The Official All-Star Batman & Robin #1 Sucks Thread (SPOILERS)

[october]

I agree. If you want to read some stories that truly suck, read comics from the 60s when you opinions aren't colored by nostalgia. I think the best modern stuff will remain relevant and stand the test of time far better than SA classics.

[The Brain]

Are you kidding me? Did you and I read the same story, BK??? Why would an assassin kill the Graysons in public like that when he could easily have done it after the show, in the dead of night? Is Gotham really so lawless that the cops, crooked or not, can batter a beautiful, well-known female journalist in front of a huge crowd of onlookers? How is it that Bruce can change into Bats, track down the assassin and stop him before he can get away?

 

 

Now that's why you're going to pick up the 2nd issue. To find out the how and why. You see the how and why pisses you off, right? But the how and why gets me excited it makes me want to read it.

And did you just want a rehash of Miller's older works? NO we don't. We want NEW Miller. And you say all this stuff is unrealistic, but it's a comic book man, a comic book. Good story and good art. Well worth the wait by far. I wish more people would come out and say how they love the book. I mean you act like you bought a car and brought home to realize it doesn't work. It's a 3 DOLLAR COMIC. It's got FRANK MILLER and JIM LEE.

 

Also I'm tired of all the OLD GUYS, yes you old guys who've been reading comics for decades. I'm sorry I'm only 22 and not reading them for so long, it's totally my fault. But can you stop bashing the artists of our generation, and show some appreciation. If it's a new style, you hate it. If someone looks like someone elses' art, oh they just copy their stuff. Stop it. Your too old to bicker, just enjoy the comic books, JEEZ!!

 

Chi Bamm, here is an OLD GUY ( 54 ), "comming out and saying I LOVED THE BOOK " I agree with

 

just about all that you said, ( really don't like to be 'labeled' because of my age ), but I understand where it

 

comes from. I buy 'mostly modern' books so I look for art & story. As far as "bashing the artist of your generation",

 

it's what we do here on the boards. Without debate, these boards would be nothing but blank pages. It is this

 

passion that keeps us comming back. Now on with the show.

[Chi Bamm]

Thanks Brain, I forget at times that the boards are meant more for bashing and less for good reviews of things. I'm sorry to stereotype you with just SOME of the older comic collectors who look at modern comics with such scorn.

[drice6900]

Well, I can't believe I'm saying this - but I agree with Hobby and CB

 

Not being a huge DC fan until the past year or so, I am enjoying a fresh look at how Bats and Robin got together.

 

By the way, I don't remember anything about ASB&R being "kid friendly". Where was this mentioned?

[The Brain]

Thanks Brain, I forget at times that the boards are meant more for bashing and less for good reviews of things. I'm sorry to stereotype you with just SOME of the older comic collectors who look at modern comics with such scorn.

 

Well I am NOT your typical collector,nor do I think the boards are meant ONLY to bash 'new' stuff. Stick around

 

you may find that there are more that agree than disagree with you here. I have over the year that I have been

 

'on the boards' gotten to the point that not much said about me is going to get to me. I like the idea that we can

 

have a fourm where we can talk about ALL aspects of collecting, we may not agree, but we can let our opinions

 

known.

[delekkerste]

OK, I'm going to "pull a JC* here". * = Joe_Collector

 

Well, as expected, the drooling fanboys have come out defending the dreck that is All-Star Batman & Robin #1. Well, what else should I expect from the same band of simpletons who enjoyed such atrocities as "Sins Past" and "Avengers Disassembled". Of course, all of us who recognized those and other recent storylines as complete garbage must be old fuddy-duddies stuck in a different age, incapable of enjoying a new comic book. WRONG! If I was in that camp, I don't think I would be picking up this book on the date of release, now, would I? I still buy new comics and enjoy them, when they are done right. ASB&R #1 was not done right; in fact, it was the comic book equivalent of a high-speed train wreck.

 

No one is saying that DC shouldn't create a Batman series unburdened by continuity; quite the contrary, I welcome such a series. And getting Frank Miller and Jim Lee together sounded like a dream creative team. Sadly, they have managed only to create a poorly conceived, disjointed, nonsensical POS that panders to the same hormonally fixated crowd who enjoyed seeing Norman Osborn defile Gwen Stacy in ASM and who think that Bendis' relentless pop culture references and Millar's gratuitous violence raises comics to the level of high literature for dealing with such "realistic" (yeah, right) themes and issues.

