SuaveStar Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 Almost three years. Captain America #25 has a cover date of April 2007, and he just came back in late 2009 / early 2010. Alright, and we don't if Bruce is coming back to be Batman, it's called the return of Bruce Wayne, not the return of Batman, even though Morrisons original plan was for Bruce to be Batman again, causing Dick to look like a grave robbing prick, things could and probably have changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 It's big, you've been warned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Hell yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Hell yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 It really doesn't feel like Dick's actually been Batman at all though. Feels like he's literally just taken over the steering wheel for a bit so Bruce could have a short nap. I don't think this run counts much more than his first go around post Knightfall, and certainly hasn't eclipsed Azreal's stint as a genuine Batman. And thats with me reading every sodding issue of Batman and Batman & Robin. Can't Morrison at least get 12 issues of Batman & Robin out before he curb-stomps the concept into oblivion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 I'd really like to see Bruce come back and head up Checkmate or something. Dick could be Batman and Bruce could be taskmaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 President Wayne anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Morrison said in an interview that writing Batman and Robin has altered his plans somewhat. That, coupled with the event being titled "The Return of Bruce Wayne," may indicate that Bruce may not come back and be Batman, at least for the time being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamvidger Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 The thing is, even though Dick hasn't been Batman long, he has been featured in many books: Batman And Robin, Batman Streets Of Gotham, Batman, Blackest Night: Batman, Arkham Reborn (he may appear with a small cameo at least, but I'm unsure, still its Gotham), Detective Comics (one issue), Gotham City Sirens (one issue), Batgirl (one issue), Vigilante (one issue. Is that Dick in it?), and probably many more I'm forgetting. Dc is publishing so many Bat-books, especially if you count out of continuity series. 4 more years of Dick thinking "I miss Bruce. Do I really have what it takes?" Blah blah blah, media bat-whore. Not that the batman Reborn comics have been bad, but the only way to get readers to still buy the comics for 3 or 4 years, with all these series for Batman, would be if Damian became Batman. also, an ides for when Bruce comes back, make Dick the batman for the justice league and other teams and across the world operations, while Vruce stays and beats up all the annoying shoit in Gotham or the other way around. as for Tim and Damian, one of them goes to the Titans, the other stays with Bruce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 Cover to Return of Bruce Wayne #2 OH SHIT SON. IS THAT WITCH HUNTER BATMAN? FUCK YEAH IT IS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 You know, the term fucking awesome, is used way to often, but here, it is justified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc20willsave Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 There's just something so badass about Witch Hunter Batman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 That would be cool if I didn't inherently hate the idea of the role of the witchhunter being justified, let alone justified to the point that Bruce Wayne could be one. To me the role of the witchhunter is to women what the Klan are to black people. Even pre-supposing that witches in fiction can't be taken seriously because they aren't real, its still as bad as typecasting black people as lazy and inferior. Its a negative false image created from a stereotype that resulted in the persecution of women in ignorant communities. Its a cool costume, but I'm still sickened by the association. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'm glad someone said it. Also The hat is awful, I'm sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'm pretty sure he's, you know, hunting actual witches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'm pretty sure he's, you know, hunting actual witches. Which as valid as saying "I'm pretty sure Hitler was hunting, y'know, actual gold-grabbing evil jews and baby stealing gypsies". "Actual witches". As though the general acceptance of a stereotype is enough to forgive its origins. Maybe I should celebrate the Spanish Inquisition for torturing and killing all those "real heretics". Cloaking the group murder of women in a century of folk tale and modern fiction doesn't change its origin. In the UK at the exact same time teenage girls were committed to asylums for uttering sexual expletives. Should be glorify the men who took them away and imprisoned them against their will? There are certain contexts and backgrounds against which I'm willing to accept the notion of witches, such as Shakespeare or fairy tales. Not 19th century celebrations of persecution and ignorance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 Which as valid as saying "I'm pretty sure Hitler was hunting, y'know, actual gold-grabbing evil jews and baby stealing gypsies". "Actual witches". As though the general acceptance of a stereotype is enough to forgive its origins. Maybe I should celebrate the Spanish Inquisition for torturing and killing all those "real heretics". Cloaking the group murder of women in a century of folk tale and modern fiction doesn't change its origin. In the UK at the exact same time teenage girls were committed to asylums for uttering sexual expletives. Should be glorify the men who took them away and imprisoned them against their will? My phrasing was shit, I admit. I am by no means trying to trivialize how terrible the witch hunts were. "Fictional interpretations of witches" would have been more appropriate. I just don't believe that Morrison would show Bruce participating in the witch hunts considering his character. I think Morrison is a good enough writer to point out how ignorant and damaging they were using Bruce as the means to point that out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc20willsave Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 This being Bruce, I could see him actually using the visage of a Witchhunter to save "witches" and fight the Gingerbread House type-witches and corrupt judges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuaveStar Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 I still like the cover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 Which as valid as saying "I'm pretty sure Hitler was hunting, y'know, actual gold-grabbing evil jews and baby stealing gypsies". "Actual witches". As though the general acceptance of a stereotype is enough to forgive its origins. Maybe I should celebrate the Spanish Inquisition for torturing and killing all those "real heretics". Cloaking the group murder of women in a century of folk tale and modern fiction doesn't change its origin. In the UK at the exact same time teenage girls were committed to asylums for uttering sexual expletives. Should be glorify the men who took them away and imprisoned them against their will? My phrasing was shit, I admit. I am by no means trying to trivialize how terrible the witch hunts were. "Fictional interpretations of witches" would have been more appropriate. I just don't believe that Morrison would show Bruce participating in the witch hunts considering his character. I think Morrison is a good enough writer to point out how ignorant and damaging they were using Bruce as the means to point that out. I think you're probably right there, but you'd never know it from that cover. Even if the interior is a complex brilliant critique on persecution the cover still pits witchhunter Batman vs old crones. As for the healthy debate, don't worry about it, I'm coming off the back of two weeks of lectures on sexism and female persecution at uni. I think I'm still heavy on the super-pro-feminism, I didn't figure you meant anything by your comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 Ultimately it's a story about a caveman from the present battling his way back through time to come home. Are we worried about historical accuracy? In other news, I would adore it if Bats faced off against Matthew Hawkins, especially if he was drawn to look like Vincent Price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 Are we worried about historical accuracy? Its not historical accuracy I'm complaining about, its just that most modern media has the good taste to depict witchhunters as villainous evil bastards, in the same way as its no longer commonplace to see films where the cowboys are pure good vs the Indians pure evil. Its about lending weight misleading images of history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 And the most popular piece of art of all time about witch hunts (no need for the spoiler tags) depicts the truth. Not like it's behind a veiled conspiracy or anything. Also, the book hasn't even come out yet and story details haven't even been given out. A little early to condemn the depiction isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 And the most popular piece of art of all time about witch hunts (no need for the spoiler tags) depicts the truth. Not like it's behind a veiled conspiracy or anything. Also, the book hasn't even come out yet and story details haven't even been given out. A little early to condemn the depiction isn't it? I'm just talking about the cover, like I said Morrison may do something really nice with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.