PDA

View Full Version : Batman & Robin #1


Ian Ascher
06-04-2009, 10:34 AM
No spoilers....

Just a very cool book with a very cool story.

Not at all like the most recent Grant Morrison Batman.... it's a total 180.

Mic. Gee
06-05-2009, 07:54 AM
His run up to this point, seemed like " I really don't like the modern take on Batman. The guy needs to lighten up and get laid. This street-level stuff may work for you, but it doesn't work for me because I suck at it. I'm innovating by creating a series of " open-ended"stories that go nowhere.[insert drug reference here] Am I not great?"

I'm leaning towards agreeing with you about his work turning a 180 degrees, judging from the previews. I seriously want to hate the guy...for not doing anything substantial for the last few years except lay the foundations for this new series. It also seems like he's trying to one-up Frank Miller

Poor Frank. He's stuck doing movies no one's going to like while alienating himself from comic book fans.

HaphazardJoy
06-05-2009, 09:04 AM
I liked it. The villains, they're a new creation? In any case, they're very Morrison, and perfect to be drawn by Quitely.
This was a good start for sure.

I'm still not sure I entirely get Damian as Robin, I mean, I need more about the character period, but is the prevailing sentiment: "well, he's not going to back down, and at least this way we can keep an eye on him, so let's let him be Robin"?

It will undoubtedly make for some good conflict in the stories, but the reasoning in-story escapes me a little.

Moonrider
06-05-2009, 11:28 AM
Got a chance to read it, and to my surprise it's actually quite enjoyable. It's a very different Batman and Robin, yes, and I know this wont stick for very long. But it's a fresh take on the concept using a pre-existing character mold (Silver Age Batman comes to mind, with the new Batman having a sense of humor) on a modern setting without ever have to put a multiverse/All Star tag on it. I was a bit wary after the mind-boggling Final Crisis, but here I think Morrison is in his top form again.

I think the concept of Damian as Robin is something that may not work very well at the hands of other writers, but he's basically a mini Bruce Wayne and Jason Todd rolled into one. He's Bruce's legacy that Dick feels responsible for, and a kid who is 'better with us than against us'. Right now he's just not lovable enough yet, though his character's snarky comments are good for laughs.

Eugene Selassie
06-05-2009, 11:39 AM
I enjoyed this.
Much more new reader friendly than the rest of his Batman run.

ronin7
06-05-2009, 12:49 PM
Lame; just lame. Just like his JLA run he's poaching elements from the Silver Age, and the Dark Knight movie, and bastardizing the Nolan elements.

I don't see this book attracting new readers at all.

Eugene Selassie
06-05-2009, 01:13 PM
Lame; just lame. Just like his JLA run he's poaching elements from the Silver Age, and the Dark Knight movie, and bastardizing the Nolan elements.

I don't see this book attracting new readers at all.

I think you should just go back to the Marvel boards where you'll be happy.

You seem to troll and spend countless hours looking for reasons to bash DC.

Why don't you go back and get your spoon fed helping of New Avengers, since apparently that book can do no wrong according to you.
:banana:

NickGuy
06-05-2009, 01:16 PM
It also seems like he's trying to one-up Frank Miller
and so far, IMO, hes done a horrible job at it. he tried to "re-invent" the joker and did an awful job. ASBAR is miles better than anything morrison has done with the character.

Moonrider
06-05-2009, 02:49 PM
and so far, IMO, hes done a horrible job at it. he tried to "re-invent" the joker and did an awful job. ASBAR is miles better than anything morrison has done with the character.

Disagreed.

NickGuy
06-05-2009, 03:04 PM
Disagreed.

okay

Eugene Selassie
06-05-2009, 03:27 PM
I've enjoyed Morrison's Batman yarns far above any of the stuff Miller has done in recent years.

Miller used to be one of my favorites.

WTF happened?

ronin7
06-05-2009, 04:13 PM
I've enjoyed Morrison's Batman yarns far above any of the stuff Miller has done in recent years.

Miller used to be one of my favorites.

WTF happened?


The up-front dialogue and captions clearly spell out that ALL-STAR BATMAN AND ROBIN is SATIRE. If you guys would stop looking for Jerry Seinfield situational puns; you would see that Miller is poking fun at the non-comic reading base's perception of the DC Universe. Not to mention the controversies Batman has faced over his entire existence. That's why Miller will always be leagues above Morrison and Moore. He knows that non-comic readers don't give a damn about Grant Morrison and Alan Moore, or what comic fans think.

I mean seriously, do you honestly think he wrote the scene where Batman scolded Alfred for spoiling Dick, and saying that he learned to eat rodents, which he didn't have to thanks to his family's wealth. And if that was good enough for him; its good enough for the boy with a straight face? If you did; then I question how you can be so serious, and not see that as written for comedy effect?

ronin7
06-05-2009, 04:16 PM
I think you should just go back to the Marvel boards where you'll be happy.

You seem to troll and spend countless hours looking for reasons to bash DC.

Why don't you go back and get your spoon fed helping of New Avengers, since apparently that book can do no wrong according to you.
:banana:

You constantly troll the Marvel boards, and slam Bendis; envious much? I only express my grievances, and that is my constitutional and god given right. I don't have to say I enjoy what is being done to the DC Universe when I don't.

Mark Bertolini
06-05-2009, 04:39 PM
Thread locked in 5....4.....3.....

NickGuy
06-05-2009, 04:56 PM
before the lock...


ASBAR ROOLZ.

Eugene Selassie
06-05-2009, 05:52 PM
You constantly troll the Marvel boards, and slam Bendis; envious much? I only express my grievances, and that is my constitutional and god given right. I don't have to say I enjoy what is being done to the DC Universe when I don't.

Um...according to my posts, I gave Bendis 2 compliments this week.

The only trolling around here is you with DC, and Busiek in particular.

I don't understand how you can hate him so much.

Eugene Selassie
06-05-2009, 06:13 PM
But ANYWAY....like I said, this was an interesting read.
Damian is becoming less abrasive as time goes on, but I'm glad his transition isn't happening too quickly.
I'd also like to see more of Dick dealing with his associates now that he has Bruce's responsibilities.

Lovecraft13
06-05-2009, 07:51 PM
I liked the issue, but I bet this particular run would probably rock harder if read all at once in a trade.

Biofungus
06-05-2009, 08:15 PM
But what if this was the only good issue in the entire run?

Lovecraft13
06-05-2009, 08:17 PM
But what if this was the only good issue in the entire run?

Then terrorists win.

Biofungus
06-05-2009, 08:20 PM
So we should send Grant Morrison to what's left of Guantanamo Bay?

Lovecraft13
06-05-2009, 08:33 PM
So we should send Grant Morrison to what's left of Guantanamo Bay?

Nah, he's Scottish. He checks out.

Great Scott
06-05-2009, 11:26 PM
I don't see this book attracting new readers at all.
I haven't read Batman in many years and this book got my attention. Fun story, great art, creepy villains, I will stay on until it starts to suck.

Lovecraft13
06-05-2009, 11:34 PM
Heh... he opened up with Mr. Toad's wild ride. Gotta love the dude's imagination.

Nitecrawlah2
06-06-2009, 03:33 AM
Apart from Detective Comics, this is the only Bat book I plan on picking up. I've always liked Morrison's and Quitely's collaborations. Since I haven't been reading much of the other titles, does this one spoil the identities of B&R yet? I like the Dick and Damien teamup, and it's definitely going to make for some interesting reading.

NickGuy
06-06-2009, 05:46 PM
So we should send Grant Morrison to what's left of Guantanamo Bay?


we should have done that after R.I.P.

Eugene Selassie
06-07-2009, 11:01 AM
I haven't read Batman in many years and this book got my attention. Fun story, great art, creepy villains, I will stay on until it starts to suck.

You're a good man Scott.

ronin7
06-07-2009, 11:26 AM
Um...according to my posts, I gave Bendis 2 compliments this week.

The only trolling around here is you with DC, and Busiek in particular.

I don't understand how you can hate him so much.


Whatever Morrison apologist.

