How do you prefer Batman: Dark or Light?

[Godzilla2014]

I know that there are many different incarnations of Batman, from the darker versions that are currently more popular, to the more lighthearted versions like the popular Batman: The Brave And The Bold and the Silver Age comics. So I ask: Which is your preference, and why?
I don't want to start a flame war, I just want to hear people discuss their preferences. I apologize in advance if there's already a thread like this.

My personal preference is for the darker incarnations. The modern comics, the Burton films, Batman: The Animated Series (and other DCAU media), and the Nolan films are my preferred Batman incarnations. They're just more compelling characters with more depth to me than the more lighthearted versions.
The lighthearted versions of Batman just seems dull and shallow to me. Rarely are Batman's motivations discussed in these incarnations, and they don't make as much sense to me given his actions when they are.

 

[Lead Cenobite]

Dark. To me, it just makes sense for Batman, since he uses the image of an animal that has a macabre reputation to scare criminals. Even the name Gotham sounds dark, despite the origins of the word.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Dark. To me, it just makes sense for Batman, since he uses the image of an animal that has a macabre reputation to scare criminals. Even the name Gotham sounds dark, despite the origins of the word.

Exactly.

 

[GothamAlleys]

I became a fan in late 80s by reading comics. There, Batman was a loner without Robin and was solving different crimes and mysteries in each issue, all very dark and sometimes even spooky. So this is MY Batman. Months after I became a fan the 89 movie came out and naturally it was even darker in tone and design than comic books, so naturally my preference goes to lone, dark Batman

But having said that, I enjoy the 60s show as well. I guess it just depends whats fun and what appealing to me. While I enjoy the 60s show, I dislike the Brave and Bold cartoon and Schumacher's movies

 

[PSYLENTGuardian]

I can't really imagine a character like Batman being light.

 

[Godzilla2014]

I became a fan in late 80s by reading comics. There, Batman was a loner without Robin and was solving different crimes and mysteries in each issue, all very dark and sometimes even spooky. So this is MY Batman. Months after I became a fan the 89 movie came out and naturally it was even darker in tone and design than comic books, so naturally my preference goes to lone, dark Batman

But having said that, I enjoy the 60s show as well. I guess it just depends whats fun and what appealing to me. While I enjoy the 60s show, I dislike the Brave and Bold cartoon and Schumacher's movies

You dislike Batman: The Brave And The Bold? I'm honestly surprised.

I can't really imagine a character like Batman being light.

Agreed.

 

[Mace Dolex]

I grew up on early 80's Batman where he was a little more approachable I would say when it came to Gordon, Alfred, etc while still having that hint of moodiness.

 

[GothamAlleys]

You dislike Batman: The Brave And The Bold? I'm honestly surprised.

I dont think a modern retro ever works, its just me. I didnt like new incarnations of He-Man and the special episode of the 80s Turtles incarnation. It just doesnt feel like the classic stuff, even if it looks the same and tries to follow the same formula

I can't really imagine a character like Batman being light.

Well, I think it works very well. I enjoy the 60s show and most of the 50s/60s stories

 

[Godzilla2014]

I dont think a modern retro ever works, its just me. I didnt like new incarnations of he-Man or the specdial epsiode of the 80s Turtles incarnation. It just doesnt feel like it even if it looks the same and trie to follow the same formula

It wasn't my favorite incarnation of Batman either. B:TBATB Batman feels rather dull and flat to me, stripped of Batman's most interesting character traits, and I never cared for him referring to his own fists as the "Hammers of Justice!™".

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Dark.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Dark 100% all the way, though I do enjoy the 60's show on occasion.

 

[CConn]

Batman is anything and everything.

He is both light and dark. And everything in between.

 

[Damianwayne]

My favourite take on batman is millers work tbh . why ? Cause im god-damn batman thats why !

 

[Anubis]

Somewhere in the middle so you know, Batman the Animated Series.

 

[Frontier]

Batman is not meant to be light. He's the most tragic of all the heroes.

Yes, Superman lost his parents - when he was an infant, he never knew them, and was raised by loving earth parents. Spider-Man lost his parents, but had a loving Aunt and Uncle.

Bats *WATCHED* his parents die in front of him, and had no one save Alfred, a surrogate at best.

Some things just don't work one way, and do another.

Light Batman to Dark Batman is like the 1970s Battlestar to the 2003 version.

When the foundation of the story is grim as can be? You have to hold that course.

Tragedy is a common element of superheroes, but I don't think there are any darker than Bats. Likewise, part of his basic operation is to use fear and violence and intimidation; to turn the weapons of the bad-guys back on them. That's not a bright sun-shine thing.

I've seen Brave & the Bold, and it's alright. It's great for kids. But... Batman is meant to be dark. He's meant to be brooding and grim. He is not a happy person, and the incarnations that portray him so may be entertaining, but they're not as true or honest as they could be.

 

[HisMagicTrick]

Dark. The post above mine says it all.

 

[El Payaso]

Dark. He can be both but the better results are when he's dark.

 

[elgaz]

Batman watched his parents bleed to death in front of him as a child. Grows up hugely disturbed, tortured by the death of his parents, unable to forgive/forget and obsessed with vengeance and justice. He now spends his nights prowling the streets and rooftops of gotham and dishing out violence to the criminal element.

IMO this is not subject matter which can be treated lightly. Batman's origins have always been dark and violent, so it makes sense that he be presented in the same light.

For me, the 60s show with it's camp humour and lack of danger never sat right. I didn't really enjoy the Schumacher films either. I think when you inject any light comedy, camp over-the-top villains and bright, colourful settings into Batman films, you're losing the tone and feel which works best with Batman. On the far extreme scale of opposite examples, you couldn't take the Muppets and make it into a dark, serious show. Well you could, but it just wouldn't come off right.

Burton almost got it right - he had 2 fairly dark films. However, they were also quite Gothic in style so were slightly hard for us to relate to on a cosmetic level - not many real cities look like his Gotham.

Nolan, on the other hand ............ well I feel he's just nailed it. You get the odd laugh in his films (usually from something Alfred says), but on the whole they're quite serious and don't take Batman's origins too lightly. Nor does he take the consequences of Batman's actions too lightly, with death and destruction all around him and Batman himself questioning if it's worth it. And he sets it all in a modern city which is immediately recognisable to any of us.

 

[munchie64]

As much as I love the 60's show and Brave and Bold, I'd say dark.

 

[Spider-Kurt!]

Dark Knight > Light Knight

Though Batman working up til the break of dawn is cool too.

 

[OutRiddled]

I like all incarnations of Batman.. except Brave and the Bold (way to kiddie for me).

 

[CConn]

Batman is not meant to be light. He's the most tragic of all the heroes.

Yes, Superman lost his parents - when he was an infant, he never knew them, and was raised by loving earth parents. Spider-Man lost his parents, but had a loving Aunt and Uncle.

Bats *WATCHED* his parents die in front of him, and had no one save Alfred, a surrogate at best.

Some things just don't work one way, and do another.

Light Batman to Dark Batman is like the 1970s Battlestar to the 2003 version.

When the foundation of the story is grim as can be? You have to hold that course.

Tragedy is a common element of superheroes, but I don't think there are any darker than Bats. Likewise, part of his basic operation is to use fear and violence and intimidation; to turn the weapons of the bad-guys back on them. That's not a bright sun-shine thing.

I've seen Brave & the Bold, and it's alright. It's great for kids. But... Batman is meant to be dark. He's meant to be brooding and grim. He is not a happy person, and the incarnations that portray him so may be entertaining, but they're not as true or honest as they could be.

Batman's story is an inherently dark one, yes. He started as a masked avenger in an age of gritty crime fiction.

But comics are a living medium. And, like all living things, they change and evolve with time and influence.

And that's exactly what happened with Batman. Within a year of his creation, he evolved into a much lighter character than was originally intended.

And this was neither a good nor a bad thing. It was simply an evolution of time and sociological influence.

But to say he is wholly grim is quite inaccurate. Most children's fables are quite wholly dark at their core; Hansel and Grettel were almost murdered in cold blood by a sadistic cannibal; Snow White is a story of attempted murder, Repunzel one of kidnapping and enslavement.

Those things are as bad if not worse than using your parents to a mugging gone wrong. Yet those stories are considered children's classics that are often adapted quite liberally to suit the dispositions of very small children.

Batman is precisely the same kind of modern fable or myth. Inherent darkness and tragedy that can be translated into a great many things for a great many audiences.