 

This project would have been perfect to introduce new readers (that means kids, not 22-year olds) to Batman and to comics in general. Instead, we have something that would be totally inappropriate to give to a 10-year old kid to read. So, while the drooling Wizard-toting fanboy brigade may enjoy the multiple pages of Vicki Vale in gauzy lingerie and graphic violence, it doesn't really do anything for readers looking for a classic Batman read or for new readers discovering the Dark Knight for the first time. They should have used this story for a Miller/Lee Bats mini-series or graphic novel with a T+ or mature readers label. This was completely the wrong direction for the much-hyped ASB&R series - DC really shot themselves in the foot. Oh sure, they'll do a lot of sales, but they won't be able to reprint this one a zillion times and distribute it into tons of different channels (and hopefully hooking a lot of new readers along the way) a la Ultimate Spidey #1. Any parent who reads this issue is unlikely to let their kids get anywhere near a comic shop until they are 18.

 

OK, well, I'm not sure that was very JC-esque, so let me just add that you're all a bunch of with no taste, descended from gypsies, tramps and thieves. Oh yeah, and b*** me.

[shrunkenhead]

I haven't yet made it to the LCS for my copy of the All-Star Bat-book, but even if I flip through it and think it's cr#p, I will plunk down my $3 and buy it. Why, because I'm a bat-freak, and I'm interested in the constant reinvention of the character, even when that reinvention is mostly cr$p (sixties bat-mite anyone?). I like it all, the good bat, the bad bat, and even the oh my god I can't believe they published it Bat. I liken it to listening to that amazingly bad Neil Young & the Shocking Pinks album from the eighties, or Bob Dylan's less than classic tune "Wiggle Wiggle (like a bowl of soup)." It's just fascinating to me to line up all the drek with all the classics, decade by decade, and see what you get.

 

Maybe that makes me a fanboy, maybe that makes me a "comics scholar." WTF do I care? Either way, I'm having fun.

 

That said, would I like a regular Bat-book that appeals to kids? Sure, sounds cool; that book is called Batman Strikes. It used to be called Batman Adventures, Gotham Adventures, etc. DC is already milking that market as a tie-in to the TV shows, and they've been doing that for over a decade now. So I expected the new Miller/Lee book not to be kiddie. And besides, that market is just not that big anymore anyways. DC has to sell comics to folks who buy comics, and the days of the spinner rack at the grocery store are pretty much over.

 

I mean really, who wants to read a kiddie book by Miller? What next, is GG Allin going to put out a kids album? (he can't, he's dead, but you get the point). Dang, why didn't Hunter Thompson write any kids fiction? I don't want my tough guys going kiddie, thanks.

 

And even though I haven't seen it yet, can this book really be worse than the Miller/Mcfarlane--Batman/Spawn monstrosity?

 

And slightly OT, but Shadow of the Bat was cancelled awhile back so that title is no longer "ongoing."

[Zonker]

And I still have a problem with Robin as a 12-year old. If you're going to update the Batman & Robin mythos, they should have made Robin OLDER, not younger. Having a very young boy as a sidekick could fly in the innocent days of 1940, but it's just downright creepy in 2005. Michael Jackson-esque scenarios aside, the thought of putting a 12-year old in harm's way like that also raises numerous ethical problems and legal liability issues.

 

Just on this point, Gene, the question of Robin-the-Boy-Hostage is central to what Miller's intending to do with the series.

 

Frank Miller Newsarama Interview

 

FM: They specifically wanted to do Batman and Robin. My first condition was that it would be called Batman and Robin The Boy Wonder. I immediately knew that Robin was going to be the subject of the story. That way, we could play Batman a bit more of the archetype and the stern father, and Robin as the young warrior, learning his way.

 

NRAMA: That said, your Batman that you’ve shown in previous stories is, if anything, eminently practical, to the point of being methodical and emotionless in his ways. Why in the world would he bring a child into this world of his?

 

FM: I felt that somebody finally had to explain that, and I worked hard on it.

 

NRAMA: But still, it does seem to go against his view of protecting innocents, as well as innocence…

 

FM: No, it makes perfect sense when you think about it. He explains it to Alfred in the story, saying, “I’m a young man, but I won’t always be young, and the mission has to continue.” Robin is his apprentice. He’s training his replacement. That’s the life he intends for Robin.

 

Of course Alfred’s reaction is, “I’m dyspeptic!” and is horrified that Bruce would do such a thing, and even, if he did something like that, admit it out loud. Alfred already has to deal with this nutcase as a boss, and now he has to worry about a kid as well.