Eugene Selassie
06-08-2009, 11:20 AM
Whatever Morrison apologist.

I spend a good amount of time criticizing Final Crisis. AND R.I.P.

I think you're reaching a bit far Ronin.

Please go back to slobbing Bendis' knob.

Troy Wall
06-08-2009, 01:18 PM
I think Quitely is only onboard for the first three issues.

Eugene Selassie
06-08-2009, 01:25 PM
I think Quitely is only onboard for the first three issues.

Has it been stated who the other artists are?

NickGuy
06-08-2009, 01:57 PM
philip tan is for the second 3 issue arc

Eugene Selassie
06-08-2009, 02:13 PM
Thanks Nick.

Actually like Quitely's stuff and Tan has not let me down with his DC stuff yet.

Nice rotation of artists.

kdmelrose
06-08-2009, 02:28 PM
Frazer Irving is the third. Quitely will stick around for covers, though.

ronin7
06-08-2009, 02:33 PM
I spend a good amount of time praising Final Crisis. AND R.I.P.

I think you're right on the money Ronin.

I will go back to slobbing Morrison's knob.

Thank you, I knew I was right ;)

kdmelrose
06-08-2009, 03:27 PM
All right, enough.

Nitecrawlah2
06-08-2009, 03:31 PM
I think Quitely is only onboard for the first three issues.
Boooourns!

kdmelrose
06-08-2009, 03:36 PM
He's set to return for the final three, though.

Mark Bertolini
06-08-2009, 04:45 PM
All right, enough.


Thank you.

Nick Kerklaan
06-08-2009, 05:23 PM
Loved this issue. I like dark n' gritty Batman as much as the next guy, but there's something about fun Silver Age-ish Baman that's totally awesome and refreshing. I agree with Lovecraft, though - it's so quick and straightforward, it'll probably read way better in trade.

Eugene Selassie
06-08-2009, 05:45 PM
All right, enough.

Thank you for being the voice of reason melrose.

Troy Wall
06-09-2009, 11:46 AM
He's set to return for the final three, though.

Is the series finite? :(

Moonrider
06-09-2009, 12:00 PM
Is the series finite? :(

We all know this won't last long. But then, who knows.

kdmelrose
06-09-2009, 12:31 PM
Is the series finite? :(

Morrison's run is, at least: 12 issues.

Nick Kerklaan
06-10-2009, 02:24 AM
I'm going to assume that the real Batman'll be back by then. A year without Bruce Wayne is probably about all they can go before the gimmick wears it out its welcome, such as it is.

Moonrider
06-11-2009, 06:08 AM
In a promotional page for the series' future stories, there's a panel picturing the current Batman attacked from behind by Batwoman and another Batman rising from what looks like the Lazarus Pit.

ronin7
06-11-2009, 09:42 AM
In a promotional page for the series' future stories, there's a panel picturing the current Batman attacked from behind by Batwoman and another Batman rising from what looks like the Lazarus Pit.

As long as it isn't Ra's Al Ghoul in Batman's costume. I'll be happy. Though if Dick gets killed, or otherwise humiliated for Bruce's return. I would be less happy.

Eugene Selassie
06-12-2009, 11:04 AM
As long as it isn't Ra's Al Ghoul in Batman's costume. I'll be happy. Though if Dick gets killed, or otherwise humiliated for Bruce's return. I would be less happy.

Completely agree. Last few years have seen MANY writers make Dick Grayson look less than inept.

Peter Tomasi corrected this very quickly in Nightwing...I hope he goes back to that book when all of Reborn stuff is over.

Moonrider
06-12-2009, 10:52 PM
I'm more excited about the new look Red Hood and his new sidekick.

Mark Bertolini
06-16-2009, 10:02 AM
Just picked this up. Excellent issue. The interaction between Dick and Alfred was probably the best part. You can tell this is a Dick Grayson that's not completely comfortable with the role he's moved into.

And Damian as Robin is genius. Can't wait to see where it goes from here.

Paul Sanderson
06-16-2009, 10:03 PM
I've heard good things about this book, so I'll definitely be getting my hands on #1 very soon now (even though I'm not a huge Quitely fan--if only Neal Adams were doing this or Marshall Rogers were still alive *sigh*). I actually don't mind Dick as Batman and Damian as Robin. It seems the natural progression of things, so I'm fine with it. Let's face it, though...Bruce will be back as Batman and probably fairly soon in the scheme of things.

Mark Bertolini
06-24-2009, 06:07 PM
I've heard good things about this book, so I'll definitely be getting my hands on #1 very soon now (even though I'm not a huge Quitely fan--if only Neal Adams were doing this or Marshall Rogers were still alive *sigh*). I actually don't mind Dick as Batman and Damian as Robin. It seems the natural progression of things, so I'm fine with it. Let's face it, though...Bruce will be back as Batman and probably fairly soon in the scheme of things.


I picked up the hardcover of Final Crisis, and right at the end it showed Anthro dying (of old age I think), and shows (what is meant to be) Bruce Wayne lay his utility belt on the old guy's body, and start drawing a little bat-symbol on the wall of the cave. I mean, he's still wearing his damn tights.

Darkseid "killed" Bruce with the Omega Effect, which, as per Wikipedia, is a form of energy that he (Darkseid) fires from his eyes as either concussive force or beams of disintegration, capable of transmuting or erasing most objects and organisms from existence as well as to reform or resurrect them.

Yeah, Bruce will be back soon.

WilliamStormeSmith
06-26-2009, 10:34 AM
It was awonderful first issue! Simple and exciting really set up almost a movie type story while still utilizing the stuff comics do well.

Wow! Looks like Morrison has done a great job again.

NickGuy
06-26-2009, 04:21 PM
really? idk...it was alright, but it didnt blow me away. Maybe its my dislike for morrison on batman. I wish the colorist from ASSM was on this one, sinclair seems to be mimicking DK2 with the effects.

it was decent. nothing to really hate on, nothing to get all worked up over.

ronin7
06-26-2009, 05:45 PM
I think the whole problem with Morrison on Batman is that Batman is a crime fighter, and urban avenger. Sure, he fights Man-Bats, vampires, etc; some times. But, he's mostly about cracking down on organized crime in Gotham, and keeping whack jobs like Joker, and company in check. He doesn't fly into outer space and deal with Martians, etc. That's more Superman's shtick.

kdmelrose
06-26-2009, 09:09 PM
He doesn't fly into outer space and deal with Martians, etc. That's more Superman's shtick.

Sure he does. Morrison has even addressed this in the past: There are (at least) two sides of Batman: the guy who cracks skulls in dark alleys, and the guy who, alongside his teammates in the Justice League, fights alien menaces, travels to other dimensions, visits Atlantis, etc.

(You could argue there's a third Batman between somewhere between those two -- the one who wants/needs a "family" of crimefighters in the form of Robin, Nightwing, Batgirl, et al).

Moonrider
06-26-2009, 09:35 PM
I think Batman over the years have become more and more wrapped in 'chucknorrism' as I would call it. It's like everything he does is badass and over exaggerated as the most overpowered non-powered superhero ever. I wouldn't be surprised if DC suddenly say that Jesus is Bruce's direct descendants! The thing about having Dick as Batman is, we finally get a Batman who is more down to earth and pretty much sane. Dick had more space adventures than Bruce, being a team leader longer than him, but he's still modestly human. That makes him the perfect character to replace Bruce while he's gone.

Oh yes I'm sure Bruce will be back very soon, he cheated death many times. The man's a cockroach, not a bat.

KHudd
06-26-2009, 09:41 PM
I didn't think the issue was anything special, but a step up from R.I.P. I don't think Dick should be batman because of his history as robin. I still don't see whats special about Grant but I liked the issue. Won't get the next issue.

ronin7
06-28-2009, 12:02 PM
Sure he does. Morrison has even addressed this in the past: There are (at least) two sides of Batman: the guy who cracks skulls in dark alleys, and the guy who, alongside his teammates in the Justice League, fights alien menaces, travels to other dimensions, visits Atlantis, etc.

(You could argue there's a third Batman between somewhere between those two -- the one who wants/needs a "family" of crimefighters in the form of Robin, Nightwing, Batgirl, et al).


