NY Times Spoils Batman #50 in Headline (Tom King pissed)
- Thread starter ManaByte
- Start date
Gonna jump on the "Issue #50 was dreadful" train.
It's a stretched out affair with pretty pictures and vapid words that go nowhere. They oversized it by adding more filler to a story already filled with filler, and then they chickened out at the end. The Bane reveal is stupid beyond stupid.
It's a stretched out affair with pretty pictures and vapid words that go nowhere. They oversized it by adding more filler to a story already filled with filler, and then they chickened out at the end. The Bane reveal is stupid beyond stupid.
The pace of meltdowns has slowed down since it came out, how did you enjoy the issue?
I thought it was great, albeit a bit thin story wise,
Tom King comented on this so it popped up in my twitter feed, I am sure we will soon find out ifmother places had good nights!
I thought it was great, albeit a bit thin story wise,
Porky Pig cameo and that Alfred part was so beautiful. Also, that Holly knows Batmans secret identity, looking forward to seeing where this goes!
Tom King comented on this so it popped up in my twitter feed, I am sure we will soon find out ifmother places had good nights!
The real lesson I've learned from comic books is that the bride shouldn't talk to her best friend the day before the wedding.
I found the conversation about eyes pretty sweet and romantic but that's about it
I enjoyed it *shrug*
I felt it overly committed to style, but I thought the presentation was overall brilliant if some of the dialog felt a little lacking and occasionally eyeroll worthy. Then again, I dunno if that was just king trying to simulate the awkwardness and nervousness inherent in most vows (in my experience, YMMV tho). The literal middle section of the book where they meet and then the plot starts it's descent and the two perspectives start to shift and split against each other was really well done I thought.
I think the people who are focusing purely on the "I don't want to ruin Batman" line are missing a bit that the pivotal scene when the bridesmaid and Alfred talked to catwoman and Batman, respectively, the bit at the end where Catwoman flinches when asked if she was willing to become a hero and Bruce stoically sits nervously is more telling I think of Catwoman's thought process on why she bailed.
The way I see it is that scene more than the literal words speak to the ending scene in great detail. Both characters are forced to confront an internally terrifying change. Bruce fights through his biggest fears and is willing to let himself be happy and thus shows up. Catwoman is unwilling to make that change and the shift in identity it would potentially bring, and thus bails leaving a cop out by essentially telling Batman "it's for your own good" in a Dear John letter. I think Catwoman's ultimate conflict is laid bare by all the art leading up to it. In a lot of it she's portrayed as the humourously literal catburgler that she is, fighting and toying with Bruce along the way, constrasted with the romance sections of being with him on various dates or otherwise romantic scenes.
The contrast ultimately paints the reality of who and what they are to each other, and how those two versions of themselves, catburgler+vigilante and happy couple, are both totally incompatible with each other. Catwoman realizes this and chooses what she has over the potential long term relationship with Bruce not because she's afraid of ruining Batman as she states, but because she fears the potential and probably necessary change in identity that would have to take place for it to work.
The bane stuff at the end was dumb and totally ruined the flow of the narrative for a cheap sell on B#51. Boothisman.gif
That's basically my thoughts on it as someone who's reading it in a vacuum. I've read bits and pieces of King's run but none of it in sustained bursts, but I'm interested in how he will ultimately solve the conundrum of keeping or changing Catwoman's identity in the context of a potential marriage. I know some people have stated the conflict doesn't matter because she can just run off to another city and keep doing her thing, but that to me, and seemingly King as well, screams an even bigger copout than what happened here. It ultimately just kicks the can down the road at best, and at worst just ignores it in favor of weak fanservice.
As far as the twist itself goes I think in order to give the conflict the gravity that's necessary in order for him to later solve it something like this had to happen. That's just me though lol and I can imagine people who have been following the trades the whole time might feel differently.
Speaking of which I find the whole fan reaction an amusingly correlation to Bruce's feelings at the end of the book. Maybe that was the intent all along with the hype: for us the reader to feel exactly the same way at the end of the book as Bruce did.
I give the twist 5 trollface kojimas out of 10 fanboy tears. DC leaving king at the alter shows an immense lack of intestinal fortitude necessary to pull a twist like this off properly. The utterly haphazard backpedaling DC did prior to release cannot be called anything less than an embarrassment to the art form, regardless of your feelings on the book itself. Come the fuck on DC, don't clear something like this and then bail on your creative team. Just completely pathetic on all levels
I felt it overly committed to style, but I thought the presentation was overall brilliant if some of the dialog felt a little lacking and occasionally eyeroll worthy. Then again, I dunno if that was just king trying to simulate the awkwardness and nervousness inherent in most vows (in my experience, YMMV tho). The literal middle section of the book where they meet and then the plot starts it's descent and the two perspectives start to shift and split against each other was really well done I thought.
