If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Fascinating in-depth look: "Reading Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns"   (bigother.com) divider line 47
    More: Interesting, Dark Knight, Batman, Chris Claremont, Robert Crumb  
•       •       •

3595 clicks; posted to Geek » on 18 Aug 2012 at 10:34 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



47 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-18 08:42:10 AM
I'm not going to read that opus but The Dark Knight Returns was an awesome book, one of the first comics I ever read. Can't wait for the animated DVD.
 
2012-08-18 09:01:47 AM

Mugato: I'm not going to read that opus but The Dark Knight Returns was an awesome book, one of the first comics I ever read.


But does it hold up?

If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?
 
2012-08-18 09:19:36 AM

FirstNationalBastard: Mugato: I'm not going to read that opus but The Dark Knight Returns was an awesome book, one of the first comics I ever read.

But does it hold up?

If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?


In fact, my power went out a few months ago and since I don't own any actual books, I read it and it holds up very well. There's an 80's vibe to it but nothing terribly dated. It would make a great movie even today but I'll settle for the animated DVD.
 
2012-08-18 09:27:04 AM

Mugato: but nothing terribly dated.


All that Reagan was pretty dated.
 
2012-08-18 09:32:01 AM

FirstNationalBastard: Mugato: I'm not going to read that opus but The Dark Knight Returns was an awesome book, one of the first comics I ever read.

But does it hold up?

If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?


Yes.
 
2012-08-18 09:32:42 AM

unlikely: Mugato: but nothing terribly dated.

All that Reagan was pretty dated.


Sure, it was written in 1986. But that doesn't spoil the book as a whole.
 
2012-08-18 09:33:37 AM
Also, since the article covers Dark Knight in which he makes Catwoman a prostitute and the Wolverine miniseries and a few other Frank Miller pieces where he shows his nigh-republican views on What Women Are Good For, AND because it's obligatory in any real Frank Miller thread:

satelliteshow.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-08-18 10:49:52 AM
You don't get it, boy. This isn't a Frank Miller thread... It's an operating table. And I'm the surgeon.
 
2012-08-18 11:31:50 AM

FirstNationalBastard: If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?


I didn't care for it in the least. I didn't read it for the first time until the mid 2000s, and I think that's the real difference. If you read in when it was new, you'd remember it fondly and re-reading it would help link you back to that original reading. I feel the same about Watchmen, FWIW. In both cases, I can understand why the books were groundbreaking and how they set up the modern era of comicbookdom. I just think the intervening 30 years have taken that seed and run so much farther with it that I can't really enjoy them.
 
2012-08-18 11:37:51 AM

t3knomanser: FirstNationalBastard: If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?

I didn't care for it in the least. I didn't read it for the first time until the mid 2000s, and I think that's the real difference. If you read in when it was new, you'd remember it fondly and re-reading it would help link you back to that original reading. I feel the same about Watchmen, FWIW. In both cases, I can understand why the books were groundbreaking and how they set up the modern era of comicbookdom. I just think the intervening 30 years have taken that seed and run so much farther with it that I can't really enjoy them.


That's exactly what I wanted to know... if someone who read it for the first time today would be blown away, or just see it as another book.
 
2012-08-18 11:48:07 AM

FirstNationalBastard: Mugato: I'm not going to read that opus but The Dark Knight Returns was an awesome book, one of the first comics I ever read.

But does it hold up?

If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?


Absolutely.
 
2012-08-18 11:50:01 AM
FirstNationalBastard: Mugato: I'm not going to read that opus but The Dark Knight Returns was an awesome book, one of the first comics I ever read.

But does it hold up?

If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?


It stands the test of time. Even for someone who still doesn't agree with some of the more potent cultural critiques it's a real work of art.

fc03.deviantart.net
 
2012-08-18 11:56:46 AM

FirstNationalBastard: t3knomanser: FirstNationalBastard: If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?

I didn't care for it in the least. I didn't read it for the first time until the mid 2000s, and I think that's the real difference. If you read in when it was new, you'd remember it fondly and re-reading it would help link you back to that original reading. I feel the same about Watchmen, FWIW. In both cases, I can understand why the books were groundbreaking and how they set up the modern era of comicbookdom. I just think the intervening 30 years have taken that seed and run so much farther with it that I can't really enjoy them.

That's exactly what I wanted to know... if someone who read it for the first time today would be blown away, or just see it as another book.



It's still a really great book, a cut above the average even if that average has improved over the years.
 