What does his role in JLA have to do with how he's written in his own book?

The only reason he's even on the Justice League is because of his brilliant deductive reasoning, and strategic mind, which are assets to the team. Just like Captain America' strategic mind, and combat and leadership experience is an asset to the Avengers.

In Gotham, he's not going to encounter aliens, dimension hopping ghosts, and crap like that. He's an urban avenger, and crime fighter. Of course, Morrison isn't Denny O'Neil, or Frank Miller, so since he can't write crime based stores; he's going to instead write the Batman comic as a knock off of the goofball Adam West show.

kdmelrose
06-28-2009, 01:03 PM
What does his role in JLA have to do with how he's written in his own book?

A lot, considering it demonstrates there are many facets to the character.

In Gotham, he's not going to encounter aliens, dimension hopping ghosts, and crap like that. He's an urban avenger, and crime fighter.

Even if we ignore his pre-O'Neal/Adams days, Batman routinely fights sci-fi figures like Clayface, Killer Croc, Man-Bat, Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy. If he can battle vampires and a centuries-old assassin in his own titles, why do you consider it such an outlandish leap for him to grapple with ghosts, aliens "and crap like that"?

The only reason he's even on the Justice League is because of his brilliant deductive reasoning, and strategic mind, which are assets to the team.

The only reason he's on the Justice League is because in 1960, when the team debuted, he was one of DC's most recognizable characters. There are plenty of superheroes who can fulfill (and have fulfilled) the role of the team's detective and/or strategist -- Martian Manhunter, Hawkman, Elongated Man, etc. -- but few sell comics like Batman does.

Of course, Morrison isn't Denny O'Neil, or Frank Miller, so since he can't write crime based stores; he's going to instead write the Batman comic as a knock off of the goofball Adam West show.

Sure, he can write crime-based stories and mysteries.

Moonrider
06-28-2009, 01:20 PM
Sure, he can write crime-based stories and mysteries.

Yep, ronin7 should read the first appearance of the Black Hand back in the Club of Heroes storyline. It's all about crime and mysteries. All written by Morrison.

Morrison has also addressed the paranormals and other weird stuff Batman encountered early in Batman RIP. He kept notes on the unexplained cases in his casebook.

ronin7
06-28-2009, 02:13 PM
I read Morrison's entire Bat-crap run. Including Gothic. He can't write crime based stories to save his miserable drug induced career. The only story that was decent was Batman and Son. The rest were NOT crime based at all. If you think something as horrible as the League of Heroes story is proof he can do crime based comics. You need your head examined. Because the bad guy in the story; Wingman who died at the end of it, showed up again in Batman R.I.P. as if nothing happened. And in the COH, he said the COV didn't exist; that John Mayhew, and Wingman created them, as some stupid cover for their murders of the fellow COH members.

Nothing about the story, or his run made sense, nothing about it was crime oriented. It was just Grant Morrison frothing at the mouth in his preputial state of absolute madness.

robbdaman
06-28-2009, 04:06 PM
That has less to do with writing crime drama and a lot more with Morrison writing convoluted crappola that only works inside his head. Writing mysteries isn't that hard, everything that can be done has been done, a writer is just borrowing ideas.

Mark Bertolini
06-28-2009, 05:46 PM
I read Morrison's entire Bat-crap run. Including Gothic. He can't write crime based stories to save his miserable drug induced career. The only story that was decent was Batman and Son. The rest were NOT crime based at all. If you think something as horrible as the League of Heroes story is proof he can do crime based comics. You need your head examined. Because the bad guy in the story; Wingman who died at the end of it, showed up again in Batman R.I.P. as if nothing happened. And in the COH, he said the COV didn't exist; that John Mayhew, and Wingman created them, as some stupid cover for their murders of the fellow COH members.

Nothing about the story, or his run made sense, nothing about it was crime oriented. It was just Grant Morrison frothing at the mouth in his preputial state of absolute madness.


If it was that bad, why'd you read the whole run?

And whoever said that all of Batman's stories had to be crime stories? That's not going to happen. Not every writer is a crime writer. Sure, Batman works really well when written as a crime title, but that doesn't mean you can't use the character in other styles of storytelling. Look at Miller's Dark Knight, which is considered the greatest Batman story ever. That's a sci-fi story starring Batman, plain and simple. Morrison's Bat-run has been excellent, because it's not the same stories re-hashed over and over.

Eugene Selassie
06-28-2009, 06:17 PM
If it was that bad, why'd you read the whole run?

And whoever said that all of Batman's stories had to be crime stories? That's not going to happen. Not every writer is a crime writer. Sure, Batman works really well when written as a crime title, but that doesn't mean you can't use the character in other styles of storytelling. Look at Miller's Dark Knight, which is considered the greatest Batman story ever. That's a sci-fi story starring Batman, plain and simple. Morrison's Bat-run has been excellent, because it's not the same stories re-hashed over and over.

I have to agree.
HOW MANY TIMES do we have to see Bats roughing up pimps, drug dealers, etc...

I'm all for new types of stories as long as the lead character still acts as the lead character would in that scenario.

ronin7
06-28-2009, 07:01 PM
If it was that bad, why'd you read the whole run?

And whoever said that all of Batman's stories had to be crime stories? That's not going to happen. Not every writer is a crime writer. Sure, Batman works really well when written as a crime title, but that doesn't mean you can't use the character in other styles of storytelling. Look at Miller's Dark Knight, which is considered the greatest Batman story ever. That's a sci-fi story starring Batman, plain and simple. Morrison's Bat-run has been excellent, because it's not the same stories re-hashed over and over.

Dark Knight Returns was a political story with crime drama under tones. And Morrison's Batman hasn't even been acting in character to be considered to be a Batman run.

You've had Batman open the bat cave wide open to a complete stranger named Jezebel Jet (Meaning super tramp in Morrisonese), he babbled incoherently about the leader of the Black Glove being his doppelganger/ actor that he hired to stand in for him, and acted like a complete imbecile through out the entire run. Not to mention the vague clues that somehow the devil was involved in Batman's demise.

All of it rubbish. Sure, not every writer can write crime drama stories. I don't expect them to. I just expect them to write good BATMAN stories instead of dorkish stories where Batman acts like a weirdo who babbles incoherently.

Thankfully, though; Morrison won't be on Batman forever, and since he's getting older he'll fade back into the obscurity he came from.

Moonrider
06-28-2009, 08:42 PM
What exactly is Batman's character, if I may ask? A grim dark avenger devoid of a sense of humor? A fun loving crimefighter with a deductive mind who punch bad guys while smiling? A depressed man, trying to lash out to the world for the death of his parents? An otherwise normal guy who happens to be a high level genius dedicating his life as a cape wearing detective? A cranky old fascist thinking he's the best solution for a world gone mad? A Cossack killing, bitch-spanking, pulp hero with a gun? We're talking about a fictitious person shaped by many writers and artists for many decades. Batman has never been 'in character' since Bob Kane. In my own opinion, Dark Knight Returns is the crappiest Batman characterization to date, but we all like what we like. Morrison, at least, gave us something different by combining several of his previous personas and explain them psychologically. That don't sit well with you, fine. Other writers will surely come replace him, pick up his/her favourite Batman stories, and write some mediocre stories based on that. Hopefully, it will be the Batman you think is 'in character'.

Mark Bertolini
06-28-2009, 08:52 PM
Thankfully, though; Morrison won't be on Batman forever, and since he's getting older he'll fade back into the obscurity he came from.


Obscurity? The man's been writing comics, professionally, for a good 20 years. What obscurity are you referring to?

And again, if you were so disappointed in his writing, why would you keep buying/reading it? That kind of guarantees he gets to keep writing Batman, when the reading public pays for and reads his work.

Just saying.

hellblazer72
06-28-2009, 10:18 PM
if you don't like morrison's writing the quit buying his books, it's that simple. now if you don't like them and keep buying them, then you're just looking for something to bitch about.

Mike225
06-28-2009, 10:42 PM
Obscurity? The man's been writing comics, professionally, for a good 20 years. What obscurity are you referring to?