 

NRAMA: The apprentice approach does seem to go towards the ideas that “Batman would never put a child in danger.” Is it that, he would, if that child is his apprentice?

 

FM: Well, he didn’t want to get Grayson at this age. It was the murder of his parents that forced his hand. Bruce was going to wait, as he puts it, “Until the kid was old enough to shave.”

 

NRAMA: So Bruce wasn’t going out, shopping for a12 year-old?

 

FM: No, but he’d been watching Grayson because he was the most talented kid he’d seen yet. He was planning on taking him under his wing in maybe another six years, but instead, he has to do it when the kid is still too young for the job.

 

 

[awe4one]

So I expected the new Miller/Lee book not to be kiddie. And besides, that market is just not that big anymore anyways. DC has to sell comics to folks who buy comics, and the days of the spinner rack at the grocery store are pretty much over.

 

This is the type of static, short term thinking that'll have comic pamphlets dead and buried within the next decade...

 

Jim

[The Brain]

OK, I'm going to "pull a JC* here". * = Joe_Collector

 

Well, as expected, the drooling fanboys have come out defending the dreck that is All-Star Batman & Robin #1. Well, what else should I expect from the same band of simpletons who enjoyed such atrocities as "Sins Past" and "Avengers Disassembled". Of course, all of us who recognized those and other recent storylines as complete garbage must be old fuddy-duddies stuck in a different age, incapable of enjoying a new comic book. WRONG! If I was in that camp, I don't think I would be picking up this book on the date of release, now, would I? I still buy new comics and enjoy them, when they are done right. ASB&R #1 was not done right; in fact, it was the comic book equivalent of a high-speed train wreck.

 

No one is saying that DC shouldn't create a Batman series unburdened by continuity; quite the contrary, I welcome such a series. And getting Frank Miller and Jim Lee together sounded like a dream creative team. Sadly, they have managed only to create a poorly conceived, disjointed, nonsensical POS that panders to the same hormonally fixated crowd who enjoyed seeing Norman Osborn defile Gwen Stacy in ASM and who think that Bendis' relentless pop culture references and Millar's gratuitous violence raises comics to the level of high literature for dealing with such "realistic" (yeah, right) themes and issues.

 

This project would have been perfect to introduce new readers (that means kids, not 22-year olds) to Batman and to comics in general. Instead, we have something that would be totally inappropriate to give to a 10-year old kid to read. So, while the drooling Wizard-toting fanboy brigade may enjoy the multiple pages of Vicki Vale in gauzy lingerie and graphic violence, it doesn't really do anything for readers looking for a classic Batman read or for new readers discovering the Dark Knight for the first time. They should have used this story for a Miller/Lee Bats mini-series or graphic novel with a T+ or mature readers label. This was completely the wrong direction for the much-hyped ASB&R series - DC really shot themselves in the foot. Oh sure, they'll do a lot of sales, but they won't be able to reprint this one a zillion times and distribute it into tons of different channels (and hopefully hooking a lot of new readers along the way) a la Ultimate Spidey #1. Any parent who reads this issue is unlikely to let their kids get anywhere near a comic shop until they are 18.

 

OK, well, I'm not sure that was very JC-esque, so let me just add that you're all a bunch of with no taste, descended from gypsies, tramps and thieves. Oh yeah, and b*** me.

 

drooling fanboys

CLASSIC R........O........T........F........L........M.........A.........O.

[Smokinghawk]

I think that Frank Miller has bought into the "Shock Rock" school of writing that says that the way to make a story good is to make it grim and cruel. Except that grim and cruel don't take a lot of brains (evidence: Insane Clown Posse). Miller has lost his complexity in favor of blood-and-guts in the same way that fans argue that George Lucas has lost his "heart and soul" storytelling in favor of CGI special effects.

 

The fact that Miller has even been compared here to GG Allin doesn't rebut this point, it makes it.

[shrunkenhead]

So I expected the new Miller/Lee book not to be kiddie. And besides, that market is just not that big anymore anyways. DC has to sell comics to folks who buy comics, and the days of the spinner rack at the grocery store are pretty much over.

 

This is the type of static, short term thinking that'll have comic pamphlets dead and buried within the next decade...

 

Jim

 

Jim, the world has changed. And for the worse, IMO, but that's besides the point. I'm not defending DC, but really, what are they supposed to do about it? Kids don't buy comics at the A&P anymore. They buy $50 video games at Best Buy, or cell phone software that lets them design their stupid ringtones. So what's to be done?

[shrunkenhead]

I think that Frank Miller has bought into the "Shock Rock" school of writing that says that the way to make a story good is to make it grim and cruel. Except that grim and cruel don't take a lot of brains (evidence: Insane Clown Posse). Miller has lost his complexity in favor of blood-and-guts in the same way that fans argue that George Lucas has lost his "heart and soul" storytelling in favor of CGI special effects.

 

The fact that Miller has even been compared here to GG Allin doesn't rebut this point, it makes it.

 

Yeah, you're right of course. I was trying to say that readers shouldn't expect a creator to completely change his or her nature, but it is kind of a sorry state of affairs nonetheless.

[drice6900]

That said, would I like a regular Bat-book that appeals to kids? Sure, sounds cool; that book is called Batman Strikes. It used to be called Batman Adventures, Gotham Adventures, etc. DC is already milking that market as a tie-in to the TV shows, and they've been doing that for over a decade now. So I expected the new Miller/Lee book not to be kiddie. And besides, that market is just not that big anymore anyways. DC has to sell comics to folks who buy comics, and the days of the spinner rack at the grocery store are pretty much over.

 

I mean really, who wants to read a kiddie book by Miller? What next, is GG Allin going to put out a kids album? (he can't, he's dead, but you get the point). Dang, why didn't Hunter Thompson write any kids fiction? I don't want my tough guys going kiddie, thanks.

 

Exactly what I was thinking! My 12 yr old doesn't even want to read the books I pick up, but he loves JLA Unlimited and Batman Strikes.

[shrunkenhead]

Sorry to post three times in a row here...but to follow up a little better on my post to Jim, I think the current status of modern comics has more to do with a growing sense of illiteracy among children than anything else. I don't mean to say that kids aren't able to read, but they generally don't want to nowadays, and that means that when they do read, they aren't very good at it.

 

I gave my neighbor's kid a longbox of 90's comics a short while back (better than throwing them away, I figured), and the kid kinda scoffed at it and said how that would be "too much reading." Even worse, I assigned my college class the Sandman: Season of Mists TPB, and their response was "we have to read the whole thing in two days??". Very sad.

 

So that's the world that DC and Marvel are stuck with, and that's (IMO) why more and more comics (particularly these reboots of classic characters that are meant to appeal to larger demographics) are stinky reads. Garbage in, garbage out.

[october]

Even worse, I assigned my college class the Sandman: Season of Mists TPB, and their response was "we have to read the whole thing in two days??". Very sad.

 

Are you serious? Are you teaching a literature class? When I was a senior, and had to take both of my upper level novel classes the same semester, I was forced to read two books a week. I would have cried tears of joy to have been granted a reprieve like Season of Mists.

[shrunkenhead]

Even worse, I assigned my college class the Sandman: Season of Mists TPB, and their response was "we have to read the whole thing in two days??". Very sad.

 

Are you serious? Are you teaching a literature class? When I was a senior, and had to take both of my upper level novel classes the same semester, I was forced to read two books a week. I would have cried tears of joy to have been granted a reprieve like Season of Mists.

 

Sadly, I'm completely serious. The class was ENG102, you know, the second required english course for freshmen.

 

Hey, even two books a week per class seems a little soft to me, but what do I know, I'm stuck reading 300 or 400 pgs a day for the dissertation. I outgeek you all!!!

[october]

Even worse, I assigned my college class the Sandman: Season of Mists TPB, and their response was "we have to read the whole thing in two days??". Very sad.

 

Are you serious? Are you teaching a literature class? When I was a senior, and had to take both of my upper level novel classes the same semester, I was forced to read two books a week. I would have cried tears of joy to have been granted a reprieve like Season of Mists.

 

Sadly, I'm completely serious. The class was ENG102, you know, the second required english course for freshmen.

 

Hey, even two books a week per class seems a little soft to me, but what do I know, I'm stuck reading 300 or 400 pgs a day for the dissertation. I outgeek you all!!!

 

As if I needed further convincing that American literacy is in dire straits...

 

 

300-400 pages!?! I have read that much in a day a handful of times, but I doubt I could keep up that pace for more than a week. Especially since you are probably reading scholarly material.

[delekkerste]

OK, many interesting points all around guys, but can we get back to the topic at hand, which is that ALL-STAR BATMAN & ROBIN #1 BLOWS CHUNKS.

[drice6900]

OK, many interesting points all around guys, but can we get back to the topic at hand, which is that ALL-STAR BATMAN & ROBIN #1 BLOWS CHUNKS.

 

... of money into DC's coffers and...