Whatever Happened To The Caped Crusader? Pt. 2 (No Spoilers)
markharrison
Happened To The Caped Crusader?" And, I think the impossible has
happened. I actually find myself slightly disappointed in a Neil
Gaiman story. I know. I know. This is sacrilege. I realize I must turn
myself over to the comic book police immediately for detainment and
possible psychiatric evaluation. But...
...I really enjoyed the first part of the story, but to me the second
part degenerated into overly familiar territory. The big reveal of the
identity of the second narrator turned out to be something of a
predictable yawner and we're ultimately left with a story that (at
least to me) doesn't really reveal any "new truths" about the Batman
character or really explore "old truths" in an especially compelling
way.
Of course, it's a well enough written story. It's Neil Gaiman after
all. And all due respect to Andy Kubert (There were some nice visual
touches. One of my favorites was the particular image that Kubert
conjures up of the Batmobile. It did bring a slight smile.) I get
where Gaiman was trying to go with this, I just don't know if it
ultimately works as well as it should.
I'm already reading reviews on the net calling this a moving,
emotional story on par with "Whatever Happened To The Man Of
Tomorrow?" that explores the mythology of Batman in a unique way - or
words to that effect. Now, it is certainly not my intent to start a
Gaiman-bashing thread, here. I love Neil Gaiman's work, overall. And
I'm not saying I *hated* this comic, just that I was really expecting
something a bit...Moore (sorry, couldn't resist). Seriously though, I
was a little let down by this one. It just seemed to...I don't
know...sort of fall flat.
I'll probably be in the minority, here but I just wondered if anyone
else had a similar experience?
Ken from Chicago
"markharrison" <markeh...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:d0c321ae-4e69-4b73...@b7g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
It happens. I've been disappointed by a couple of Peter David stories,my
favorite writer, including one of his Star Trek: New Frontier novels, one of
the most recent ones.
Writers are people too.
-- Ken from Chicago
Edward McArdle
Chicago" <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
I'm having the same impression with Treason. It seems to be all short
sentences, and everyone has the same turn of phrase. But that was always
the case. I suspect that it is because the book is Chapter 5067 in a
never-ending series.
--
Edward McArdle
plausible prose man
> I picked up Detective #853 today, with the second part of "Whatever
> Happened To The Caped Crusader?" And, I think the impossible has
> happened. I actually find myself slightly disappointed in a Neil
> Gaiman story.
A fair amount of Gaiman leaves you going "yeah...what are you trying
to say with that," especially when he goes meta-. I'm thinking here of
"problem of Susan."
> I know. I know. This is sacrilege. I realize I must turn
> myself over to the comic book police immediately for detainment and
> possible psychiatric evaluation. But...
>
> ...I really enjoyed the first part of the story, but to me the second
> part degenerated into overly familiar territory.
The first part promises something deconstructive the second part
doesn't deliver as it descends into winky cameos and chicken fat,
especially with a tacked on, cliched ending that just leaves you going
"huh?" Perhaps some editor squashed the "the whoever's tale" conceit,
and there was some re-rewriting, which might also explain the delay.
> The big reveal of the
> identity of the second narrator turned out to be something of a
> predictable yawner.
I won't tell you I didn't see that coming, but...you know, I didn't
hate it either.
> and we're ultimately left with a story that (at
> least to me) doesn't really reveal any "new truths" about the Batman
> character
Eternal reoccurance and reinvention of Batman?
> or really explore "old truths" in an especially compelling
> way.
Bruce Wayne's unlikely to die of old age.
> Of course, it's a well enough written story. It's Neil Gaiman after
> all. And all due respect to Andy Kubert (There were some nice visual
> touches. One of my favorites was the particular image that Kubert
> conjures up of the Batmobile. It did bring a slight smile.)
He also does other artists styles pretty well. I liked the alternate
ending to Killing Joke, and it's always nice to see Betty.
> I get
> where Gaiman was trying to go with this, I just don't know if it
> ultimately works as well as it should.
I'm going to have to say "no," especially given some ambiguity re: is
this Bruce's thoughts as the Omega effect hits him? Sort of, yes and
no? Or does it stand outside continuity as some meta- commentary on
Batman? Also...
SPOILER
1
2
3
4
5
I sawer the "Darkest Night" Free Comic Book Day promo two weeks
early, it opens with Hal and Barry standing over Bruce's unmarked
grave, talking about superhero deaths and resurrections. Hal's pretty
sure Bruce is gone forever, while Barry holds out hope. After all,
they both know you can come back from the dead and if anyone has a
plan, it's Bruce. Then they fly off, and we see a shadowy figure come
pilfer the coffin, plucking a skull from the loam with a lot of
implied bat-ears, and on the last page Black Hand's seemingly bringing
Batman back from the dead. We also get what is, at least as far as I
know, our first look at Zombie E-2 Superman's action figure. You know,
not just all blacked out in sillhouette, but the full on, and he looks
like Timmy from World of Warcraft. You know, he's not just Superman
only pale or partially transparent, he's more horrible than a Marvel
Zombie. This has some little touch of obscene descecration about it,
but I suppose that's the idea.
Well, okay, so Batman's a black lantern? Great, but I thought he was
stuck in the past. Oh, and I just read that he'd died and been reborn,
only seemingly about ten years ago. Yeah, I don't know...I sure can't
wait to read Blackest Night, that's for sure.
> I'm already reading reviews on the net calling this a moving,
> emotional story on par with "Whatever Happened To The Man Of
> Tomorrow?" that explores the mythology of Batman in a unique way - or
> words to that effect.
I don't think that's wrong, exactly.
> Now, it is certainly not my intent to start a
> Gaiman-bashing thread, here. I love Neil Gaiman's work, overall. And
> I'm not saying I *hated* this comic, just that I was really expecting
> something a bit...Moore (sorry, couldn't resist).
I find it something short of "man of tomorrow," sure.
Brenda Clough
My review of it is going to be up very late tonight (or early tomorrow
morning) at blog.bookviewcafe.com
Brenda