And again, if you were so disappointed in his writing, why would you keep buying/reading it? That kind of guarantees he gets to keep writing Batman, when the reading public pays for and reads his work.

Just saying.He's talking about before 1986, I think.

Ronin, do you know any writers that have been popular since birth? Cause not coming from obscurity would be a hell of a trick.

Paul Sanderson
06-28-2009, 10:52 PM
It's just a manner of speech, people :rolleyes:

Mike225
06-28-2009, 10:54 PM
It was used as an insult and it's fucking retarded to do so.

Lovecraft13
06-29-2009, 01:44 AM
And the wheels on the bus go round and round.

Paul Sanderson
06-29-2009, 02:57 AM
It was used as an insult and it's fucking retarded to do so.

Calm down, will you. He's allowed to dislike Morrison's work if he wants to. There's no need for that sort of BS from you!

KHudd
06-29-2009, 03:54 AM
I read Morrison's entire Bat-crap run. Including Gothic. He can't write crime based stories to save his miserable drug induced career. The only story that was decent was Batman and Son. The rest were NOT crime based at all. If you think something as horrible as the League of Heroes story is proof he can do crime based comics. You need your head examined. Because the bad guy in the story; Wingman who died at the end of it, showed up again in Batman R.I.P. as if nothing happened. And in the COH, he said the COV didn't exist; that John Mayhew, and Wingman created them, as some stupid cover for their murders of the fellow COH members.

Nothing about the story, or his run made sense, nothing about it was crime oriented. It was just Grant Morrison frothing at the mouth in his preputial state of absolute madness.

YEAH!!!!!!!! You tell em! I feel some animosity :whistlin:

I just wanted to ad my 2 cents, I think Morrison run was bad after reading it several times but I thought it was going to get better. When he was drugged I was kind of mad. I also was mad when I was picking up the vibe alfred was batman's father and Thomas Wayne was black glove. I still picked up the issue because it had R.I.P on it. If you did not pick up the run and batman would have been murdered you would feel pretty dumb. That would have been all over the news.

Mike225
06-29-2009, 05:39 AM
Calm down, will you. He's allowed to dislike Morrison's work if he wants to. There's no need for that sort of BS from you!Please refer me to where I said he couldn't have an opinion of his own. I just said that all writers come from obscurity. "BS," indeed!

Buckyrig
06-29-2009, 10:35 AM
"Indeed"?

Geez Mike, when did you start wearing an ascot? :laugh:

Mark Bertolini
06-29-2009, 10:54 AM
"Indeed"?

Geez Mike, when did you start wearing an ascot? :laugh:


Little known fact: Ascots are hardcore.

Eugene Selassie
06-29-2009, 11:45 AM
I can understand some not liking Morrison's work.
But I can't understand the utter hatred some people have. I've never seen him act like a jerk or anything.
It's not like he's writing half the company's books and you have to deal with him everywhere.

ronin7
06-29-2009, 12:29 PM
I can understand some not liking Morrison's work.
But I can't understand the utter hatred some people have. I've never seen him act like a jerk or anything.
It's not like he's writing half the company's books and you have to deal with him everywhere.


Ahem, he said fuck it when the Authority fans didn't like what he was doing, and left the book causing a major snafu in Wildstorm's relaunch. That doesn't read like major jerk to you?

The guy has always been a primadonna, and has always said he doesn't give two shits about characters. That he's all about ideas, and most of his ideas are mind numbingly bad.

And Mike225; Morrison got his start in the UK during the seventies when he was only a teenager. That's what I meant about obscurity because no one here in America had ever heard of him. But in the UK they considered him a genius for Zenith (Xenith?).

kdmelrose
06-29-2009, 12:42 PM
Ahem, he said fuck it when the Authority fans didn't like what he was doing, and left the book causing a major snafu in Wildstorm's relaunch. That doesn't read like major jerk to you?

You leave out a lot in your Wikipedia recap.

If you look at events surrounding the relaunch, and that his "fuck it" comment came two years after the fact and was cheekily delivered at a convention panel, then that most certainly doesn't read like a "major jerk" to me.

NickGuy
06-29-2009, 12:45 PM
morrison doesnt like frank miller, so thats why i dont like him

kdmelrose
06-29-2009, 12:49 PM
At least it's not something silly then ...

Eugene Selassie
06-29-2009, 01:20 PM
morrison doesnt like frank miller, so thats why i dont like him

Which Frank Miller?

Pre or Post DK2?

Lovecraft13
06-29-2009, 01:45 PM
Calm down, will you. He's allowed to dislike Morrison's work if he wants to.

Well put... for the man who poos on everything.

NickGuy
06-29-2009, 02:29 PM
Which Frank Miller?

Pre or Post DK2?


frank millers been the same frank miller as always, he jst stopped being subtle about it with 300

ronin7
06-29-2009, 06:54 PM
You leave out a lot in your Wikipedia recap.

If you look at events surrounding the relaunch, and that his "fuck it" comment came two years after the fact and was cheekily delivered at a convention panel, then that most certainly doesn't read like a "major jerk" to me.


Wikipedia? I'm quoting the actual interview that was transcribed online during that convention. He caused numerous delays on both Wildcats, and Authority because; suddenly, he thinks his chaotic writing can be adapted into feature films. But, obviously that is not turning out well.

Look, like him all you want; I've read better Batman stories from the likes of Denny O'Neil, Steve Englehart, Frank Miller, Marv Wolfman, Chuck Dixon, Mike W. Barr, Ed Brubaker, and Paul Pope.

kdmelrose
06-29-2009, 07:14 PM
I've read better Batman stories from the likes of Denny O'Neil, Steve Englehart, Frank Miller, Marv Wolfman, Chuck Dixon, Mike W. Barr, Ed Brubaker, and Paul Pope.

You can play the "I've read better" game with most any creator or book.

Beyond that, though, I don't recall anyone in this thread claiming that Morrison writes the best Batman ever. Some people enjoy his work on the character; you, as you've made repeatedly clear, don't.

Eugene Selassie
06-29-2009, 07:14 PM
Wikipedia? I'm quoting the actual interview that was transcribed online during that convention. He caused numerous delays on both Wildcats, and Authority because; suddenly, he thinks his chaotic writing can be adapted into feature films. But, obviously that is not turning out well.

Look, like him all you want; I've read better Batman stories from the likes of Denny O'Neil, Steve Englehart, Frank Miller, Marv Wolfman, Chuck Dixon, Mike W. Barr, Ed Brubaker, and Paul Pope.

No offense, but really?
You think Mike W. Barr writes better Batman than Grant Morrison?

Lovecraft13
06-29-2009, 08:02 PM
Morrison writes the best Batman ever.

kdmelrose
06-29-2009, 08:11 PM
Shut up, you.

KHudd
06-29-2009, 08:13 PM
Morrison writes the best Batman ever.
I think Miller writes him the best. He has the best two batman stories.

NickGuy
06-29-2009, 08:21 PM
Morrison writes the best Batman ever.


http://fonzation.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/nope.jpg

http://www.cssplay.co.uk/menu/fail.gif

NickGuy
06-29-2009, 08:23 PM
I think Miller writes him the best. He has the best two batman stories.


http://oneyearbibleimages.com/amen.jpg

Paul Sanderson
06-29-2009, 08:26 PM
Miller wrote the best Batman in Batman: Year One IMO, but his recent Batman work has been pitiful at best. Morrison has written some fine stories and some lesser stories, too. Most writers fall into that category. Alan Moore wrote a great Batman in The Killing Joke, Denny O'Neil used to write some fine Batman stories as did Steve Englehart. I like Paul Dini's Batman work also. I could list many a fine Batman writer who has contributed at least some good stories as well as probably some lesser stuff.

Lovecraft13
06-29-2009, 08:30 PM
It's not that some of you guys don't have taste, it's just that you guys tend to favor on the side of suck and defend it feverishly.

For example, "DK2 is the greatest Batman story EVAR! because Frank Miller wrote it!! OMGzz!11".

"Why?"

"Why? Because Frank Miller wrote it, jackass!"