2012-08-18 12:01:51 PM

ck1938: It stands the test of time. Even for someone who still doesn't agree with some of the more potent cultural critiques it's a real work of art.


My favorite page from the entire book is a series of small, rapid panels showing Wayne (just prior to becoming Batman again) sitting in a chair flipping though TV channels, each of which brings report of some different crime in Gotham. It flips from that, to his face, to a memory of his parents being killed and back again several times. Each panel with his face shows him breaking down more and more until he can't stand it any longer.

I don't know how they could have better demonstrated just how unbearable Wayne finds it to not be Batman.
 
2012-08-18 12:06:18 PM

Shrugging Atlas: ck1938: It stands the test of time. Even for someone who still doesn't agree with some of the more potent cultural critiques it's a real work of art.

My favorite page from the entire book is a series of small, rapid panels showing Wayne (just prior to becoming Batman again) sitting in a chair flipping though TV channels, each of which brings report of some different crime in Gotham. It flips from that, to his face, to a memory of his parents being killed and back again several times. Each panel with his face shows him breaking down more and more until he can't stand it any longer.

I don't know how they could have better demonstrated just how unbearable Wayne finds it to not be Batman.


bigotherbigother.files.wordpress.com 

/it's in the article
 
2012-08-18 12:11:18 PM

calbert: /it's in the article


I'll be damned. I confess, I ran out of steam after the first page. Now I'm going to have to read the entire thing.
 
2012-08-18 12:20:19 PM

FirstNationalBastard: That's exactly what I wanted to know... if someone who read it for the first time today would be blown away, or just see it as another book.


I'm not really one to be clouded by nostalgia. If it doesn't impress anyone who reads it for the first time, it could be because it's been copied so many times. Like if they ever do make a movie out of Neuromancer, people who never read it in the '80s would say, "What is this Matrix ripoff shiat?".
 
2012-08-18 12:57:46 PM

FirstNationalBastard: That's exactly what I wanted to know... if someone who read it for the first time today would be blown away, or just see it as another book.


I of course can't tell you since I read when it first came out. But that said, a good story is a good story. The only hang up I can see some people having if they picked it up for the first time today is the whole Cold War angle in it that drives some of the story. But that is quite secondary to the fact it put Batman in a 'real' setting and context long before Nolan came along and did so on the big screen.
 
2012-08-18 01:09:50 PM

t3knomanser: FirstNationalBastard: If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?

I didn't care for it in the least. I didn't read it for the first time until the mid 2000s, and I think that's the real difference. If you read in when it was new, you'd remember it fondly and re-reading it would help link you back to that original reading. I feel the same about Watchmen, FWIW. In both cases, I can understand why the books were groundbreaking and how they set up the modern era of comicbookdom. I just think the intervening 30 years have taken that seed and run so much farther with it that I can't really enjoy them.


I read Watchmen in the mid 2000s and was blown away. Of course, I had the nagging doubt that readers who didn't grow up during the Cold War wouldn't have been nearly as impressed. Veidt's audacious plan loses some of its luster when there never was a nuclear Armageddon.
 
2012-08-18 01:11:52 PM

Shrugging Atlas: But that is quite secondary to the fact it put Batman in a 'real' setting


Um, no. It was a dark setting, but it was hardly a realistic setting. The Nolanverse isn't terribly real either- but it's a different kind of heightened reality; the Nolanverse focuses on the criminal drama aspects. TDKRs focuses on the general 80s malaise and ennui. I guess part of what I don't like about it is how much it reminds me of "The Happiness Patrol" episode of Doctor Who.
 
2012-08-18 01:12:50 PM

Fano: Of course, I had the nagging doubt that readers who didn't grow up during the Cold War wouldn't have been nearly as impressed.


I did grow up during the cold war, although I was still in grade school when the threat evaporated. There are Cold War things that have more resonance for me, like Greg Bear's Eon.
 
2012-08-18 01:17:45 PM

Mugato: FirstNationalBastard: That's exactly what I wanted to know... if someone who read it for the first time today would be blown away, or just see it as another book.

I'm not really one to be clouded by nostalgia. If it doesn't impress anyone who reads it for the first time, it could be because it's been copied so many times. Like if they ever do make a movie out of Neuromancer, people who never read it in the '80s would say, "What is this Matrix ripoff shiat?".


That may be more of the problem. Still, the originals often have a power of their own. A zillion slasher movies made, and Halloween still feels fresh to me.