I think the people who are focusing purely on the "I don't want to ruin Batman" line are missing a bit that the pivotal scene when the bridesmaid and Alfred talked to catwoman and Batman, respectively, the bit at the end where Catwoman flinches when asked if she was willing to become a hero and Bruce stoically sits nervously is more telling I think of Catwoman's thought process on why she bailed.
The way I see it is that scene more than the literal words speak to the ending scene in great detail. Both characters are forced to confront an internally terrifying change. Bruce fights through his biggest fears and is willing to let himself be happy and thus shows up. Catwoman is unwilling to make that change and the shift in identity it would potentially bring, and thus bails leaving a cop out by essentially telling Batman "it's for your own good" in a Dear John letter. I think Catwoman's ultimate conflict is laid bare by all the art leading up to it. In a lot of it she's portrayed as the humourously literal catburgler that she is, fighting and toying with Bruce along the way, constrasted with the romance sections of being with him on various dates or otherwise romantic scenes.
The contrast ultimately paints the reality of who and what they are to each other, and how those two versions of themselves, catburgler+vigilante and happy couple, are both totally incompatible with each other. Catwoman realizes this and chooses what she has over the potential long term relationship with Bruce not because she's afraid of ruining Batman as she states, but because she fears the potential and probably necessary change in identity that would have to take place for it to work.
The bane stuff at the end was dumb and totally ruined the flow of the narrative for a cheap sell on B#51. Boothisman.gif
That's basically my thoughts on it as someone who's reading it in a vacuum. I've read bits and pieces of King's run but none of it in sustained bursts, but I'm interested in how he will ultimately solve the conundrum of keeping or changing Catwoman's identity in the context of a potential marriage. I know some people have stated the conflict doesn't matter because she can just run off to another city and keep doing her thing, but that to me, and seemingly King as well, screams an even bigger copout than what happened here. It ultimately just kicks the can down the road at best, and at worst just ignores it in favor of weak fanservice.
As far as the twist itself goes I think in order to give the conflict the gravity that's necessary in order for him to later solve it something like this had to happen. That's just me though lol and I can imagine people who have been following the trades the whole time might feel differently.
Speaking of which I find the whole fan reaction an amusingly correlation to Bruce's feelings at the end of the book. Maybe that was the intent all along with the hype: for us the reader to feel exactly the same way at the end of the book as Bruce did.
I give the twist 5 trollface kojimas out of 10 fanboy tears. DC leaving king at the alter shows an immense lack of intestinal fortitude necessary to pull a twist like this off properly. The utterly haphazard backpedaling DC did prior to release cannot be called anything less than an embarrassment to the art form, regardless of your feelings on the book itself. Come the fuck on DC, don't clear something like this and then bail on your creative team. Just completely pathetic on all levels
Janin is a garbage artist. I can't stand him, Deodato and everyone else that uses lifeless traced 3D models.
Just caught up with this and I have no clue what is happening.
Wow Riley Reid sure leads an interesting life.
Woops NY Times got there first.
Wow Riley Reid sure leads an interesting life.
It reminds me of wrestling fans.
If you just read the comments online, you wonder how this thing is still alive when everyone is complaining all the time.
You don't "need" to, but "I like it because I like it because I saw it coming" makes for pretty boring discussion. Thanks for responding anyway, though.
It was like a clip show, except all of the clips were worse than the first time we saw them. All of the cameos were really just "hey neato I know that reference bc I've been reading this" (Kite-Man, Porky's).
The symmetrical approach was better used, and more clearly pointed, in "I Am Bane" than in here.
The letters on the pin-ups was annoying — in "I Am Suicide," the letters not only had more insight into each character (they weren't just waxing poetic on eye colour), but they were also accompanied by SEQUENTIAL ART.
The pin-ups themselves often looked rushed, sloppy, or tossed off.
The Bane twist makes sense only in a "oh, right, so he's taking revenge on Batman's happiness because he stole Bane's happiness (only briefly, since Psycho Pirate is still with him)." It makes very little practical sense, and it's not a great look for Selina OR Bruce that apparently neither of them had true agency in this engagement/not-wedding process, as they were both (TWIST!) being manipulated by Bane.
On its own merits, Batman #50 isn't even really a "comic book," it's barely a story, and as the cap to the King run's first half of stories, it's like whiffing out in tee-ball when the bases are loaded.
There's a speech from Bruce where he describes how as the years went on it became less about the death of his parents and more about making gotham a better place for the Bat Family. Harley and Joker get more fleshed out but the there was definitely more growth from Bruce than we've seen in decades.