One can't argue over taste, but two can argue over stupid comments. And that goes for you, and you, and you, and you...

NickGuy
06-29-2009, 08:54 PM
i actually could give a lengthy explanation as to why DK2 rocks...personally i love Miller's mockery of both the internet and fanboys in it for one.

Mike225
06-29-2009, 09:01 PM
Morrison has written some fine stories and some lesser stories, too.Which stories by Morrison do you consider to be his finest? Also, what are his lesser stories?

Buckyrig
06-30-2009, 12:51 AM
Grant Morrison are many sandwiches. I don't understand all the friction here. Frank Miller did books and now he has a hat. But if we're really being honest, Batman writes better Alan Moore stories than many hats and a Monte Cristo.

KHudd
06-30-2009, 01:51 AM
http://oneyearbibleimages.com/amen.jpg
funniest thing i've seen on the internet.

I didn't like dk2 because it was a ok at best sequel to the greatest batman story. If it wasn't a sequel it would have been a book you should read.

When is miller's next batman book coming?

Paul Sanderson
06-30-2009, 06:03 AM
Which stories by Morrison do you consider to be his finest? Also, what are his lesser stories?

Morrison's run on JLA was superb and some of his recent Batman stuff (pre-RIP) was fine. His Animal Man run was excellent, too. I can't stand his Arkham Asylum or Doom Patrol work and some of his other recent stuff on Batman has been a little mediocre. I didn't like his first storyline on Legends of the Dark Knight either (the title of which currently escapes me). I'm not a huge fan of All-Star Superman for that matter either, but I've never been a fan of the All-Star concept more than anything else.

Moonrider
06-30-2009, 08:30 AM
This is the 101st reply.

Mark Bertolini
06-30-2009, 09:42 AM
funniest thing i've seen on the internet.

I didn't like dk2 because it was a ok at best sequel to the greatest batman story. If it wasn't a sequel it would have been a book you should read.

When is miller's next batman book coming?



Spring 2010.

ronin7
06-30-2009, 12:17 PM
No offense, but really?
You think Mike W. Barr writes better Batman than Grant Morrison?


Jim Starlin also writes a better Batman than Grant Morrison. And his two stories are universially controversial; if not out right hated.

Eugene Selassie
06-30-2009, 12:44 PM
Jim Starlin also writes a better Batman than Grant Morrison. And his two stories are universially controversial; if not out right hated.

I know you hate Morrison, but I think you're stretching it.

Even writers I LOATHE, I can easily admit when they've done phenomenal work.

Grant's work is not that bad.

L Jamal
06-30-2009, 12:49 PM
I'm not a huge fan of All-Star Superman for that matter either, but I've never been a fan of the All-Star concept more than anything else.
Have you read All Star SUperman? I'm not a fan of Superman in general, but All Star Superman is easily one of the best Superman stories of the last 10 years.

Quitely and Morrison on Batman has started off weel enough for me to add it to my TPB list which is amazing since very little DC universe stuff ever makes it to my TPB list.

Lovecraft13
06-30-2009, 01:36 PM
I'm not a huge fan of All-Star Superman for that matter either

:laugh:

For now on, every time you post an opinion about something you think sucks, I'm just gonna do a drum shot. That comment easily shows me how lost you are.

Eugene Selassie
06-30-2009, 01:53 PM
Have you read All Star SUperman? I'm not a fan of Superman in general, but All Star Superman is easily one of the best Superman stories of the last 10 years.

Quitely and Morrison on Batman has started off weel enough for me to add it to my TPB list which is amazing since very little DC universe stuff ever makes it to my TPB list.

Just curious...why no DC?

Eugene Selassie
06-30-2009, 01:57 PM
:laugh:

For now on, every time you post an opinion about something you think sucks, I'm just gonna do a drum shot. That comment easily shows me how lost you are.

:har:

Eugene Selassie
06-30-2009, 01:58 PM
Oh, and I am a Superman fan...and I wish Grant and Geoff were writing the two Superman books.

Action and All Star have been the best Clark has been handled in well over a decade.

Buckyrig
06-30-2009, 02:01 PM
Just curious...why no DC?

Because Julius Schwartz stole his GI Joes.


That's really a weird question though.

WilliamStormeSmith
06-30-2009, 02:11 PM
I'll never hold anyone's personal taste against them. I'm a huge Grant fan. His writing and works are not only wonderful and complicated reads. They also have a great deal to teach aspiring writers. I despise Grisham, Stephen king, and Toni Morrison but still read and learn from them. Morrison to me is a very important writer, he speaks to us who enjoy non-linear drugged out psychedelic comics, plus he can write great action and some strong mystery. His Batman Black Glove run had me asking questions i didn't want to ask, things i wasn't used to, but the misdirection was strong and the mystery stronger.

The Invisibles
We3
Animal Man
SeaGuy
Doom Patrol
Azteck w/ Millar
Batman - where he is my favorite Batman writer of the last 25 years,
Arkham Asylum
New Adventures of Hitler
Legends of the Dark Knight
Big Dave w/ Millar
DC One Milliion
JLA
Marvel boy
the filth - my all time favorite mini
Flex Mentallo

He's done some awesome stuff!

Mark Bertolini
06-30-2009, 02:40 PM
I'll never hold anyone's personal taste against them. I'm a huge Grant fan. His writing and works are not only wonderful and complicated reads. They also have a great deal to teach aspiring writers. I despise Grisham, Stephen king, and Toni Morrison but still read and learn from them. Morrison to me is a very important writer, he speaks to us who enjoy non-linear drugged out psychedelic comics, plus he can write great action and some strong mystery. His Batman Black Glove run had me asking questions i didn't want to ask, things i wasn't used to, but the misdirection was strong and the mystery stronger.

The Invisibles
We3
Animal Man
SeaGuy
Doom Patrol
Azteck w/ Millar
Batman - where he is my favorite Batman writer of the last 25 years,
Arkham Asylum
New Adventures of Hitler
Legends of the Dark Knight
Big Dave w/ Millar
DC One Milliion
JLA
Marvel boy
the filth - my all time favorite mini
Flex Mentallo

He's done some awesome stuff!


I fully, whole-heartedly agree. The Invisibles, the Filth, and Flex Mentallo are lightyears beyond the work anyone else is doing. This is stuff that will be re-examined 10 years from now and then everyone will realize how far ahead of the curve Morrison was.

robbdaman
06-30-2009, 02:58 PM
Personally most of Morrison's work has never been that exciting to me, I think he's second rate behind Moore who really led the way for him. Likely it's because I don't read his work with rose colored glasses unlike a fan of his work who would drool at the thought of just reading his stuff. Moore was light years ahead of Morrison before Morrison was even writing comics. I will say that I think Morrison's creator owned projects are better than anything he does for DC or Marvel though. His X-Men was atrocious, he had replaced Wolverine's personality with that of a salty talking sailor.

ronin7
06-30-2009, 03:47 PM
I fully, whole-heartedly agree. The Invisibles, the Filth, and Flex Mentallo are lightyears beyond the work anyone else is doing. This is stuff that will be re-examined 10 years from now and then everyone will realize how far ahead of the curve Morrison was.

The only curve that Morrison is ahead of is the one that leads to the sanitorium.

Eugene Selassie
06-30-2009, 03:48 PM
Personally most of Morrison's work has never been that exciting to me, I think he's second rate behind Moore who really led the way for him. Likely it's because I don't read his work with rose colored glasses unlike a fan of his work who would drool at the thought of just reading his stuff. Moore was light years ahead of Morrison before Morrison was even writing comics. I will say that I think Morrison's creator owned projects are better than anything he does for DC or Marvel though. His X-Men was atrocious, he had replaced Wolverine's personality with that of a salty talking sailor.

I'd say that he brought the REAL Wolverine back and the wussy crybaby punk ass Uncle Logan that had been shown in the X-books all through the 90's was jettisoned.

