that is out in the open, most people just say, "Eh..I sure did like The Dark Knight," and the discussion moves on.

I find the stunt to be a bit ridiculous, and terribly confusing.

As I said earlier, I'm not sure what's confusing after the last issue. That made everything clear enough.

I thought that the point of all of this Crisis stuff, as far as Batman is concerned, was to move alot of the silly Silver Age stuff out of continuity...

That "Crisis stuff" was twenty-two years ago. The more recent Crisis seemed mostly to be about reintroducing select silver age elements.

and it gets awfully confusing when Grant Morrison keeps on bringing it back into continuity, and then you've got to go on the damn internet and track down all of the obscure Batman titles. (I'm sure that someone else has already lamented that fact in this thread, but that doesn't make it any less of an issue.)

For the record, you can find both of the stories Morrison has referenced in his run (Zurr-En-Arrh and the isolation chamber story) in The Greatest Batman Stories Ever Told.

I felt that the Joker Prose story was garbage

I loved that issue to death. Great stuff.

and I find it terribly confusing when The Joker only shows up in that form when Grant Morrison is writing him, but then when Dini writes him, all of this super psycho garbage is nowhere to be found, and he's not dressed like Marilyn Manson.[/quote]
Again, what's terribly confusing? The other writers just haven't reflected (yet) what Morrison has done. He can hardly be blamed for that.

I can appreciate the fact that Morrison has got this all planned out, and I bet that it will work wonderfully as a Batman story when it's all said and done, but it is just crazy to present it to audiences as a monthly title. Especially when Batman is back in the public light again...but hey...who cares about new readers anyway?

Generally speaking, the number of people who go into comic book stores after seeing movies like Iron Man or The Dark Knight is negligible. More importantly, they will always be confused by the differences between the film and the comic.

that's pretty cool, I must admit.

Knowing Morrison's take on Batman, I've been waiting the entire run for something like that to happen, haha.

because a Batman without Bruce Wayne is not going to sell...even if you put Dick Grayson under the cowl, it's still going to be Nightwing dressed up as Batman.

I don't believe that for a second.

 

[MasterOgami]

"Surprising" and "shakeup" are not the same. The status quo was not changed. All that happened was new element was introduced and then whisked away, to be used later.

Which, to me, changed things up a bit as it was altering Bruce, to a degree anyway, and his world. It wasn't earth-shattering or presented that way, but IMO it still seemed pretty major.

What was confusing?

As I recall there was a little bit of hubbub across a few different boards in regards to what was flashback and what was hallucination in that issue. Lots of "This is obviously real, fools!" and back and forth. The reason I cite Daniels is because of the dreadlocked henchman on the bottom of page 10. What the heck am I looking at?!? In this case Daniels' art had me wondering what was true and what was illusion.

And this has not been happening in Morrison's run, in your opinion? I am inclined to disagree.

Overall, no, not really. BUT I easily admit that it all requires a reevaluation; another read through might reveal certain aspects of it to be a bit more than I initially gave them credit for. There will still be things I consider goofy or a little off the mark, but it might seem to work better for me with more of it actually in the can, so to speak.

As I've said in the past, if no one else was going to be Batman, I believe Dick would do it in a heartbeat--no mater how much he hates it. Moreover, if the person another person put on the costume and did not meet Dick's standards, he'd take it from him. The only thing Dick would hate worse than being Batman is watching the mantle die or be perverted.

I think this needs to be for keeps. This has been billed as the final Batman story, and it needs to be for real if that's the goal. It may be that the story isn't really about replacing Batman--that the replacement is only to serve a larger goal when he returns. That would be fine, but that's not the impression I'm getting. If you say you're ending the Bruce Wayne story, do it--and don't do it with a plan to undo it in two years.

This is the sort of story that can make or break the potential the future of the book. If Dick's time as Batman (or whoever puts on the cowl) is just a stunt, then it will forever sour the chances of anyone ever succeeding Bruce Wayne. I want to see Bruce Wayne succeeded one day, regardless of the fact that he's my favourite character and could never be surpassed. That is simply where the story should go, and I want stories to move. I want them to end, too. Bruce deserves and ending someday--not an endless repetitive cycle battling the Joker, Penguin, and Two-Face.

They've painted themselves into a corner by saying (repeatedly) that this is the real deal; the end of Bruce's story. Now they have to deliver. If it turns out to be temporary, people will feel cheated. I will feel cheated, even though the idea of Bruce Wayne never being Batman again is scary. If it is temporary, they had better make it mean something, make it important somehow, lest it become the Clone Saga.

