Will Batman go ever truly go "back to his roots"

[NolGoyHater]

Just a thought. Will someone ever pull a Frank Miller and "reinvent" Batman by returning him back to his roots as a masked killer vigilante?

I say no, because Frank Miller and the like's version are harrelled as the Definitive Batman so much that editors and people in control at DC won't let that happen. Eventhough, nothing about TDK has to do with the Batman comics in terms of storyline today because it was set so far in the future with no continuity of comics before or after.

But Devil's advocate says that someone just like Frank Miller, will come into DC building and be hailed from peers and comic readers. Then DC will without any hesitation, give him complete creative control and he will take Batman back to 1939 and make him a sadistic vigilante with a gun again and people will call him BRILLIANT, INNOVATIVE, and ORIGINAL and "HIS" version of Batman will be considered present fact as Miller's and Loebs is today.

What are your thoughts?

 

[AndrewGilkison]

If The Punisher hadn't been invented, then maybe I could see it happening. But it seems Frank Castle took the sadistic, dark, and murderious vigilante with a gun thing and ran with it.

Also, it seems writers and fans just like a Batman that doesn't kill and doesn't shoot people with guns. For them, it just makes for better stories to have moral limits placed on him.

So I'd say it's not going to happen.

 

[The Empire Ape]

Batman may have been a masked vigilante (and hell, he still is, like Superman, Spider-Man (before demasked) and almost all superheroes) and killed but THIS WAS NOTHING SPECIAL back than. Superman was even more brutal. Hell, even Mickey Mouse killed Nazi soldiers. Should they all go back to the roots? No, different times, different solutions. And Batman was not brooding back then. ANd he didn't behave like an *******. So the whole "It's okay that batman is a jerk because this was the way he was invented" is false, too.

 

[November Rain]

possibly there may come a time when batman chooses to kill someone but if written properly, i don't see him having a problem with that.

it just depends how emotionally attached he was to something he lost and how far he was willing to go to get revenge.

I think if ultimately batman killed the joker in a cold hearted manner, if the joker found out bruce's identity and literally destroyed everything he held dear, then have bruce devolve and openly kill the joker, i don't think many people would mind if written properly and if his redemption was also done properly.

i'd certainly hail him for it.

 

[storyteller]

Batman doesnt kill in cold blood. He's been pushed past his breaking point but never does the deed.

 

[dkamphaus43]

Those first few stories in 1939 where he killed people and had the personality of a brick were all trial and error stories. Finger and Kane still hadn't found the right tone for the character yet, and it took them a few issues for them to get it nailed down. It's as simple as that. It happens all the time with new creations.

 

[souloffire]

Those first few stories in 1939 where he killed people and had the personality of a brick were all trial and error stories. Finger and Kane still hadn't found the right tone for the character yet, and it took them a few issues for them to get it nailed down. It's as simple as that. It happens all the time with new creations.

Actually the majority of the 39' Batman stories were written by Gardner Fox and not Bill Finger. Finger wrote Tec' 27 and 28 and Fox wrote 29 through 34.

 

[Mladen]

He's currently pretty close. Miller himself seems intent on taking Batman in that direction, since he likes to write him as a sadistic lunatic beating rapists to a pulp (Allstars).... Which, interesting enough, is exactly how they've been writing the Joker.

either way, 'back to his roots' isn't necessarily a good thing. Most of the old Batman stories were really awful, and kamphausd1 rightly points out that Batman had no personality whatsoever. Actually, is it just me or does today's Batman also seems to lack a personality? hmm

Theres always the chance to reinvent the character, but hopefully it'll be something new, not just something like 'more violence' or 'batman kills'.

 

[dkamphaus43]

Actually, is it just me or does today's Batman also seems to lack a personality? hmm

Theres always the chance to reinvent the character, but hopefully it'll be something new, not just something like 'more violence' or 'batman kills'.

What're you talking about? I thought they were returning Batman to his more human, heroic but still dark persona that he had in the 70's and 80's?

 

[CConn]

They were.

Problem is, 90% of the writers for DC didn't get the memo.

 

[CConn]

But yeah, the current Batman really doesn't have any personality. Honestly, I don't even like the character as he is now. He's pretty wholly bland and if he shows any personality at all, it's an attitude of gruff or harshness. Usually to the people closest to him. Not very endearing (Of course, there are exceptions; Morrison seems to be doing a pretty good job at characterizing him...as is Adam Beechen in the pages of Robin).

Now, when I go back and read stuff from the 70s and even up until the Knightfall days, now THAT's a character I can get into. THAT's the character I love. He's a bit corny, he's a bit cocky, but he's always undeniably a hero. He may be terrifying to the bad guys, but he's good as gold to the good guys, and to his friends. He's not some emotionally stilted ogre, he's just a man who has some inner demons, who's a hero. And that's the type of character, the type of Batman, I'm into.

 

[dkamphaus43]

But yeah, the current Batman really doesn't have any personality. Honestly, I don't even like the character as he is now. He's pretty wholly bland and if he shows any personality at all, it's an attitude of gruff or harshness. Usually to the people closest to him. Not very endearing (Of course, there are exceptions; Morrison seems to be doing a pretty good job at characterizing him...as is Adam Beechen in the pages of Robin).

Now, when I go back and read stuff from the 70s and even up until the Knightfall days, now THAT's a character I can get into. THAT's the character I love. He's a bit corny, he's a bit cocky, but he's always undeniably a hero. He may be terrifying to the bad guys, but he's good as gold to the good guys, and to his friends. He's not some emotionally stilted ogre, he's just a man who has some inner demons, who's a hero. And that's the type of character, the type of Batman, I'm into.

Paul Dini seems to be doing a good job as well!

 

[CConn]

Paul Dini's Batman has been horrible. In most of his issues, Dini's offered absolutely no characterization or character progression of Batman at all, and, in the stories that has offered characterization, Batman has been no different than the dull blowhard he was pre-Infinite Crisis.

 

[dkamphaus43]

Paul Dini's Batman has been horrible. In most of his issues, Dini's offered absolutely no characterization or character progression of Batman at all, and, in the stories that has offered characterization, Batman has been no different than the dull blowhard he was pre-Infinite Crisis.

But at least he doesn't portray Batman as an assh*&e.

 

[CConn]

He was an a**hole to Zatanna in Dini's most recent issues. Granted, he realized he was being an a**hole (one of the one instances of characterization by Dini I have enjoyed), but overall, Dini's Batman is no different than the one that's been stalking around for the past 10 years.

Sure, he might not be as big of an a**hole as he is when Johns writes him, but Johns' characterization has always been the exception rather than the rule.

 

[dkamphaus43]

He was an a**hole to Zatanna in Dini's most recent issues. Granted, he realized he was being an a**hole (one of the one instances of characterization by Dini I have enjoyed), but overall, Dini's Batman is no different than the one that's been stalking around for the past 10 years.

Sure, he might not be as big of an a**hole as he is when Johns writes him, but Johns' characterization has always been the exception rather than the rule.

He doesn't really seem that way to me.

 

[Punch]

Once again, misinformation gets repeated and repeated until it becomes fact for some. Miller's Batman was not a psycho killer.

 

[dkamphaus43]

Once again, misinformation gets repeated and repeated until it becomes fact for some. Miller's Batman was not a psycho killer.

Well no, not in YEAR ONE he wasn't.

 

[dude stannis]

He was an a**hole to Zatanna in Dini's most recent issues. Granted, he realized he was being an a**hole (one of the one instances of characterization by Dini I have enjoyed), but overall, Dini's Batman is no different than the one that's been stalking around for the past 10 years.

Sure, he might not be as big of an a**hole as he is when Johns writes him, but Johns' characterization has always been the exception rather than the rule.

Batman has good reason to be an ass to Zatanna. In that post 52 story with Jason Bard, the Tally-man, and Two-Face's return Bats apologised to a rookie female cop because he was an ass to her.

Also, Johns' weakest point is Batman.

 

[BubbaGump]

Well no, not in YEAR ONE he wasn't.

True. There's a specific panel (someone scan it) where he has that look in his face: "I'm not a killer."

 

[dude stannis]

Three guys boosted a TV from someone apartment and where trying to escape from the fire escape, Batman comes in starts kicking ass and one guy falls over the rail, but Batman catches him just in time.

 

[BubbaGump]

Three guys boosted a TV from someone apartment and where trying to escape from the fire escape, Batman comes in starts kicking ass and one guy falls over the rail, but Batman catches him just in time.

Ha. They did worse in the 60's show. All that violant Ka-powing. *shudders*

 

[Punch]

Well no, not in YEAR ONE he wasn't.

He wasn't in The Dark Knight Returns either.

 

[Lord Thanos]

sorry guys but ive had enough,any one with a beef against millers batman is either misinformed,a fool,or just too whiney for their own good

read all star b&r #4 excelent writing(and truly the first time ive liked robin in a bat tale)besides carry kelly

 

[Lord Thanos]

i found this issue to be quite moving(dick grason trying to be strong in the face of great tragidy,his perspective on batman in perticular)also batman is arogant in this tale,but its so well thought out and exicuted that i accepted