L Jamal
06-30-2009, 03:52 PM
Just curious...why no DC?
I find most DC Universe books really boring. The characters are overly powerful and have few flaws or weaknesses. Honestlly, I read very little from the Big Two in general, but I do occasionally look at Marvel and see books that I must read, not so for DC's main universe. Vertigo and Wildstorm often have books that pique my interest.

ronin7
06-30-2009, 03:52 PM
Oh, and I am a Superman fan...and I wish Grant and Geoff were writing the two Superman books.

Action and All Star have been the best Clark has been handled in well over a decade.


Yes, because we need an effeminate, limp wristed Clark who constantly gets ridiculed, and acts more, and more out of character than the real Clark Kent who was presented BEFORE the panty waist Clark was introduced.

Grant Morrison wrote a horrible Superman, and completely ignored the core of the character just so he could write him like he was portrayed in the Silver Age; a wimp, loser, and geek.

L Jamal
06-30-2009, 03:58 PM
Grant Morrison wrote a horrible Superman, and completely ignored the core of the character just so he could write him like he was portrayed in the Silver Age; a wimp, loser, and geek.

You do realize that the entire point was to do an homage to the classic Silver Age Superman.... right? So essentially, your complaint is that Morrison did exactly what he set out to do.... write a Silver Age Superman story.

NickGuy
06-30-2009, 04:00 PM
I didn't like dk2 because it was a ok at best sequel to the greatest batman story. If it wasn't a sequel it would have been a book you should read.



IMO, DK2 is just like DKR...its completely relevant to its time and era. the art is a reflection of its time too..DKR was the "ugly art" of the 80's, and DK2 is garishly computer colored. they both break the trappings of the current batman. miller set up an iconoclast with DKR and then breaks it in DK2.


and i thought the invisibles was hella confusing=\ maybe ill go back and read it someday.

the only thing i enjoyed of morrisons was all star supes.

ronin7
06-30-2009, 04:00 PM
I'd say that he brought the REAL Wolverine back and the wussy crybaby punk ass Uncle Logan that had been shown in the X-books all through the 90's was jettisoned.

Did you even read Wolverine's original appearances since Lein, Claremont, and Cockrum brought him to the fore in Giant Sized X-Men #1? Because what Morrison wrote was nothing like the character Chris Claremont with co-plotters John Byrne, Frank Miller, and Al Milgrom portrayed in Uncanny X-Men, Wolverine mini series, and Kitty Pryde and Wolverine. Nor was it in line with what Chris Claremont, Peter David, Larry Hama, and others portrayed in in his self titled solo series in the 80's and early 90's.

Hell, it didn't even match Barry Windsor Smith's portrayal either in Weapon-X. I don't know who the hell Morrison was basing his Logan on, but it wasn't the real Logan.

ronin7
06-30-2009, 04:03 PM
You do realize that the entire point was to do an homage to the classic Silver Age Superman.... right? So essentially, your complaint is that Morrison did exactly what he set out to do.... write a Silver Age Superman story.

Yes, I do realize that. The Silver Age Superman was a geek; a loser; a nothing. Let the real Superman stand up. Not this spineless piece of garbage.

hellblazer72
06-30-2009, 04:06 PM
Yes, because we need an effeminate, limp wristed Clark who constantly gets ridiculed, and acts more, and more out of character than the real Clark Kent who was presented BEFORE the panty waist Clark was introduced.

Grant Morrison wrote a horrible Superman, and completely ignored the core of the character just so he could write him like he was portrayed in the Silver Age; a wimp, loser, and geek.


actually morrison's clark was alot like clark in the first superman movies. and it makes sense for him to act the complete opposite of superman. now what doesn't make sense is writers who write him exactly like superman but with glasses. i thought it was rather nice that a writer actually went back and made clark the way he was supposed to be, which is superman's disguise. it's becoming apparent that you rather characters that are a parody of what they used to be.

hellblazer72
06-30-2009, 04:16 PM
Did you even read Wolverine's original appearances since Lein, Claremont, and Cockrum brought him to the fore in Giant Sized X-Men #1? Because what Morrison wrote was nothing like the character Chris Claremont with co-plotters John Byrne, Frank Miller, and Al Milgrom portrayed in Uncanny X-Men, Wolverine mini series, and Kitty Pryde and Wolverine. Nor was it in line with what Chris Claremont, Peter David, Larry Hama, and others portrayed in in his self titled solo series in the 80's and early 90's.

Hell, it didn't even match Barry Windsor Smith's portrayal either in Weapon-X. I don't know who the hell Morrison was basing his Logan on, but it wasn't the real Logan.

i don't believe you read those stories, because the way wolverine was portrayed in the 80's was exactly how wolverine was portrayed in morrison's run. claremont's wolverine was someone who was approachable and had a sense of humor, and that was what morrison did to him. it wasn't until the late 90's we got a character that was the best at what he does and the only thing he had in common with the wolverine from the 80's was he still said bub. as for weapon x, wolverine didn't say anything throughout and the captions didn't do anything to define the character.

robbdaman
06-30-2009, 04:16 PM
Yeah, what ronin7 said. Morrison has a habit of complete ignoring the personalities and backgrounds of a character and doing his own thing even if it makes little sense in light of continuity. Devolving a character back to what it was 10 or 15 years ago with no reason or explanation. I will say he made Cyclops more interesting but considering he was the most boring character ever before he wrote his version it didn't take much effort.

hellblazer72
06-30-2009, 04:20 PM
Yes, I do realize that. The Silver Age Superman was a geek; a loser; a nothing. Let the real Superman stand up. Not this spineless piece of garbage.


i thought you were complaining about clark in the silver age, now you've jumped to superman. morrison's superman was anything but a spineless piece of garbage. i think you should read books that came out before the 90's to see how characters should be, because alot of writers were coming from that need to make these characters like millers dark knight. all miller's dark knight did was make writers try to make everyone badass and one dimensional.

hellblazer72
06-30-2009, 04:26 PM
Yeah, what ronin7 said. Morrison has a habit of complete ignoring the personalities and backgrounds of a character and doing his own thing even if it makes little sense in light of continuity. Devolving a character back to what it was 10 or 15 years ago with no reason or explanation. I will say he made Cyclops more interesting but considering he was the most boring character ever before he wrote his version it didn't take much effort.

morrison has a habit of stripping away all the crap that has accumalated on a character through years of bad writing. every superhero book he's worked on he's taken characters back to roots. doompatrol he took them from a justice league type superhero book and went back to the bizarre misfits that arnold drake envisioned them to be. x-men he went back to when xavier built a school for mutants, because origanally that's how xavier formed the team by telling them he was building a school for mutants. superman he went back to a time when superman's stories were more science fiction based. justice league he went back and brought in the big seven like when the league debuted.

Mark Bertolini
06-30-2009, 04:41 PM
Moore was light years ahead of Morrison before Morrison was even writing comics.


Well, that kind of goes without saying, right?

Based on that theory, Stan Lee is a better writer than Alan Moore, because Lee was light years ahead of Moore before Moore was even writing comics.

Just saying. (And no, I really don't think Stan Lee is a better writer than Alan Moore. Better pitch-man, yes.)

robbdaman
06-30-2009, 04:57 PM
morrison has a habit of stripping away all the crap that has accumalated on a character through years of bad writing. every superhero book he's worked on he's taken characters back to roots. doompatrol he took them from a justice league type superhero book and went back to the bizarre misfits that arnold drake envisioned them to be. x-men he went back to when xavier built a school for mutants, because origanally that's how xavier formed the team by telling them he was building a school for mutants. superman he went back to a time when superman's stories were more science fiction based. justice league he went back and brought in the big seven like when the league debuted.


Let me guess, you're a fan of Brand New Day? Ignoring a decade or two of continuity and writing a character as it was back then is not good writing IMO. I get that you're a fan and enjoy the way he does things but I feel he isn't forced to do things that mesh well with the rest of what other writers have done whether it was bad writing or not, ignoring years of stories is lame.

robbdaman
06-30-2009, 04:59 PM
Well, that kind of goes without saying, right?

Based on that theory, Stan Lee is a better writer than Alan Moore, because Lee was light years ahead of Moore before Moore was even writing comics.

Just saying. (And no, I really don't think Stan Lee is a better writer than Alan Moore. Better pitch-man, yes.)