I think that something so traumatizing happens that Bruce can't bear to be Batman any longer. Maybe he kills someone. In any case, I think he's retired and left Gotham to try and put himself back together as human being, not as Batman. He's gone to live as a hermit, or perhaps at Nanda Parbat. I think an interesting situation would be for Dick to be Batman for a couple of years (comic time) before Bruce returns to Gotham. Use the time to age him, grey his hair a little, to hammer home the point that he's not going to be--and not interested in being--Batman any longer. Make him a supporting player, as in Batman Beyond.

I think the reason he's "gone" in the RIP tie ins is that DC knows they could never establish a new Batman so long as Bruce is still in the book--the stories would always gravitate towards him, Batman or not. If they keep him out for a couple of years, they can take that time to establish Grayson without having the kill Bruce and his future potential. They bring him back as a supporting player, and by this time all but the most stubborn fans have accepted Dick.

Another interesting question: could their be two Batmen? We've got plenty of Green Lanterns, two Wildcats, and if Geoff Johns' comments are any indication, he intends to have three co-existing Flashes when Flash: Rebirth is done. I'm inclined to think there can only be one Batman, but I will admit the idea of Bruce returning in the future and having both Dick and Bruce as Batman is intriguing.

Stories need to -end-, heck yes that's so true! That endless cycle you speak of is my biggest problem with comics. That said, I just can't see DC actually ending Bruce's career as Batman, even though at some point it does -need- to happen in order for this to be a -story-. That's one of the reasons I like Miller's DK version, as crazy and over the top as some (okay, much) of it is, its got a beginning, middle, and end. But, does DC see this as a story or do they see it as product? Are they okay with someone like Dick or Tim taking over for the long term, as long as the titles stay on shelves and continue to sell?

If it were to actually happen, I'd (sooner or later) be fine with Dick taking over. I'd prefer Tim since I personally think it'd be more interesting, but really I do just want to see the story progress in a way that feels honest: The Robins weren't just sidekicks, they were being groomed as possible successors, and maybe it is time for that to happen*. I don't know about two Batmen. Certain characters seem to lend themselves better to the idea of having multiple versions, but I agree that it might be intriguing. However, it could end up with Bruce coming back, in costume, alongside his successor only to realize that he can't cut it anymore, which I think would only make Bruce look foolish.

*I'd also be okay with Bruce eventually bad@$$ing his way through this, despite the indications that this really is supposed to be "it" for him. Something like that could obviously be chalked up to the comic being endless corporate product and not a real -story-, but, geesh, there's just a large part of me that wants to see Bruce -win-. Then again, if "The Batman" continues without Bruce, he -has- won.

 

[Evil_Meanie]

As I said earlier, I'm not sure what's confusing after the last issue. That made everything clear enough.

It just seems like a rather ridiculous plot, when you get down to it. At its core, this book is about a group of villains who drug Bruce Wayne and leave him on the streets....however, it's been presented (thus far) in a very pretentious, and confusing manner.

That "Crisis stuff" was twenty-two years ago. The more recent Crisis seemed mostly to be about reintroducing select silver age elements.

I know what Crisis on Infinite Earths is, and I really don't see the point of undoing it, like DC seems to have, especially when it comes to Batman. The Silver-Age Batman belongs in collected editions that people can read for amusement, not in current continuity..and especially not when it is presented to an audience that is not entirely familiar with the Silver Age stories to begin with.

For the record, you can find both of the stories Morrison has referenced in his run (Zurr-En-Arrh and the isolation chamber story) in The Greatest Batman Stories Ever Told.

Fair enough. But again, my main point is that I don't see why he feels the urge to drag up stories that are literally decades old, and mostly forgotten about, and then make them all some type of weird hallucination or whatever his explanation for all of that business is.

I loved that issue to death. Great stuff.

I can see its merits, but Morrison's Joker has NEVER been acceptable to me, so I wasn't likely to enjoy the issue from the get go...different strokes, I suppose.

Again, what's terribly confusing? The other writers just haven't reflected (yet) what Morrison has done. He can hardly be blamed for that.

Sure you can blame him for that. He chose to make extreme modifications to a classic character in the main title of the series. He could have easily just made his Joker story a one shot that didn't fit into continuity, and it would have had the exact same effect. How can you say that it's NOT distracting when the character is written one way by everyone else, and then given this extreme makeover whenever he pops up in the main title? It would be like Frank Miller's Goddamned Batman showing up once a week in the Adam West series, with none of the characters seeming to notice.

Generally speaking, the number of people who go into comic book stores after seeing movies like Iron Man or The Dark Knight is negligible. More importantly, they will always be confused by the differences between the film and the comic.

I don't feel that the will always be confused by the differences between the film and the comic. But how can you deny that the timing of this story is absolutely atrocious? The Dark Knight just made big money, and Batman is back in the eyes of mainstream America....and yet, he's running around in his book (which is the SOURCE of all things Batman) dressed in a ridiculous get-up and talking to Bat-Mite.

I don't believe that for a second.

Well that's you, but I'm telling you...Bruce Wayne IS Batman, and it's not appealing to me, and to a great many others, any other way. When I first heard of Batman Beyond, I thought it was a terrible idea, and even after the series has concluded, I still think that it's a terrible idea, even if it did produce some good episodes. I know that it's a one dimensional mindset, but I honestly don't care. Anyone else under the cowl is just going to feel wrong to me. Think about it like this...at Bruce's core, he IS Batman. Bruce Wayne is the act, Batman is the true identity. So when you take him out of the picture, then whoever you put in his place simple is not going to measure up.

I'm all for shaking up the status quo..to a certain extent. I feel that there are certain things that should not be touched....and Bruce Wayne as Batman is one of them. I guess that's why I enjoyed The Dark Knight Returns so much...I loved the idea of an aged Bruce Wayne refusing to give up the cowl, and instead kicking the hell out of anyone that got in his way.

I'm happy that there are people out there who enjoy this type of thing....you are certainly way more open minded than myself....but what can I say? It's not my thing, and I'm really just ready for it to be over.

 

[Saint]

It just seems like a rather ridiculous plot, when you get down to it. At its core, this book is about a group of villains who drug Bruce Wayne and leave him on the streets....however, it's been presented (thus far) in a very pretentious, and confusing manner.

Explain how it is "pretentious."

I know what Crisis on Infinite Earths is, and I really don't see the point of undoing it, like DC seems to have, especially when it comes to Batman.

Which is fine. Your opinion on the matter was not my concern; you expressed confusion as to the reintroduction of previously removed elements. I explained the cause of the reintroduction.

Fair enough. But again, my main point is that I don't see why he feels the urge to drag up stories that are literally decades old, and mostly forgotten about, and then make them all some type of weird hallucination or whatever his explanation for all of that business is.

Because he thinks it's cool? Because he thinks fans will think it's cool? I don't know what the majority thinks, but I know at least a significant chunk of fans agree.

I can see its merits, but Morrison's Joker has NEVER been acceptable to me, so I wasn't likely to enjoy the issue from the get go...different strokes, I suppose.

Hm. I don't really see what causes the widespread dislike. Besides the physical alteration, he's just the Joker with a slight attitude adjustment--one that pushes him out of the BTAS zone and more into a Hannibal Lecter zone. There's precedent for that.

Sure you can blame him for that. He chose to make extreme modifications to a classic character in the main title of the series. He could have easily just made his Joker story a one shot that didn't fit into continuity, and it would have had the exact same effect. How can you say that it's NOT distracting when the character is written one way by everyone else, and then given this extreme makeover whenever he pops up in the main title? It would be like Frank Miller's Goddamned Batman showing up once a week in the Adam West series, with none of the characters seeming to notice.

It's not distracting because I know this sort of thing happens in comics. Sometimes other writers can be slow to catch up with the evolution of characters. And, again: how is Grant to blame? He wrote a story that progressed the Joker into a new place, and other writers have failed to reflect that. This is their problem, not his. Similarly, if Batman calls it quits in RIP, Bruce Wayne will still be appearing in Trinity because that story is already ongoing and requires his presence. The solution will simply be to assume--as with the anomalous Joker stories--that Trinity takes place before RIP.

I don't feel that the will always be confused by the differences between the film and the comic. But how can you deny that the timing of this story is absolutely atrocious? The Dark Knight just made big money, and Batman is back in the eyes of mainstream America....and yet, he's running around in his book (which is the SOURCE of all things Batman) dressed in a ridiculous get-up and talking to Bat-Mite.

I can deny it's "atrocious" because, as I said, the number of new readers gleamed from the film will be negligible. Unfortunate timing, maybe, but ultimately mostly irrelevant. I would rather DC not disrupt their plans, anyway. I don't need the flow of the story to be interrupted with six months of by-the-books filler for the sake of a handful of moviegoers who will buy one Batman comic and then never come back.

Well that's you, but I'm telling you...Bruce Wayne IS Batman, and it's not appealing to me, and to a great many others, any other way. When I first heard of Batman Beyond, I thought it was a terrible idea, and even after the series has concluded, I still think that it's a terrible idea, even if it did produce some good episodes.

Yes: you think. The success of Batman Beyond, though, demonstrated pretty clearly that Batman without Bruce Wayne will sell just fine. All that is required is for the story to be good enough, and all but the most stubborn minority will come around.

 

[Saint]

As I recall there was a little bit of hubbub across a few different boards in regards to what was flashback and what was hallucination in that issue. Lots of "This is obviously real, fools!" and back and forth. The reason I cite Daniels is because of the dreadlocked henchman on the bottom of page 10. What the heck am I looking at?!? In this case Daniels' art had me wondering what was true and what was illusion.

I think we were meant to assume it's true, but with the possibility of that not being the case.

Stories need to -end-, heck yes that's so true! That endless cycle you speak of is my biggest problem with comics. That said, I just can't see DC actually ending Bruce's career as Batman, even though at some point it does -need- to happen in order for this to be a -story-. That's one of the reasons I like Miller's DK version, as crazy and over the top as some (okay, much) of it is, its got a beginning, middle, and end. But, does DC see this as a story or do they see it as product? Are they okay with someone like Dick or Tim taking over for the long term, as long as the titles stay on shelves and continue to sell?

History says they are--for a while, anyway. Wally West lasted twenty years--and, thankfully, doesn't seem to be getting the boot even though Barry is back. Kyle Rayner lasted ten years before Hal came back, and he too has stuck around.

For me, the question isn't whether or not they can make a new Batman stick. The question is what will happen ten down the line. If they decide to make Bruce Batman again, I don't want to see Dick--who I will have spent ten years investing in--killed, demoted, or faded into obscurity to make space. That's the real challenge.

If it were to actually happen, I'd (sooner or later) be fine with Dick taking over. I'd prefer Tim since I personally think it'd be more interesting, but really I do just want to see the story progress in a way that feels honest: The Robins weren't just sidekicks, they were being groomed as possible successors, and maybe it is time for that to happen*.

Tim is the most suitable choice, which for me makes him the least interesting. Despite his age, he's the only one who would willingly become Batman, and he's the one with the skillset most conducive to being Batman. I prefer Dick--or even Jason--because they would be struggling with the role. Dick wouldn't want to be Batman--at least at first--and would have to assume a manner and a skillset that don't come naturally to him. Jason would be putting on the mask as something to aspire to--a standard of heroism he's failed to live up to, and more than anything, something that, mentally, will keep him from killing people.

*I'd also be okay with Bruce eventually bad@$$ing his way through this, despite the indications that this really is supposed to be "it" for him. Something like that could obviously be chalked up to the comic being endless corporate product and not a real -story-, but, geesh, there's just a large part of me that wants to see Bruce -win-. Then again, if "The Batman" continues without Bruce, he -has- won.

I think his winning and his continuing as Batman don't need to go hand in hand.

I think Bruce should be faced with a situation where he's forced to kill somebody. I think it needs to be painted as the decision of Bruce Wayne to do this--not Batman--and the acceptance that Bruce is a man, and can't be held to the insane moral absolutes of Batman. More importantly, though, it's a point of growth: an acceptance that the absolute control Batman has always aspired to--where everyone walks home alive--simply cannot be reconciled with reality: people will always die, and sometimes a choice has to be made as to who. The innocent, or the madman whose survival will only put more in danger? Bruce needs to accept that he cannot manipulate every situation to the point where both survive.

Following that, what makes sense for me is for Bruce to completely abandon violence. With that revelation, he would think himself incapable of continuing as Batman, and, more importantly, he wouldn't want to. He wouldn't want to continue a mission that he knows will sometimes force him to kill people. He would have had his fill of suffering. I think he would bail out to Nanda Parbat or somewhere else in an effort to rebuild himself as Bruce Wayne, as someone who can help the world without hurting anybody.

 

[etrigan69]

I havn't read this title but i have checked out the synopsis and the cliff notes. What a ****ing mess.....

 

[Saint]

You'll find most comic book stories (and most science fiction, and most fantasy, and the list goes on) will sound ridiculous if you only read the synopsis.

 

[etrigan69]

You'll find most comic book stories (and most science fiction, and most fantasy, and the list goes on) will sound ridiculous if you only read the synopsis.

If Thomas Wayne is alive and is a bad guy and they are replacing Bruce as Batman (Regardless of how temporary it is, and it is temporary even if they kill him off.) then this book is ****.....

 

[Saint]

If Thomas Wayne is alive and is a bad guy and they are replacing Bruce as Batman (Regardless of how temporary it is, and it is temporary even if they kill him off.) then this book is ****.....

I'm sorry, I assumed calling it a "mess" had something to do with the quality of the story; such as it making sense nor not. If you just don't like the idea, well, I can't really say anything to that. I will say, though, that reading the book will make it apparent that the Thomas Wayne business is a ploy to screw with Bruce's head.

As for the replacement of Bruce Wayne? Well, I suppose there's not much I can do to refute preemptive hate that affords no merit to how the story is told, what it's about, how it works, why it happens, where it goes or how it turns out.

 

[FCEEVIPER]

damn it.. Mr. Morrison is going to have to disappear....

Call on me, I'll help.

 

[etrigan69]

The thing is this kind of crap screams at me "I/We are out of ideas so were going to remove the main character." (or his powers with other books)

It just gets old. Didn't they do this crap with Azrael not too long ago?

Just write good stories within the confines of what they are presented with. If you don't have any good ideas to use with this characcter, go write an original new character then!

 

[Majic Walrus]

I'm sorry, I assumed calling it a "mess" had something to do with the quality of the story; such as it making sense nor not. If you just don't like the idea, well, I can't really say anything to that. I will say, though, that reading the book will make it apparent that the Thomas Wayne business is a ploy to screw with Bruce's head.

As for the replacement of Bruce Wayne? Well, I suppose there's not much I can do to refute preemptive hate that affords no merit to how the story is told, what it's about, how it works, why it happens, where it goes or how it turns out.

BTW Saint, after reading the latest issues of Robin and Nightwing I'm hoping for Dick as new Bats now.

 

[Majic Walrus]

The thing is this kind of crap screams at me "I/We are out of ideas so were going to remove the main character." (or his powers with other books)

It just gets old. Didn't they do this crap with Azrael not too long ago?

Just write good stories within the confines of what they are presented with. If you don't have any good ideas to use with this characcter, go write an original new character then!

I understand how you feel and I felt the same way. And while you are correct and this is just another gimmicky story... What's wrong with that?

No where is there some sort of comic book law that states that the stories shouldn't be gimmicky or rely on the change-up cliffhanger.

You certainly don't mind it in TV shows where the season finale puts the main character in some sort of moral trauma or physical endangerment and then by the open of the next season all of that stuff is resolved within the first minute and a half.

(Sarah Conner Chronicles, Dallas, every goddamn episode of Lost, Heroes, Numerous seasons of Star Trek:TNG, VOY, and DS9)

And yet I still love most of those shows that do that and by the time the new season comes on I don't care anymore.

The stories are only good while you're reading them anyway so why not have off the wall stories like this? They're good for while you read them and if everything changes back who cares at least you enjoyed the story. If everything stays the same, who cares at least you enjoyed the story.

I think people would like RIP as admittedly confusing as it started out if they would just allow themselves to like the story and then move on.

 

[Dark Globe]

Honestly, I hope Grant kills Batman off and pisses off even more Batman fans. The way some of these fans are acting is moronic. There have been so many changes to Batman and The Joker over the years and I don't see how the hell this is any different. You people are gonna piss and moan and threaten Grant and then you're gonna sit back and just accept it, so talking out of your asses isn't gonna stop something that's out of control. You may not like it, but don't threaten someone over something as silly as a comic.

 

[CaptainClown]

actually I wouldn't care if he killed off bruce wayne, just I think this story is garbage

 

[WolfCypher]

Actually, I've been enjoying RIP. So many major arcs and events, and RIp is the only one that I still like. Let's see:

Secret Invasion is meh.
Final Crisis is bleh.
NWTD has peaked.
Ultimate Origin is meh.
But RIP? I'm actually having fun even still.

 

[Dark Globe]

actually I wouldn't care if he killed off bruce wayne, just I think this story is garbage

Well, it's obvious you don't like it, but here's the question, why are you still in a thread about something you don't like? Why do you continue to even read RIP if you don't like it? Don't answer with "Because it's Batman!" either.

 

[bestever23]

ok my 2 cents~

I don't know who will take over batman but I know who black glove is and why batman goes away

Spoilers


The Black glove is Damien (yep!) and Batman kills him (not on purpose thou)
Feeling Guilty that he killed his son, he calls it quits

lol look If I'm right you all owe me a Dr. Pepper

 

[CaptainClown]

Well, it's obvious you don't like it, but here's the question, why are you still in a thread about something you don't like? Why do you continue to even read RIP if you don't like it? Don't answer with "Because it's Batman!" either.

because this is a discussion about the arc. It is not the Batman R.I.P. appreciation thread, this is a thread about the comic. We are free to explain our problems with it, about what we don't like about the writer, or even praise it for whatever reasons.

THAT is why I am in this thread. Also I continue to read it because you never know maybe it will turn out to be good in the end. So far what has been produced is garbage and I will stay in this thread spouting my complaints all I want.

 

[The Guard]

The thing is this kind of crap screams at me "I/We are out of ideas so were going to remove the main character." (or his powers with other books)

Clearly they're not out of ideas. Because what they've done here is a relatively new one.

Comics are soap operas. They always have been, they always will be.

 

[360wavesandxbox]

it is my belief that the black glove is the "real" joker..Im not convinced that the joker that we have seen thus far in RIP is the "real" joker... I believe he is an imposter while the "real" mr J is behind the scenes pulling strings...

 

[Dark Globe]

because this is a discussion about the arc. It is not the Batman R.I.P. appreciation thread, this is a thread about the comic. We are free to explain our problems with it, about what we don't like about the writer, or even praise it for whatever reasons.

THAT is why I am in this thread. Also I continue to read it because you never know maybe it will turn out to be good in the end. So far what has been produced is garbage and I will stay in this thread spouting my complaints all I want.

Really? Well usually, in past forums I've been in, when it comes to a thread, when someone doesn't like something, they say their opinion and leave, not repeat it over and over until the point of annoyance. I think it's beyond that you don't like it, I think you just want to tick people off for liking it. I'm not trying to insult you, but you're not making yourself look any better by calling it "Garbage". It's obviously not "Garbage" because it's not in a trash can and it doesn't smell of feces. Refering to it as Garbage makes you look like a jerk.

 

[CaptainClown]

Really? Well usually, in past forums I've been in, when it comes to a thread, when someone doesn't like something, they say their opinion and leave, not repeat it over and over until the point of annoyance. I think it's beyond that you don't like it, I think you just want to tick people off for liking it. I'm not trying to insult you, but you're not making yourself look any better by calling it "Garbage". It's obviously not "Garbage" because it's not in a trash can and it doesn't smell of feces. Refering to it as Garbage makes you look like a jerk.

Well welcome to the hype, people who don't like something still stick around the threads to discuss it. Check other threads and you will always find people who don't care for something and stick around. Just like praise people will repeat what they believe about the title...over and over again... thats just what happens.

Also I do believe this concept in general is garbage so I don't care if it makes me look like a jerk. Motown Marvel hates Batman and Robin All-Star and he sticks around that thread and is welcome to call it garbage and call Miller a hack. Who cares.

 

[Punchinello]

I'm one of the other batfans who also strongly believes that RIP has pretty much killed the series, because of two things; but namely just the first one. 1.] Batman should never be killed off, or driven insane/written off so he is replaced by a new Batman, regardless who will take the cowl (Nightwing, Robin, Batgirl, etc) 2.] Morrisson's atrocious writing and characters. I mean, really. Le Bossu? The Black Glove? Hints that Alfred is Bruce's father? The bizarro!Joker with the facials surgery scars (plus the cliche, OOC Lecter/SweeneyTodd/Pyramid Head basis) that should never be called The Joker; and we'd like to just hope that he's a clone from another dimension who killed the real Joker? (OOCly speaking of course; not literally) RIP is the worst story arc I have ever read, and I've given up on reading any of the new comics if DC goes ahead with what we're fearing: replacing Batman, and keeping this 'new' Joker. =/ Mind you, if you think about it; the last couple of years haven't really turned out too good batman comics or graphic novels. DC's gone overboard with the killing-off-characters, rewriting characters, re-introducing just about everybody, etc.

 

[The Guard]

1.] Batman should never be killed off, or driven insane/written off so he is replaced by a new Batman, regardless who will take the cowl (Nightwing, Robin, Batgirl, etc)

I'm not sure what this is based on, other than personal preference. We all love Bruce Wayne as a character, but to say that he simply CANNOT be succeeded in the context of the mythology? The Batman mythology, in its most classic form, has been building to this eventuality for years and years.