That's what makes Batman great, that's what makes him endure. That's the core of the character - not grim intimidation - but tragedy made into something good and just.

As long as that core principal holds true, true meaning of Batman is respected. And that's what's important.

So, as I said, Batman can be anything and everything. And personally, I enjoy something like Brave and the Bold just as greatly as I enjoy the somber drama of Christopher Nolan's Batman. But hey, maybe that's just me.

 

[SuperFerret]

Batman is not meant to be light. He's the most tragic of all the heroes.

Yes, Superman lost his parents - when he was an infant, he never knew them, and was raised by loving earth parents. Spider-Man lost his parents, but had a loving Aunt and Uncle.

Bats *WATCHED* his parents die in front of him, and had no one save Alfred, a surrogate at best.

Some things just don't work one way, and do another.

Light Batman to Dark Batman is like the 1970s Battlestar to the 2003 version.

When the foundation of the story is grim as can be? You have to hold that course.

Tragedy is a common element of superheroes, but I don't think there are any darker than Bats. Likewise, part of his basic operation is to use fear and violence and intimidation; to turn the weapons of the bad-guys back on them. That's not a bright sun-shine thing.

I've seen Brave & the Bold, and it's alright. It's great for kids. But... Batman is meant to be dark. He's meant to be brooding and grim. He is not a happy person, and the incarnations that portray him so may be entertaining, but they're not as true or honest as they could be.

Look up the Martian Manhunter. Notice that he lost his entire race (including his wife and daughter) to a fiery plague that his twin brother created because J'onn (and others) took away his telepathy. Also notice that he's not a whiny little ***** about it.

I like Batman when he's a person.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Batman is not meant to be light. He's the most tragic of all the heroes.

Yes, Superman lost his parents - when he was an infant, he never knew them, and was raised by loving earth parents. Spider-Man lost his parents, but had a loving Aunt and Uncle.

Bats *WATCHED* his parents die in front of him, and had no one save Alfred, a surrogate at best.

Some things just don't work one way, and do another.

Light Batman to Dark Batman is like the 1970s Battlestar to the 2003 version.

When the foundation of the story is grim as can be? You have to hold that course.

Tragedy is a common element of superheroes, but I don't think there are any darker than Bats. Likewise, part of his basic operation is to use fear and violence and intimidation; to turn the weapons of the bad-guys back on them. That's not a bright sun-shine thing.

I've seen Brave & the Bold, and it's alright. It's great for kids. But... Batman is meant to be dark. He's meant to be brooding and grim. He is not a happy person, and the incarnations that portray him so may be entertaining, but they're not as true or honest as they could be.

Batman's story is an inherently dark one, yes. He started as a masked avenger in an age of gritty crime fiction.

But comics are a living medium. And, like all living things, they change and evolve with time and influence.

And that's exactly what happened with Batman. Within a year of his creation, he evolved into a much lighter character than was originally intended.

And this was neither a good nor a bad thing. It was simply an evolution of time and sociological influence.

But to say he is wholly grim is quite inaccurate. Most children's fables are quite wholly dark at their core; Hansel and Grettel were almost murdered in cold blood by a sadistic cannibal; Snow White is a story of attempted murder, Repunzel one of kidnapping and enslavement.

Those things are as bad if not worse than using your parents to a mugging gone wrong. Yet those stories are considered children's classics that are often adapted quite liberally to suit the dispositions of very small children.

Batman is precisely the same kind of modern fable or myth. Inherent darkness and tragedy that can be translated into a great many things for a great many audiences.

That's what makes Batman great, that's what makes him endure. That's the core of the character - not grim intimidation - but tragedy made into something good and just.

As long as that core principal holds true, true meaning of Batman is respected. And that's what's important.

So, as I said, Batman can be anything and everything. And personally, I enjoy something like Brave and the Bold just as greatly as I enjoy the somber drama of Christopher Nolan's Batman. But hey, maybe that's just me.

I agree with both of these posts. What makes Batman an interesting character to me is that while he shares psychological trauma with many of his villains, what ultimately makes him different is that he controls his dark side and uses to do good.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Look up the Martian Manhunter. Notice that he lost his entire race (including his wife and daughter) to a fiery plague that his twin brother created because J'onn (and others) took away his telepathy. Also notice that he's not a whiny little ***** about it.

I like Batman when he's a person.

What do you mean by "when he's a person"?