I'm saying Moore was doing what Morrison has been long before Morrison came around. Nothing Morrison did was that revolutionary.

hellblazer72
06-30-2009, 05:37 PM
Let me guess, you're a fan of Brand New Day? Ignoring a decade or two of continuity and writing a character as it was back then is not good writing IMO. I get that you're a fan and enjoy the way he does things but I feel he isn't forced to do things that mesh well with the rest of what other writers have done whether it was bad writing or not, ignoring years of stories is lame.

i'm not a spiderman fan so i don't really know what's going on with him. alot of writers ignore what other writers have done, it's nothing new. frank miller ignored all the stories where batman and superman were friends, because he wanted batman to be a loner/dark knight. jeph loeb ignored almost all of ultimates vol. 1 and 2 when he wrote the ultimates. matt fraction's ignored alot of the past of certain characters on x-men.

Buckyrig
06-30-2009, 06:42 PM
The only curve that Morrison is ahead of is the one that leads to the sanitorium.

So wait, now you think Morrison is a genius? :huh:

ronin7
06-30-2009, 07:23 PM
i don't believe you read those stories, because the way wolverine was portrayed in the 80's was exactly how wolverine was portrayed in morrison's run. claremont's wolverine was someone who was approachable and had a sense of humor, and that was what morrison did to him. it wasn't until the late 90's we got a character that was the best at what he does and the only thing he had in common with the wolverine from the 80's was he still said bub. as for weapon x, wolverine didn't say anything throughout and the captions didn't do anything to define the character.


:rolleyes: It's clear you never read Claremont's Wolverine, or any of his other appearances by Peter David, Archie Goodwin, Larry Hama, etc. Logan long ago stepped aside, and let Jean and Scott be happy because he realized he didn't need to interfere in their marriage. He even almost got married to Mariko Yashida, not once, but twice. He's also had relationships with other women. His crush on Jean didn't define him, nor did it define Jean.

Nor did Jean act like a whore who was hot, and heavy for Logan's LD like she did in Morrison's New X-Men. She chose Scott because she loved him and only him. She even said in a thought caption that the feelings she had for Logan was like a crush a freshman girl gets for the senior quarterback. Nothing more.

So, don't bother saying I didn't read those stories when you show you haven't read them at all.

ronin7
06-30-2009, 07:32 PM
actually morrison's clark was alot like clark in the first superman movies. and it makes sense for him to act the complete opposite of superman. now what doesn't make sense is writers who write him exactly like superman but with glasses. i thought it was rather nice that a writer actually went back and made clark the way he was supposed to be, which is superman's disguise. it's becoming apparent that you rather characters that are a parody of what they used to be.


Clark in the movies was NOT the Clark in the actual originating COMICS. He was the limp wristed Clark portrayed by the liberal set during the 60's and 70's. Who was a totally different animal from the actual Clark Kent; Superman.

You clearly don't know what you are talking about. And news flash; Clark Kent, and Superman are one and the same. No one would in sheer honesty think that some one who has his powers, and appears godlike like Superman would have a normal life.

Just because you can see it, doesn't mean you could prove it to everyone else. Superman is far to smart, and is too powerful to be caught flat footed.

Paul Sanderson
06-30-2009, 07:32 PM
:laugh:

For now on, every time you post an opinion about something you think sucks, I'm just gonna do a drum shot. That comment easily shows me how lost you are.

Stupid thing to say coming from you, just about the most lost person I've ever met (especially comparing to how level-headed and secure you used to be). God forbid someone have an opposing opinion to yours :rolleyes:

And yes, I have read All-Star Superman, Jamal. Borrowed the trade from the library where I work. Didn't care for it. Not a big fan of the old style Superman (and I hate Quitely's art, always have) and I don't think Morrison did a good job with his homage of that era.

Buckyrig
06-30-2009, 07:35 PM
He was the limp wristed Clark portrayed by the liberal set during the 60's and 70's.

Dude, what? :blink:

This is about hippies now?

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Paul Sanderson
06-30-2009, 07:36 PM
And btw, I'm going to check out Batman & Robin #1. Despite my dislike for Quitely's art, I've heard good things about it and am willing to give it a go.

ronin7
06-30-2009, 07:39 PM
morrison has a habit of stripping away all the crap that has accumalated on a character through years of bad writing. every superhero book he's worked on he's taken characters back to roots. doompatrol he took them from a justice league type superhero book and went back to the bizarre misfits that arnold drake envisioned them to be. x-men he went back to when xavier built a school for mutants, because origanally that's how xavier formed the team by telling them he was building a school for mutants. superman he went back to a time when superman's stories were more science fiction based. justice league he went back and brought in the big seven like when the league debuted.


No, no, no. He didn't make them back into a school like the old days. He had Xavier preaching militant philosophy, and declaring that "they" weren't going to play the chimpanzee politics. Which was playing right to what Claremont wanted to do if he had stayed on. Which is funny because Morrison has admitted time, and again he hates Claremont. Yet, he couldn't stop aping him.

Hell, he even aped John Byrne; Sublime - That Which Endures. :laugh:

Aaron Walther
06-30-2009, 08:32 PM
Clark in the movies was NOT the Clark in the actual originating COMICS. He was the limp wristed Clark portrayed by the liberal set during the 60's and 70's. Who was a totally different animal from the actual Clark Kent; Superman.

You clearly don't know what you are talking about. And news flash; Clark Kent, and Superman are one and the same. No one would in sheer honesty think that some one who has his powers, and appears godlike like Superman would have a normal life.

Just because you can see it, doesn't mean you could prove it to everyone else. Superman is far to smart, and is too powerful to be caught flat footed.
You have so much to teach us.

Aaron Walther
06-30-2009, 08:50 PM
No, no, no. He didn't make them back into a school like the old days. He had Xavier preaching militant philosophy, and declaring that "they" weren't going to play the chimpanzee politics. Which was playing right to what Claremont wanted to do if he had stayed on. Which is funny because Morrison has admitted time, and again he hates Claremont. Yet, he couldn't stop aping him.

Hell, he even aped John Byrne; Sublime - That Which Endures. :laugh:

Do you have any sort of...proof...to back up your insane rhetoric?

Because I'm going to link (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=2707) to an interview where G-Mo says this:

Chris [Claremont] is the guiding spirit of the X-Men as far as I'm concerned so I tried to be faithful to his essence throughout.
And he also says:

My favorite period is the Caremont/Byrne run from the early 80s. Chris was a wealth of new characters and fresh situations. His work was sexy, modern and intelligent. Byrne's work captured that spirit perfectly and for a while the pair of them could do no wrong. I didn't read X-Men much at all after 1982...

kdmelrose
06-30-2009, 08:55 PM
Which is funny because Morrison has admitted time, and again he hates Claremont. Yet, he couldn't stop aping him.

When did Morrison say he hates Claremont?

I've seen Morrison refer to Claremont as "the guiding spirit of the X-Men," describe his work on the franchise as "sexy, modern and intelligent," fondly recall following the Claremont/Byrne era when he'd given up on all other comics, and praise the collaborators as inventive and "so far ahead of their game they were defining the rules of a whole NEW game."

However, I don't remember ever seeing Morrison say he "hates" Claremont.

kdmelrose
06-30-2009, 08:55 PM
Ha! You beat me to some of the quotes.

Aaron Walther
06-30-2009, 08:59 PM
Expedient is my middle name!

It is amusing that you were remembering the exact two quotes that I was.

kdmelrose
06-30-2009, 09:01 PM
And I tossed in a quote from "The Morrison Manifesto" for good measure!

Aaron Walther
06-30-2009, 09:02 PM
You've always got to one up everyone, don't you??

kdmelrose
06-30-2009, 09:09 PM
It's the only thing that keeps me going. Sniff.

Lovecraft13
06-30-2009, 09:51 PM
Stupid thing to say coming from you, just about the most lost person I've ever met (especially comparing to how level-headed and secure you used to be). God forbid someone have an opposing opinion to yours :rolleyes:.