Is it ok to discuss Watchmen, DKR spoilers in this thread? The "shocking twists and stunning revelations" in both have been ripped off so many times I'd find it hard for a modern audience to be impressed. Still, you got to respect the line "I'm not a Republic serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome?" since it seems like it took the popularity of Austin Powers to defy that common trope. Well, and Goldfinger's famous line "no, I expect you to die!."

Also, Miller and Moore led to the grimdark 90s of loathsome murderous "heroes," so there's that to consider as a negative mark on their legacy. OTOH, that led to greater appreciation of Golden and Silver age optimism/morality with stuff like Kingdom Come. Is it a wash?
 
2012-08-18 01:20:45 PM

Fano: Mugato: FirstNationalBastard: That's exactly what I wanted to know... if someone who read it for the first time today would be blown away, or just see it as another book.

I'm not really one to be clouded by nostalgia. If it doesn't impress anyone who reads it for the first time, it could be because it's been copied so many times. Like if they ever do make a movie out of Neuromancer, people who never read it in the '80s would say, "What is this Matrix ripoff shiat?".

That may be more of the problem. Still, the originals often have a power of their own. A zillion slasher movies made, and Halloween still feels fresh to me.

Is it ok to discuss Watchmen, DKR spoilers in this thread? The "shocking twists and stunning revelations" in both have been ripped off so many times I'd find it hard for a modern audience to be impressed. Still, you got to respect the line "I'm not a Republic serial villain. Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome?" since it seems like it took the popularity of Austin Powers to defy that common trope. Well, and Goldfinger's famous line "no, I expect you to die!."

Also, Miller and Moore led to the grimdark 90s of loathsome murderous "heroes," so there's that to consider as a negative mark on their legacy. OTOH, that led to greater appreciation of Golden and Silver age optimism/morality with stuff like Kingdom Come. Is it a wash?


I don't think they're spoilers after nearly 30 years.

Anyway, About Watchmen... I know it's supposed to be an integral part of the story and all, but does anyone ever really read the stupid pirate comics sections?

In the years since I bought my first copy in 1997, I think I've only read them once, and that was because if I was going to pay 75 bucks for the Absolute, I was damn well going to read every page.
 
wee [TotalFark]
2012-08-18 01:28:27 PM
Since comics sadly remain an understudied and under-analyzed literary medium

Uh, what?

I guess this guy never tried to get into ComicCon...
 
2012-08-18 01:29:31 PM

wee: Since comics sadly remain an understudied and under-analyzed literary medium

Uh, what?

I guess this guy never tried to get into ComicCon...


They have Comics at San Diego Comicon now?

Wow, that's news.
 
2012-08-18 01:39:19 PM

FirstNationalBastard: I don't think they're spoilers after nearly 30 years.

Anyway, About Watchmen... I know it's supposed to be an integral part of the story and all, but does anyone ever really read the stupid pirate comics sections?

In the years since I bought my first copy in 1997, I think I've only read them once, and that was because if I was going to pay 75 bucks for the Absolute, I was damn well going to read every page.




I started reading them, then after the first started skimming. Much more interesting were the text sections/case files, etc. that established a whole alternate history that I thought was neat. I know the pirate story is supposed to be a parallel tale, but I think it was just that Moore just wanted to draw pirates and E.C. comics.

The Dark Knight Strikes again by the way is Miller's signed confession that he was gone mad. And I say this as someone who wishes he'd keep writing All-Star Batman and Robin (age 12). Sadly, I think he figured out that people are on to his little game of "just how offensive can I make Batman and the StuporFriends and have fans keep buying?
 
2012-08-18 01:41:28 PM

t3knomanser: Shrugging Atlas: But that is quite secondary to the fact it put Batman in a 'real' setting

Um, no. It was a dark setting, but it was hardly a realistic setting. The Nolanverse isn't terribly real either- but it's a different kind of heightened reality; the Nolanverse focuses on the criminal drama aspects. TDKRs focuses on the general 80s malaise and ennui. I guess part of what I don't like about it is how much it reminds me of "The Happiness Patrol" episode of Doctor Who.


I'm not talking real as in, "This could totally happen" but real in the sense that he's not portrayed as your typical, flawless comic book character. "Real." "Dark." "More real?" Whatever the adjective the point is this isn't the typical idealized portrayal of the character.

He's flawed, gets his ass handed to him, uses poor judgement, and is outsmarted by the Joker the entire way through the story. Bruce Wayne/Batman is more in line with what you would expect from an individual with incredible wealth that chooses this unhinged course of action in some attempt to get over the grief and guilt of his parent's death...rather than going to a pshrink, drowning his sorrows in hookers and blow, or just plain getting the fark over it like any normal person would do.

So no, the comic is not real in the sense a single man can take on and fight 30 gang members or cops at once in close combat or a human looking alien from Krypton would be working for the Reagan Administration. As is the case with Nolan's movies where we have a heavily armored vehicle driving on the roof of an old church or blowing up police cars without killing the cops and having him end up at the top of the FBI's most wanted list and being branded a domestic terrorist.
 
2012-08-18 01:45:37 PM

Fano: The Dark Knight Strikes again by the way is Miller's signed confession that he was gone mad.


Let us not speak of such things. That pile of fail was so farking bad it could drive the reader mad. I'm all but certain he made it as bad as he possibly could just to be a dick.
 
2012-08-18 02:17:11 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Fano: The Dark Knight Strikes again by the way is Miller's signed confession that he was gone mad.

Let us not speak of such things. That pile of fail was so farking bad it could drive the reader mad. I'm all but certain he made it as bad as he possibly could just to be a dick.


Yup. I think Batman: Year One was the last, best work of 'Mainstream' comics Miller did. Then he went of into 'Hard Boiled' and 'Give Me Liberty', expanding into pushing the boundaries of violence in comics. He just kept spiraling downwards until he's where he's at today: a mistaken belief that 'adult' story-telling involves ultra-violence and sex.
 
2012-08-18 02:41:20 PM
The "Big Blue Boy Scout" phrase still resonates.
 
2012-08-18 02:52:10 PM

Fano: FirstNationalBastard: I don't think they're spoilers after nearly 30 years.

Anyway, About Watchmen... I know it's supposed to be an integral part of the story and all, but does anyone ever really read the stupid pirate comics sections?

In the years since I bought my first copy in 1997, I think I've only read them once, and that was because if I was going to pay 75 bucks for the Absolute, I was damn well going to read every page.



I started reading them, then after the first started skimming. Much more interesting were the text sections/case files, etc. that established a whole alternate history that I thought was neat. I know the pirate story is supposed to be a parallel tale, but I think it was just that Moore just wanted to draw pirates and E.C. comics.

The Dark Knight Strikes again by the way is Miller's signed confession that he was gone mad. And I say this as someone who wishes he'd keep writing All-Star Batman and Robin (age 12). Sadly, I think he figured out that people are on to his little game of "just how offensive can I make Batman and the StuporFriends and have fans keep buying?


No troll at all, but All Star Batman and Robin was glorious. Apart from Snyder's New 52 Batman, no one does anything interesting or memorable with the character. Miller did. He "gets" Batman like no other writer out there.
 
2012-08-18 03:43:36 PM

Hebalo: Fano: FirstNationalBastard: I don't think they're spoilers after nearly 30 years.

Anyway, About Watchmen... I know it's supposed to be an integral part of the story and all, but does anyone ever really read the stupid pirate comics sections?

In the years since I bought my first copy in 1997, I think I've only read them once, and that was because if I was going to pay 75 bucks for the Absolute, I was damn well going to read every page.



I started reading them, then after the first started skimming. Much more interesting were the text sections/case files, etc. that established a whole alternate history that I thought was neat. I know the pirate story is supposed to be a parallel tale, but I think it was just that Moore just wanted to draw pirates and E.C. comics.

The Dark Knight Strikes again by the way is Miller's signed confession that he was gone mad. And I say this as someone who wishes he'd keep writing All-Star Batman and Robin (age 12). Sadly, I think he figured out that people are on to his little game of "just how offensive can I make Batman and the StuporFriends and have fans keep buying?

No troll at all, but All Star Batman and Robin was glorious. Apart from Snyder's New 52 Batman, no one does anything interesting or memorable with the character. Miller did. He "gets" Batman like no other writer out there.


ASB&R IS glorious, I agree. Of course, I see it from the side of Miller being like the demon feeding Homer donuts in hell "I hear you like gritty violent crazy Batman. WELL HAVE ALL YOU WANT." Nearly killing Green Lantern in the yellow room was great. Wonder Woman treating men like walking meatbag sperm donors, Superman casually punching her in the back of the head. All of it gloriously crazy. I don't know if he quit writing it because he realized he'd reached some sort of Great Barrier to Poe's Law or what. Linkara may call it "the Adventures of Crazy Steve," but seriously, Miller took one audacious flying leap while creating this. This was memorable stuff. Now, Dark Knight Strikes Again was just terrible.
 
2012-08-18 03:55:01 PM

2wolves: The "Big Blue Boy Scout" phrase still resonates.


Of course we're criminals. We've always been criminals. We HAD to be criminals.

Some of the internal dialogue in TDKR was outstanding, and Jimmy Olsons opening article was terrific.
 
2012-08-18 05:22:07 PM
Didn't read past the first page, but at least the author pointed out to me that there's a misspelling on the cover of Daredevil #168.

Always liked Miller's Marvel stuff.
 
2012-08-18 05:33:17 PM
I owe subby a beer or something. Reading that 8 part nerdgasm was an excellent way to kill an afternoon.

TDKR is quite simply a work of art. I've revisited it over the years and it still holds up well.

It probably always will.
 
2012-08-18 06:48:35 PM
Great book, I have read it about 5 times now and it reminds me of how Supermam is God like but can't get past what it would take to ever beat Batman if he had to.

Oh and does anyone remember the Darkwing Duck ep. based on it? Great cartoon.
 
2012-08-18 07:11:14 PM
Yeah, Miller may have gone off the rails a wee bit in recent years, but man, when he did it right, he REALLY did it right.
 
2012-08-18 09:59:29 PM

FirstNationalBastard: Mugato: I'm not going to read that opus but The Dark Knight Returns was an awesome book, one of the first comics I ever read.

But does it hold up?

If someone were to read it today, would it still be an awesome book?


Read it for the first time not two years ago. I still look back on it fondly.
 
2012-08-19 12:40:41 AM

Subdue their bellies: You don't get it, boy. This isn't a Frank Miller thread... It's an operating table. And I'm the surgeon.


Oooo. My gun has no bullets.
 
2012-08-19 01:05:06 AM

Dumb-Ass-Monkey: Yeah, Miller may have gone off the rails a wee bit in recent years, but man, when he did it right, he REALLY did it right.


Frank Miller was an absolute genius who knew how to take comics into a more adult world. Unfortunately, from pushing comics as something for 8 year olds, he upped the average to 16 year olds, who demanded nothing but strippers, hookers, and men with large weapons.

I don't mind his off the rails modern era at all, for reasons explained in my previous posts, He's both Typhoid Mary and Jonas Salk.
 
2012-08-19 01:42:28 AM
Shrugging Atlas:

So no, the comic is not real in the sense a single man can take on and fight 30 gang members or cops at once in close combat or a human looking alien from Krypton would be working for the Reagan Administration. As is the case with Nolan's movies where we have a heavily armored vehicle driving on the roof of an old church or blowing up police cars without killing the cops and having him end up at the top of the FBI's most wanted list and being branded a domestic terrorist.


I don't really want to glorify the Aurora shooting, just comment. A man, well-prepared and carrying the element of surprise, killed multiple people. Crazy people have committed many mass murders recently. I think that because they don't really understand that what they are doing is wrong, they don't think what they are doing is impossible. It simply needs to be done.

If someone could be Batman, they'd have to be borderline crazy for it to work. It's what professional soldiers say all the time; you stop and think about what you're doing, you're dead. Just act, react and carry on.
 
2012-08-19 02:51:29 AM

FirstNationalBastard: But does it hold up?


Figure it will.
 
2012-08-19 10:28:37 AM

Fano: Frank Miller was an absolute genius who knew how to take comics into a more adult world.


Comics started out in that more adult world- things like "Sin City" were meant to recall the early days of comics, before the underwear perverts took over. The old school, hyperviolent horror and crime comics died under the CCA. I'd actually argue that Miller was more of an archaeologist than an innovator.

Frank Miller did the right things while being in the right place at the right time. He was smart enough to see the opportunity and talented enough to grab it. But I would not call him a genius. And like Harlan Ellison, after a few early successes, his limited genius has been swallowed by his assholitry.
 
2012-08-19 12:52:25 PM

unlikely: Also, since the article covers Dark Knight in which he makes Catwoman a prostitute and the Wolverine miniseries and a few other Frank Miller pieces where he shows his nigh-republican views on What Women Are Good For, AND because it's obligatory in any real Frank Miller thread:

[satelliteshow.files.wordpress.com image 500x745]


I see this sort of comment all the time, and while I agree he does have a propensity for "writing" his female characters as nothing more than blank replacable prostitues, I do feel I have to defend him (just a little) by mentioning that he is the man who created Elektra: Assassin. If only because it is my all time favourite graphic novel.

Elektra is his best most defined female character and nary a hint of any whorishness. Also see Martha Washington in Give me Liberty and Carrie Kelly/Robin. Of course three strong non-whore characters do not balance out the rest and I agree somewhere along the way Mr. Miller went off the deep end . Seemingly after 1990 when both Elektra Lives Again and Give Me Liberty were published.
 
2012-08-19 03:35:08 PM

The Thoroughbred of Sin: I see this sort of comment all the time, and while I agree he does have a propensity for "writing" his female characters as nothing more than blank replacable prostitues, I do feel I have to defend him (just a little) by mentioning that he is the man who created Elektra: Assassin. If only because it is my all time favourite graphic novel.


Sure, not everything he writes paints women as whores but as you say, he does have the propensity. I mean why did Catwoman have to be a prostitute (or madam)?
 
2012-08-19 05:30:06 PM

Mugato: The Thoroughbred of Sin: I see this sort of comment all the time, and while I agree he does have a propensity for "writing" his female characters as nothing more than blank replacable prostitues, I do feel I have to defend him (just a little) by mentioning that he is the man who created Elektra: Assassin. If only because it is my all time favourite graphic novel.

Sure, not everything he writes paints women as whores but as you say, he does have the propensity. I mean why did Catwoman have to be a prostitute (or madam)?


I just sat down and re-read year one. I cant say I ever had a problem with the depiction of selina kyle in year one, in fact I think year one is probably the best origin story IMHO. I like the way all the main characters are conceived, epecially Gotham itself. Now I am no literaty critic but let me take a stab at the catwoman/prostitue issue.

In the book we see Selina as a prostitue in 2 scenes, the first is when Bruce wanders into the seedy side looking to test out his fighting ability. In that scence we see Selina as a protective mother type figure for the young Molly. She remains aloof during the initial confrontation with the pimp watching from her window (presumably during a dominatrix session, although we are unsure if it is personal or professional) she only gets involved when Bruce hurts Molly. The second time we see her as a prostitute is when she punches out the pimp and tells Molly "we are changing or profession". And thus begins her career as a burgler. All in all her being a prostitue is essential irrelevant to overall story.

In the city of Gotham almost everyone is the opposite of their surface appearance. The police are more a criminal gang than a law enforcement unit, the commisionare is more of a Don than a cop, Gordon is a disgraced cop who becomes the moral center of the story (while cheating on his pregent wife) and Bruce Wayne appears to be a wealthy, frivoulous man but is actually a deeply disturbed and obessessed vigilanete. Selina in my mind represents the same thing, she is on the surface a prostitute, so I a criminal and typically seen as powerless and victmized, in fact she is a strong powerful woman and while not a "hero" seems to be the good side. In that she exhibits the maternal attitude towards Molly and targets her crimes on the criminal upper class.

I would also suggest that traditionally Catwoman has always skirted the edge of criminal do-gooder. While never a "hero" she was not a true "villian" she always seemed to more a Robin Hood type to Batman's ethical vigilante. So a female/criminal mirror to Batman, or even the opposite half. This is in imo why Catwoman is often suggested as a love interest without ever becoming one and it is important to note that Catwoman has always been "sexy". Where Bruce is the lawful/privilaged man dragged down to become a costumed vigilante, Selina is criminal/disadvantaged raised up to become a costumed vigilante. The difference in their outcomes, ie Bruce helps others while Selina robs to help herself, is due to their relative starting positions.
Of course I realize there are always the odd issue or comic that defies this conception.

So does she need to be a prostitue? nope not at all. Her character could have defined in many ways, but given the very small role she plays in the comic, I think introducing her in an other way would have required more back story and a seperate plot line. I am tying to imagine who to introduce Selina and Bruce in a way that has as little impact on the story while still defining the basic traits of the character. She is not a criminal that requires Batman to chase or hunt, she essentially adds nothing to main plot line, in fact her character could be completely removed from the story and have no impact on the main story line.

All in all I think making her a prostitute was just the easiest way to create the essential parts of the character without actually having to do the work of creating a backstory and a plot line.

I havent thought this much about comics in years.
Off to read Dark Knight now
 
2012-08-19 09:33:28 PM

The Thoroughbred of Sin: I havent thought this much about comics in years.
Off to read Dark Knight now


Well then it's a successful book.
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report