The Batman VS Batman Begins VS Batman 1989.

[DKDetective]

"I thought this was the most realistic character in comics so I will make him realistic, but I couldn’t. If you think about the Batmobile, its not credible that a city of 7 million people would not see that the same very visible car goes in the same direction at 5 AM and its a countryside that it goes to, so there are maybe seven or eight estates. Surely they would figure it out! You can’t have a realistic Batman and the Batmobile! There is a college professor who argued that Batman could exist for two years and a whole lot of reasons he couldn’t do it anymore."

Thanks for digging it up for me. This is why I asked to see the interview for the context. In this context he's taking about applying realism to Batman and how that scenario would go. As he just said there in a realistic scenario Batman couldn't even have a Batmobile. He's just spinning a realism yarn here.



Well if you do manage to come across it please share it. I'm a big Denny fan.

I disagree on that interpretation as him just responding to a hypothetical about a realistic Batman as I have seen him make similar comments in other interviews as mentioned. He switches tact and specifically discusses his "personal biography" of Bruce Wayne, which to me, suggests he is no longer strictly speaking dealing about the realism topic. I took it as a kind of a stream of consciousness where discussing one topic reminds us of our thoughts on another. We all do it, especially as we get older.

You have to also remember that he is playfully responding to his own reputation as someone who made Batman realistic and/or grounded. As Denny has said elsewhere on many occasions, part of why he loved writing Batman is that his sensibilities as a writer are very grounded. He doesn't know what to do with gods and demigods, hence the debacle of him stripping Wonder Woman of her powers in the 70s. He prefers to write street level, urban stories of crime and social issues. He's poking fun at the high level absurdity of what he did with the character in terms of trying to add realism or ground a character that is fundamentally unrealistic.

I am also a huge Denny fan and I think the biggest reason why BTAS is the closest I've seen to a definitive adaptation (for my tastes) is how closely it hews to what Denny and his colleagues did in the 70s.

 

[DKDetective]

Well if you do manage to come across it please share it. I'm a big Denny fan.

The Comic Archive on YouTube has uploaded a long series of video interviews with Denny, which are awesome. Here is one of them so you have a link to their channel:

I'm pretty sure he discusses the topic in one of these, but I'm not sure which. As a Denny fan, I'm sure you would just enjoy watching them all and then we can discuss further.

 

[The Joker]

But that isn’t true because he retires again and is happy with Selina. In my eyes he was broken because Rachael died because of him and he failed her. He kept saying how there is nothing out there for him because there was no more Rachael. If he didn’t retire in the end of TDKR then yeah I would agree with you because then your point would be valid that he learned it was because he wasn’t Batman anymore and never about settling down with someone. But he does settle down and retire and give the batcave (knowing there is going to be more crime and wars to fight) to Blake. He just found someone to settle down with and be happy. I love the ending but it didn’t mesh with my view of Batman. It was a realistic approach to Batman. What if Batman was in our world? Impossible to fight for 25 years and never retire.

Yes it is true. He was able to retire with Selina only when he finally comes to terms with the source of his pain aka "It's my fault, Alfred... if I hadn't gotten scared..." and learns to live for himself again that he can truly put the mantle aside and take a shot at life as Bruce. I'm quoting titansupes' above on that one since he phrased it better than I would have.

He wasn't broken because of Rachel, though of course losing her certainly was part of his pain, it wasn't his reason for giving up Batman. He wasn't needed any more as Batman.Again something that was said multiple times in the movie.

Batman BTAS, the dark knight returns, kingdom come, all of Scott Snyder run, and basically all of the comics. Batman 89. Batman isn’t only about fighting the super city ending events. He doesn’t want any crime. Zero. Any death in the street is failure on his part. No city ESPECIALLY Gotham will ever achieve that.

Batman BTAS showed him willing to not even try to be Batman so he could be with Andrea Beaumont. Then years later when she came back into his life and rekindled his love with her he again contemplated giving it all up for her. Alfred fully supported it saying its what his parents would have wanted for him. It was Andrea herself that stopped it from happening both times. First was when she left him to run away with her father from the mob. Second time was when he found out Andrea was the Phantasm. But the point is this was a Bruce Wayne who was willing to give it all up for a normal happy life.

The comics are the comics. Said this several times now but the comics will never give him an ending because they can't. Not unless they like losing money and their fan base.

Batman '89 has no direction for the character at all. Name one scene where Bruce talks about any of his insight on being Batman besides him telling Vicki its just something he has to do. No disrespect to Burton but his version of Batman is one of the most hollow ones. Even Burton himself doesn't rate the movie highly;

“I like parts of it, but the whole movie is mainly boring to me. It’s OK, but it was more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie.”

Freakishly Clever: A Tim Burton Profile (Part 1)

I agree but then your just saying that an amazing fighter can be Batman. When in my eyes, it is a lot more than that for Batman. It is intellect, gadgets, planning, drive, and obsession. Nolan for the most part understands this except the intellect and gadgets. Batman has a gadget for everything. Take away his utility belt and suit then yeah you are taking away Batman’s biggest weapon. Why do you think he can fight Superman or be in the justice league fighting other gods or fighting half his villains? Clayface, Mr. Freeze, Man-Bat, Bane, etc. Let alone a dozen robbers. He has the gadgets and batsuit and intellect to even the odds in a fight.

No I never said amazing fighter. I said someone remarkable. Batman does more than use his fists. He strategizes. He uses his smarts. For example he uses different tactics to handle the SWAT teams because they are on his side they just are unaware they are targeting the wrong people. Batman saw through Joker's set up and had to strategize protecting the hostages, taking out Joker's men, while also stopping the SWAT team and not actually hurting them.

That's someone who is a lot more than just an amazing fighter. That's what I mean when I say gadgets don't define him. Who he is and how he uses them is what makes him Batman.

 

[The Joker]

I disagree on that interpretation as him just responding to a hypothetical about a realistic Batman as I have seen him make similar comments in other interviews as mentioned. He switches tact and specifically discusses his "personal biography" of Bruce Wayne, which to me, suggests he is no longer strictly speaking dealing about the realism topic. I took it as a kind of a stream of consciousness where discussing one topic reminds us of our thoughts on another. We all do it, especially as we get older.

You have to also remember that he is playfully responding to his own reputation as someone who made Batman realistic and/or grounded. As Denny has said elsewhere on many occasions, part of why he loved writing Batman is that his sensibilities as a writer are very grounded. He doesn't know what to do with gods and demigods, hence the debacle of him stripping Wonder Woman of her powers in the 70s. He prefers to write street level, urban stories of crime and social issues. He's poking fun at the high level absurdity of what he did with the character in terms of trying to add realism or ground a character that is fundamentally unrealistic.

I am also a huge Denny fan and I think the biggest reason why BTAS is the closest I've seen to a definitive adaptation (for my tastes) is how closely it hews to what Denny and his colleagues did in the 70s.

Well I haven't seen these similar comments so I can't say anything on them. That's why I asked to see them for the context. In this case he was talking about a realism context. He said if we apply realism to Batman he wouldn't even be able to have the Batmobile. Then he went on and applied this realistic view to how Batman would retire if he was to.

Denny created Ra's Al Ghul. A 700 year old immortal foe. He was not that out of touch with the super fantastical. Denny took Batman back from the camp of the 50's and 60's and back to the darker roots of the early 40's. I think that's what his "realism" approach was. He brought the character back from the goofy comic book era where Batman was having capers like this;

The Comic Archive on YouTube has uploaded a long series of video interviews with Denny, which are awesome. Here is one of them so you have a link to their channel:

I'm pretty sure he discusses the topic in one of these, but I'm not sure which. As a Denny fan, I'm sure you would just enjoy watching them all and then we can discuss further.

Thank you sir. I will definitely give this a watch.

 

[DeadlyWest]

Saving Gotham from crime? Yes definitely possible to save a city. Eradicating the whole world of crime? An absurdly delusional goal for one man to think he can achieve. But since Batman is based in Gotham and focuses strictly on Gotham then why would you think he's trying to eradicate crime completely? Let alone believe he could always be there to stop it when he never leaves his own city?

Saving Gotham from crime, yes a reachable goal. Crime everywhere? Not in a million years. The reason they'll constantly keep Gotham ravaged with crime is because they will never end Batman.

Same reason why nobody realistically would have put a bullet in Joker's head by now. They can't end a fan favorite character.

It's one thing to reduce crime to the point of it no longer being as major of an issue

It's another to completely eradicate it.

Bruce would only be content with the latter. Which is not permanently possible. Even if crime was temporarily at 0%, there is always going to be someone (even in a city) looking to take advantage of someone in some way, want someone dead or otherwise have a reason to commit a crime.

 

[The Joker]

It's one thing to reduce crime to the point of it no longer being as major of an issue

It's another to completely eradicate it.

Bruce would only be content with the latter. Which is not permanently possible. Even if crime was temporarily at 0%, there is always going to be someone (even in a city) looking to take advantage of someone in some way, want someone dead or otherwise have a reason to commit a crime.

What are you basing that on? If crime was reduced to a non major issue, and was capable of being handled by the Police, why wouldn't he retire.

We've had versions of Batman, Miller's Dark Knight Returns for example, where he retired for 10 years from Batman while the city was still plagued with crime.

 

[DeadlyWest]

What are you basing that on? If crime was reduced to a non major issue, and was capable of being handled by the Police, why wouldn't he retire.

We've had versions of Batman, Miller's Dark Knight Returns for example, where he retired for 10 years from Batman while the city was still plagued with crime.

It's my personal opinion. It's not based on any particular writer's take or anything like that, just the conclusion I've come to based on what I've read over the years.

While sure, we've had versions that did retire for a while, even Miller's Batman had to come back because he couldn't resist his compulsions any longer. He even only retired because Jason died as far as I recall.

 

[The Joker]

It's my personal opinion. It's not based on any particular writer's take or anything like that, just the conclusion I've come to based on what I've read over the years.

Fair enough.

While sure, we've had versions that did retire for a while, even Miller's Batman had to come back because he couldn't resist his compulsions any longer. He even only retired because Jason died as far as I recall.

Yeah but he did still retire. That's my point. He was able to sit back and do nothing for 10 years when the city still needed him. Yet its hard to fathom a Batman who could retire when the crime rate is so low that he isn't needed and the Police can manage it.

Again this is just people's ideas of who Batman is to them vs what the comics actually do with him.

 

[DeadlyWest]

Yeah but he did still retire. That's my point. He was able to sit back and do nothing for 10 years when the city still needed him. Yet its hard to fathom a Batman who could retire when the crime rate is so low that he isn't needed and the Police can manage it.

Sure, but there's also a fair few differences between Miller's Batman and modern comic Batman. Even down to the reason Miller's Batman retired, which was Jason's death. Something which modern Batman kept going despite. And even then, Miller's Batman clearly found that extremely painful to do for even 10 years, basically becoming an alcoholic because of it.

 

[The Joker]

Sure, but there's also a fair few differences between Miller's Batman and modern comic Batman. Even down to the reason Miller's Batman retired, which was Jason's death. Something which modern Batman kept going despite. And even then, Miller's Batman clearly found that extremely painful to do for even 10 years, basically becoming an alcoholic because of it.

Of course, but that's not the point. He was still able to do it. Sit back and watch his city deteriorate around him. Whether he found it difficult or not, he was able to do it. For 10 years, too. Its one of the most popular and iconic Batman stories.

 

[spideyfan77]

Of course, but that's not the point. He was still able to do it. Sit back and watch his city deteriorate around him. Whether he found it difficult or not, he was able to do it. For 10 years, too. Its one of the most popular and iconic Batman stories.

I could be wrong here but didn’t Batman retire in that because he was forced too by the government and Superman? Which is why Green Arrow had his arm cut off?

He was forced into retirement. Didn’t choose it. But I could be 100% wrong. Don’t remember it that well. That was just my interpretation

 

[The Joker]

I could be wrong here but didn’t Batman retire in that because he was forced too by the government and Superman? Which is why Green Arrow had his arm cut off?

He was forced into retirement. Didn’t choose it. But I could be 100% wrong. Don’t remember it that well. That was just my interpretation

No it was definitely because of Jason's death.

 

[DKDetective]

No it was definitely because of Jason's death.

Yes, but @spideyfan77 is right that it was implied in DKR that superheroes other than Supes were basically all forced into retirement about the same time. While Bruce may have gone willingly due to Jason, a superhero getting their child sidekick killed may also have prompted a wider backlash. It has been a while since I read the story, but the subtext is there that it was not just a personal decision by Bruce due to grief, but that other things were in motion at the same time.

 

[The Joker]

Yes, but @spideyfan77 is right that it was implied in DKR that superheroes other than Supes were basically all forced into retirement about the same time. While Bruce may have gone willingly due to Jason, a superhero getting their child sidekick killed may also have prompted a wider backlash. It has been a while since I read the story, but the subtext is there that it was not just a personal decision by Bruce due to grief, but that other things were in motion at the same time.

There's no subtext. Its made abundantly clear he quit because of Jason. Superman even flat out asks him if he has forgotten why he quit in the first place after he has taken on Carrie as Robin.

 

[The Batman]

Also, Green Arrow didn't go into retirement. He still fought crime, he just ended up doing it secretly so the government wouldn't continue to come after him.

Bruce adopts Oliver's approach by the end of DKR.

 

[DKDetective]

There's no subtext. Its made abundantly clear he quit because of Jason. Superman even flat out asks him if he has forgotten why he quit in the first place after he has taken on Carrie as Robin.

Of course, he quit because of Jason, but there is subtext that there was other stuff going on at the time causing superheroes to have to retire or go underground at the same time.

 

[The Joker]

Of course, he quit because of Jason, but there is subtext that there was other stuff going on at the time causing superheroes to have to retire or go underground at the same time.

Yeah but there was no subtext to it being a factor in why Batman quit. In fact Superman scolds him for being rebellious against it when the others agreed to it (except for Oliver).

 

[DKDetective]

What are you basing that on? If crime was reduced to a non major issue, and was capable of being handled by the Police, why wouldn't he retire.

Found another interesting Denny quote on this issue, from the Bat-Bible that he wrote as editor of the Bat-Books during the 1980s through 2000:

First, let us agree that Wayne/Batman is not insane. There is a difference between obsession and insanity. Obsessed the man surely is, but he is in the fullest possession of his mental and moral faculties. Everything with the exception of his friends' welfare is bent to the task he knows he can never accomplish, the elimination of crime. It is this task which imposes meaning on an existence he would otherwise find intolerable.

 

[The Joker]

Found another interesting Denny quote on this issue, from the Bat-Bible that he wrote as editor of the Bat-Books during the 1980s through 2000:

Again like the last quote you posted I'd need to see the full thing for context before taking that at face value.

 

[DKDetective]

Again like the last quote you posted I'd need to see the full thing for context before taking that at face value.

Here is the full bible:
The Other Scott Peterson: The Batbible
The context is telling new writers about Bruce's psychology.

 

[The Joker]

Here is the full bible:
The Other Scott Peterson: The Batbible
The context is telling new writers about Bruce's psychology.

This Bat Bible was written back in the 90's yes? His bible states that:

"Bruce or Batman
Which one is genuine, Bruce Wayne or Batman? Answer: Batman. Wayne has become part of his tool kit, an identity he finds useful."

Fast forward to 2014 and he said this;

"I decided that Batman is the REAL guy and Bruce Wayne is the disguise. Other people have played it other ways perfectly validly. There is NO one right way to act Hamlet. And there’s no one way to write Batman … or Superman! These characters have been around for … well, Superman’s 76 years, Batman’s 75, and it’s been estimated that 80 percent of the people on Earth know about Batman in one form or another. They are open to interpretation"

Source: The DENNY O’NEIL Interviews: ‘There is No Hope in Crime Alley!’

So he obviously has changed his views on his Bat bible statement of how Batman is given how he said in that more recent interview the opposite way is equally valid. Considering we also saw him say Chris Nolan got Batman right, its easy to see he didn't beholden to the view that Batman is on a mission he knows he can't win.

Opinions and views change. Denny's obviously did.

Reading through other areas of that Bat Bible are not even factually correct. The love life aspect for example;

"He's been seen with dozens of attractive females, but he's never had a serious affair. He favors women who, like himself, are underachievers. It is assumed that he has occasional flings--the phrase "one night stand" comes to mind--but his dates tend neither to confirm or deny the assumption. If they ever compared experiences, they'd learn that an evening with Bruce is always the same: dinner, a show or an appearance at some social or charity affair, and early leave-taking, a plea of illness or a busy tomorrow, a quick kiss on the cheek with a promise to call, and a silent telephone thereafter."

He's never had a serious affair? He had serious relationships with Vicki Vale and Silver St Cloud. There's more that came after them but I'm covering the era before when that 'Bat Bible' was written.

 

[Blade Hoarder]

The lack of support for Batman 89 gives me pain. It probably has the best screenplay of the three. Definitely the best dialogue.

 

[DeadlyWest]

The lack of support for Batman 89 gives me pain. It probably has the best screenplay of the three. Definitely the best dialogue.

I can agree there, but unfortunately it's a movie that's aged like milk in this age where comic accuracy has a lot more precedence. Still a great movie, though

 

[BatLobster]

Batman 89 def deserves more love. I think it's a tighter race between all 3 films than this poll would suggest.

At this moment I think both 89 and BB completely dwarf TB in terms of historical significance for the character though. Obviously that book has yet to be written, but it just doesn't feel as revolutionary as both 89 and BB were at the time. IMO.

 

[Blade Hoarder]

Yeah. BB is basically the blueprint of the Hollywood reboot craze. And 89 had the biggest impact on the comics. Tim Burton basically repainted the visual identity of Batman.

remember Gotham looked more like a real city prior to Burton. He single handedly brought the gothic nightmare aesthetic to the character.