So sad, especially coming from a grown man. :laugh: Dude, I think you are the first person who ever had a wrong opinion. I don't really care about your bad taste. I also don't care about your stupid arguments. But I do love to make fun of them.

Lovecraft13
06-30-2009, 10:00 PM
And btw, I'm going to check out Batman & Robin #1. Despite my dislike for Quitely's art, I've heard good things about it and am willing to give it a go.

So you're pooing all over this thread, and you haven't even read the issue yet. You're a real piece of work. Do you have ANYTHING to add that's worthwhile?

hellblazer72
06-30-2009, 10:23 PM
:rolleyes: It's clear you never read Claremont's Wolverine, or any of his other appearances by Peter David, Archie Goodwin, Larry Hama, etc. Logan long ago stepped aside, and let Jean and Scott be happy because he realized he didn't need to interfere in their marriage. He even almost got married to Mariko Yashida, not once, but twice. He's also had relationships with other women. His crush on Jean didn't define him, nor did it define Jean.

Nor did Jean act like a whore who was hot, and heavy for Logan's LD like she did in Morrison's New X-Men. She chose Scott because she loved him and only him. She even said in a thought caption that the feelings she had for Logan was like a crush a freshman girl gets for the senior quarterback. Nothing more.

So, don't bother saying I didn't read those stories when you show you haven't read them at all.


you sure you're not getting joe casey's x-men mixed up with morrison's..after all in casey's run there was the cover with wolverine and jean kissing. and morrison never had her acting like a whore, and if she did i doubt jean would be pissed at scott and emma's psychic affair. because as you say she was a whore so that would mean she was getting some on the side also.

hellblazer72
06-30-2009, 10:29 PM
Clark in the movies was NOT the Clark in the actual originating COMICS. He was the limp wristed Clark portrayed by the liberal set during the 60's and 70's. Who was a totally different animal from the actual Clark Kent; Superman.

You clearly don't know what you are talking about. And news flash; Clark Kent, and Superman are one and the same. No one would in sheer honesty think that some one who has his powers, and appears godlike like Superman would have a normal life.

Just because you can see it, doesn't mean you could prove it to everyone else. Superman is far to smart, and is too powerful to be caught flat footed.

clark in the movies was not the clark from the comics, that makes no sense what so ever. i'm glad you shed light on clark and superman being the same person, but what you don't realize in your morrison hate filled mind is that clark and superman were to be thought of as 2 people. that is clark was superman's disguise so that would mean he would have to act different. it's not much of a disguise if he comes strolling in the daily planet standing tall with his chest out, speaking confidently as superman and sporting glasses, anyone would be able to tell he's superman. no would think superman has a normal life but he did. that's the kicker he has a normal life as clark kent.

KHudd
06-30-2009, 11:22 PM
The next issue comes out tommorow, after reading my superman trade, I might get it after all. I don't understand his other work. He is very freaking weird.

WilliamStormeSmith
07-01-2009, 01:27 PM
I'm a fan of comics in general, since 1978. Which means I've got hundreds of long boxes and read pretty much every popular comic by Moore, Ellis, Morrison, and Claremont. I've got hundreds of boxes and rarely have I ever been worried about the things you guys seem to hate, despise, and get mad at. To me a good story is a good story, and great stories usually don't come from any author consistently. The four I mention usually knock it out of the park. But you guys have made me see something I never saw before.

I don't care if Batman becomes a junkie, Clark's queer, Logan gets braids, or anything other than what is this specific story about and how if it all does it tie in to others I've read. Characterization will never be consistent in comics, they aren't novels, these are 22 page stories based on a visual partnership. No author can make everyone happy with the vastness of back issues one must navigate. So I just like seeing their take on the many different personalities and aspects of Clark, Bats, Bruce, Supes, and Logan's of comicdom. It's there turn in the sandbox, so I've just never felt like I should bitch about what they build.

Sure Grant's a drugged up Englishman who believes in aliens, right there someone should know his stories aren't gonna be for everyone. Moore's a working class pot head magician more accesible to the American interests and liberal mindset. Ellis is tech and sex, two things I don't need in comics, but love his work and always want more of it. Claremont is old school soap opera w/ class and action, he told "people" stories. Me I enjoyed OMD, the Clone Saga, Casey's Xmen, and Austen's Xmen. All that says about me is I'm more accepting of what they were trying to say and the stories they tried to tell. I couldn't write anything but my type of story, guess I expect the same from them.

I base how good they are by how well I remember the stories and the immediate effect after reading them. Sounds like you guys do the same, just don't see anything to argue about. It's just taste.

Newt
07-01-2009, 07:31 PM
Look, Smith, there's no call for that kind of talk in this thread! Quick, call one of the other participants a spiteful halfwit! :mad:

:laugh:

Buckyrig
07-01-2009, 07:48 PM
penis

KHudd
07-01-2009, 10:06 PM
Got issue 2 today I loved it! Great action scenes and great scenes with dick and damien. Go get it!

Phatman
07-03-2009, 02:02 PM
Got issue 2 today I loved it! Great action scenes and great scenes with dick and damien. Go get it!

Agreed---good so far.

BTW, I get people not liking a certain style of art, but Quitely is a modern master. I guess that's a whole other discussion though.

Aaron Walther
07-03-2009, 08:27 PM
I haven't read the issue yet, but I've heard he knocks it out of the park. I can't wait to get it.

The only complaint I can see leveled at Quietly is that he only have a couple of faces that he works from(something very common among most artists from I've seen). The only difference between Lois Lane, Jean Grey, Emma Frost was the color of their hair. With men, he usually has only two variations, thin or fat.

Mind you, I think that's more of an aesthetic of his work than a problem that needs improvement, but I can see how some people would be bothered by that.

When it comes to page composition and panel layout, the man has no comparison.

The first book of his that first really opened my eyes to his work and blew me away was We3, which incidentally has very few humans in it.

kamikaze
07-03-2009, 11:48 PM
I liked the first issue. Change can be good sometimes (even if it's short), and I like the potential stories that can come from this. I noticed that Dick(Batman) is the on the lighter side of the personality spectrum and Damien's personality(Robin) is now darker (check out how he talks to Alfred). Its nice how that got flipped around. And Tim is now the loner, which makes that dynamic pop, too. What's the story on Mr. Pyg? Ive never heard of this weirdo.

hellblazer72
07-06-2009, 01:46 AM
I haven't read the issue yet, but I've heard he knocks it out of the park. I can't wait to get it.

The only complaint I can see leveled at Quietly is that he only have a couple of faces that he works from(something very common among most artists from I've seen). The only difference between Lois Lane, Jean Grey, Emma Frost was the color of their hair. With men, he usually has only two variations, thin or fat.

Mind you, I think that's more of an aesthetic of his work than a problem that needs improvement, but I can see how some people would be bothered by that.

When it comes to page composition and panel layout, the man has no comparison.

The first book of his that first really opened my eyes to his work and blew me away was We3, which incidentally has very few humans in it.


not sure how much of quitely's art you've looked at but he has a wide variation on how he draws faces...

Paul Sanderson
07-15-2009, 07:21 PM
Bought and read both B&R #1 & 2 yesterday. I enjoyed both issues. Not Morrison's best writing, some of the dialogue is a bit cringy-worthy (and I'm not a fan of the flying Batmobile), but I like the overall dynamic of the new Batman & Robin team and Quitely's art is, I think, better suited to Batman than to Superman, where I thought his work was particularly poor. Some interesting new villains too. Overall, a solid read and I'll be back for more.

Eugene Selassie
07-17-2009, 11:25 AM
Bought and read both B&R #1 & 2 yesterday. I enjoyed both issues. Not Morrison's best writing, some of the dialogue is a bit cringy-worthy (and I'm not a fan of the flying Batmobile), but I like the overall dynamic of the new Batman & Robin team and Quitely's art is, I think, better suited to Batman than to Superman, where I thought his work was particularly poor. Some interesting new villains too. Overall, a solid read and I'll be back for more.

Likewise.
I haven't been this excited about Batman in a LOOOONG time.

Moonrider
07-17-2009, 08:13 PM
penis

Agreed. Uh, wait... :huh: