Aug 31 2010 6:25pm

The Great Debate: Bruce Wayne vs. Dick Grayson

On August 30th the New York Post broke their most serious story in months: starting in November there will be two Batmans (Batmen?), Dick Grayson AND Bruce Wayne. I read the New York Post story yesterday, followed by the interpretations from several other websites and at first I was a little confused. How could anyone logically back up this idea? I’m really hoping my brain wasn’t the only to explode.

Let’s break this down. Bruce Wayne is Batman. He has always been Batman. If there were no Bruce Wayne there would be no Batman. Dick Grayson is not Batman. Dick Grayson was Robin and assumed the role of Batman because Bruce Wayne was lost in time. Case closed.

Apparently while Bruce was lost he hit his head on something—or the publishers at DC Comics are just trying to make some more cash—because now Bruce Wayne believes Batman needs to be global. All of a sudden, Bruce Wayne is thinking more like a businessman than a vigilante. DC publisher Dan DiDio explains, “Grayson’s role really is the protector of Gotham City. But we thought it only made sense for Bruce Wayne, a billionaire, to take a more global view.”

DiDio makes it sound like Bruce Wayne woke up one morning and suddenly realized he’s a billionaire. Except, he’s been ridiculously wealthy all along. Bruce Wayne flashes his wealth when necessary, has a high tech armory and all of a sudden he’s looking at being Batman as a business opportunity? This is not Batman; this is a perversion of what Batman stands for.

I may be old fashioned in my thinking but doesn’t Batman already possess global impact? Couldn’t he perhaps network better in lieu of becoming the McDonalds of superheroes? More so, Batman’s identity is based on the fact that he chooses to fight for Gotham because of his emotional connection to the city in lieu of having emotional connections with individual people.

I also love the fact that DC is trying to lessen the blow by explaining how the “Bat-men” will be divvied up. Grayson will remain the Batman for Detective Comics, Batman, and Batman and Robin AND—here’s the real selling point—Grayson’s costume will remain the current bat suit with the black logo, but Bruce Wayne (who will be Batman in Batman Inc. and David Finch’s Batman: The Dark Knight) gets, brace yourself, the return of the yellow bat symbol.

Well at least they’re giving us that.

Meme photo from Photobucket user ubersnuber

Annie Gala is not Batman, Bruce Wayne is Batman.

John McCarthy
1. John McCarthy
I've been reading comics for about 40 years. Been a Batman fan longer, due to reruns of the old Adam West series. (Young kids don't know from campy, you know?)
And I agree with everything Annie says. This sounds like design by committee, or, worse: writing via corporate initiative.
james loyd
2. gaijin
I'm hopelessly out of the loop. So, what happened to Tim Drake? Can he take over as Nightwing now that Dick finally gets to be Batman (you know, without actually being the REAL Batman)?
rob mcCathy
3. roblewmac
I am Not one those comic fans who says "should'nt you read it before calling it a bad idea?" Where do those people get their comic money anyway?
This is a bad idea and they know it
Binyamin Weinreich
4. Imitorar
I actually have no issues with Dick being Bruce's successor as Batman. I mean, there's no one else who could do it better. Obviously Dick could never truly be Batman the way that Bruce was, (as Tim Drake once said, "You can't really be Batman without being Bruce.") but as Bruces "oldest son", so to speak, and his original partner, the mantle belongs to him by right in Bruce's absence.

But all of that assumes Bruce's death or absence. If Bruce is around, he is clearly the only true Batman, in any and all ways. The idea of "Batman" is too tied to his personality for it to be otherwise. Either Bruce is gone and Dick assumes the mantle of Batman, or Bruce is back and Dick is Nightwing. This idea is just a mess and a travesty of what Batman should be, and I desperately hope DC undoes it soon. The worst part is that apparently Dick was supposed to go back to being Nightwing once Bruce returned, but because people liked him as Batman, DC decided on this. This is the result of thinking like marketers and not storytellers.

The worst thing is that the Flash has already been screwed into a similar situation. Once Barry came back, there was nothing left for Wally. He was the Flash for nearly 20 years, and now what is he? Does he even have a book to show up in, now that the Titans are a villain team? The worst part was that in Blackest Night, Wally said he was the Nightwing to Barry's Batman, and Barry said he was the Flash to his Flash. So apparently DC has no plan to make Wally a hero in his own right but related to the Flash, like Nightwing was to Batman, and give him his own book. Wonderful. A character who was one of the most important in the DCU for decades reduced to nothing due to editorial nostalgia. And now this with Batman. Not happy, DC...
Daniel Goss
5. Beren
This is a wonderful idea. Batman can become a major supporting character in every single comic that DC produces. Just immagine: a "Batman" in every major city in the DC Universe. Bruce Wayne is not required anymore, so he retires to Metropolis where he starts following Clark Kent around with a camera while shouting things like "look everyone, I shot him but he's not bleeding!" and "Can't any of you idiots make a mental picture of what he'd look like without glasses? Remind you of anyone?"
I'm sorry, I've lost my train of thought. The sheer awesome of this idea has permenantly derailed me.
John McCarthy
6. goodfellow_puck
Yeaaaah, I'm just going to go re-watch my Batman: The Animated Series DVDs and think of a happier time when Batman made sense.
Chuk Goodin
7. Chuk
You know what's cool these days? Reality TV! That's how they should do the next Batman -- they could make it a cross between American Idol and Survivor, but with more crime fighting. The audience can vote, you could have some celebrity/super-hero judges...DC could even tie it in to the real world with 1-900 numbers, like they did the first time they killed Jason Todd.
David Siegel
8. bigscary
Dick's been Batman, and Bruce has been lost in time for, errrrr, just short of a year and a half (it'll be eighteen months even in November). It's been an era of some great batman stories, and the run-up was almost as good. Far from design by committee, it's all the singular vision of Grant Morrison, generally considered one of the best comics writers working, and has been an incredible ride focusing on the transcendence by the Batman of any one man beneath the cowl and the simultaneous declaration that not only is Bruce Batman, he is Batman even when he isn't (the Zurr-en-Arrh portion of RIP, his return miniseries).

I suggest you read current comics before you write an article about them. One of the Batman themes Morrison has been working with for a decade and more is that he is simultaneously a gritty urban avenger roughing up muggers and someone Superman calls on to help fight invasions from beyond the stars. I, personally, can't wait.
John McCarthy
9. Ouranosaurus
I second Bigscary's comments. The recent Return of Bruce Wayne miniseries has been partly about how Bruce is Batman even when he's trapped thousands of hundreds of years in the past, and about how he inspires Batman-analogues everywhere he goes. Short list of heroes inspired by Batman: Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, Tim Drake, (all Robins) Batwoman, three Batgirls including the current Oracle, Huntress, the Question, Knight and Squire… I've leaving a bunch out, but I think with Morrison helming it, the idea of Batman Inc stands a good chance of being awesome.

With anyone else, it would probably be a turd sandwich, however.
Henry Loose
10. schrodinger
This is a crap idea. No need to sugar coat it, its still crap. Batman is Gotham City, Gotham City is Batman. The city always seems to resonate and reflect Batman (especially the Frank Miller Batman) Move him out of the city and he's just not as effective (superman only works out of metropolis because he has the ability to... super speed and all). Dick Grayson also does not belong in the bat suit. He's a whiny punk.
Soon Lee
11. SoonLee
So, it's like the Batman version of the Green Lantern Corps?

Why stop there? We could do Batman versions of all other superheroes. First we take Gotham...
Annie Gala
12. AGala
I love the fact that I wrote this HOURS ago, this is my first opportunity to see what you guys have to say & 11 comments! That's huge!

Let's chop it up...

BigScary & Ouranosaurus - valid points. Even good ones, but hasn't Bruce Wayne AKA Real Life Batman was first introduced in 1939 - what you're suggesting is that over 60 years of Bruce Wayne as Batman is being negated due to recent comics? A decades worth of work hardly trumps that.

I want to keep an open mind about this & will dutifully read selections from both but this is a blatant opportunity for DC to make some bucks by getting dedicated Batman readers to buy, buy, buy, which is business minded and brilliant but sort of dishonest. Let's see how this turns out but I am about the results.
John Carr
13. CyricPL

One reason I'm in the BigScary & Ouranosaurus camp is that, realistically, 60 years of Bruce Wayne as Batman has been anything but a single cohesive character. You mention in the post that it sounds like Bruce Wayne is only now remembering he's a billionaire -- but Silver Age Batman did all kinds of globe-hopping and time traveling and had ridiculous technology for all of it, all of which requires exploiting his wealth.

The fact is, what we all mean when we say Bruce Wayne is Batman is the character as he has been since roughly the 70s/80s (even the original "dark" Golden Age version is quite different from our modern conception of of Batman).

So Grant Morrison is writing another Batman story that plays with and inverts the conventions and expectations built up by past comics. I'm game.
Scott Skocy
15. skoce
CyrilPL Bigscary & Ouranosaurus are right. Morrison, the sole architect to this Batman story, is much more in tune the entire 60 year history of Batman than people who only know Frank Miller's Batman. The whole point of Morrison's run on Batman is how Batman, with all of the sidekicks and "knock-offs," has become bigger than Bruce Wayne. Though if you just want to complain about something you haven't read, both this new series and Morrison's Batman run, go right ahead.
John McCarthy
16. kushiel
I don't know which is chicken or which is egg, but the parallels between Batman and Captain America bother me to the point I lose interest in both. Both 'deaths' are timelost adventures, then respectively replaced by Dick and Bucky Cap? Meh.
Mark Means
17. mmeans68
Sounds like yet another money making idea by a comic book company already charging $4.00 for a book. I think the only one who thinks this is a good idea is Didio. Oy!

Now I remember why I've stopped buying comics.
John McCarthy
18. Jason Langlois
I'm hopelessly out of the loop. So, what happened to Tim Drake?

Tim Drake is now Red Robin, while Damien Wayne (Bruce's son by Talia) is Robin. Jason Todd is The Red Hood. As far as I know, no one is currently Nightwing, unless there's one of the Kryptonians from Kandor currently using the name.
John McCarthy
19. Chad Cressley
This is just another example of the comics industry cannabilizing its own. As someone who read comics growing up in the 80's and is kind of interested in getting back into them again, stuff like this just confuses me and makes me not want to bother reading them. I want the whole story of Batman when I read a comic titled "Batman." Unfortunately, I don't get the whole story unless I buy 60 different comics this month and maybe 53 next...etc. I would need to spend every waking hour of every waking day tracking which comic line Batman will be appearing in next, just to get the whole story. As an adult, I just don't have time for this, so I don't bother. It's a shame really, as I would probably buy one or two comics regularly if I knew I wasn't missing 50% of the story. Instead I buy none.
John McCarthy
20. HudsonP
I'm a little surprised, as I thought the latest storyline was building up to re-establishing the status quo. I'll be ditching the books, when Morrison goes, but mainly because I'm more of a Morrison fan than a Batman fan. Morrison's run has been sweet indeed - he's at the top of his game.

I'm not a big fan of massive character revisions, but I think the point is well made that it has happened many times in the past. The difference now is that the changes are hyped and hallyballoo-ed like they're the second coming, precisely to elicit responses like the OP.

@ Chad Cressley - I understand the sentiment, and I do sometimes feel a little faint at the till when the bill is added up, but I think that this is as much an evolution of the way comics stories are told as a naked cash grab.

Around the time Siegel & Shuster left Superman, the character replaced the creator as the motive force behind comics; when Spidey turned up in Fantastic Four, a process began that has displaced the character in favour of the setting as the focus of super-hero comics story-telling. It looks to me like a logical development of the idea of continuity, something that began as a way to cross-market supers titles in the first place.

Since Civil War, I've concentrating on reading events rather than characters - I just buy the books that are related to the "event" rather than follow the continuity for any particular character (although I do get hooked from time to time - World War Hulk totally sold me on The Incredible Hercules, eg, and I got drawn into the Avengers line by the events in Secret Invasion).
James Goetsch
21. Jedikalos
Ha ha ha ha ha. He'll hire them out like security guards: Rent-a-Batman. Ha ha ha ha ha.

Seriously--they get paid to think of this?
John McCarthy
22. Chad Cressley
@ HudsonP
Using events as a reading guide is a good idea. Though, I'm not sure it works for me, as I tend to read based on characters I like and dislike.

I'm less concerned with the cash, than I am of the time needed to stay on top of one character and get the entire story. There are just too many branches to follow.
John McCarthy
23. HudsonP
Yeah, I think there are a few ways to approach supers and - obviously - you go with whatever floats your boat. My approach is partly a response to Completist Syndrome, where I've found myself buying comics long after I've stopped enjoying them out of a deep seated need to get them all (or perhaps simply nostalgia). I find that putting a duration limit on reading helps combat that. When I do start picking up a regular book, I usually bail when the creative team (more often just the writer) changes.

Of course, these day, if it turns out I missed out on something great I can usually pick it up as a trade a couple of years later - we didn't have that luxury in the olden days!
Jason Ramboz
24. jramboz
The next Gotham Times Bestseller: "I am Batman (and So Can You!)" by B. Wayne. Coming soon to a DCU bookshelf near you.
Annie Gala
25. AGala
We'll have to wait & see I guess. These will most certainly be added to the pull list reviews when they debut in November.

It's great to see so many opinions in the same place! What's even better is the information I'm getting by reading these comments & the passion we all share for the Bat.
Simon MacDonald
26. macdonst
I think that having both Bruce and Dick as Batman makes a lot of sense. From what I know Dick will stay in Gotham and be the Batman for that city while Bruce goes around the world training other Batmen. Not they will also use the Batman moniker. Check out the Club of Heroes storyline by Morrison for a look at the Batmen of many nations. I love Knight and Squire characters, UK Batman and Robin.

Also, this is a natural extension of Bruce's character that has been building for a long time. Any future representation of Bruce always shows him extending his reach but having multiple Batmen. See Kingdom Come or The Dark Knight Returns for two classic examples.
Marcus W
27. toryx
This is yet another example of why I don't read comics in the first place.
28. MasterAlThor

That is not fair. Comics are a wonder diversion for people. I have many a fond memory of my comics. Of course I gave them all to my older sons, but I still want to know what's going on in the comic world.

Now as for there being two Batman's. DC's editors have been drinking the Marvel editors kool-aid. It seems to me that if you have a way to wreck a franchise you just have to do it. The EIC at Marvel wreck Spider-Man, why not have the EIC at DC wreck Batman.

Oh well as long as they don't mess up my X-Men.

Aaaaaggggghhhhh too late.


Perhaps toryx was right.
james loyd
29. gaijin
I had completely forgotten, but DC actually did something similar in Brotherhood of the Bat. If memory serves...
After Bruce dies, Ra's al Ghul finds early Batman costume/equipment sketches that Bruce had abandoned and put them to use...ALL of them. Suddenly there's an army of Batmen with different capabilities.

The big difference is that they actually did it the right way that time. The main thing is that it was an Elseworlds issue, so it was okay to do anything because it didn't effect the "real" continuity. Also, it took place after Bruce is out of the picture, which is obviously a prerequisite for anybody else to step in as Batman
Marcus W
30. toryx
MAT @ 28: I wouldn't want to stop anyone else from their enjoyment of comics. I was just explaining that it's weird stuff like this that keeps me from enjoying them myself.
John McCarthy
31. Dicky G
Shame on you Batman! Shame!

Well, at least the yellow/black symbol is back. That really is something...
Paul Lewandowski
32. Snowkestrel
I haven't been reading the comics for a while, so I can't comment on how the recent stuff has been leading up to this, however, this does illustrate yet another interesting note in the Batman/Superman dichotomy. When Superman returned from the dead, one of the first quote-worthy things the character said was "I am not a franchise".

Well, apparently Batman is.

Let's see how that works out. I suppose that fighting your way back to the present through hundreds of thousands of years can kinda make ya think, right?
33. MasterAlThor

You are absolutely right. Stuff like that keeps good people from reading comics. I hate it as much as you do. I can't even talk rationallyabout what Marvel did to Spider-Man.

David Siegel
34. bigscary
Serious question. When did any of you insisting Bruce is always and forever the one singular Batman in one singular book last read a current Batman comic? All those old comics will still be there. There will probably never be a movie made about DickieBats, and he probably won't figure in any big-name minis or oneshots (think DKR).

What's the harm?
David Siegel
35. bigscary
Serious question. When did any of you insisting Bruce is always and forever the one singular Batman in one singular book last read a current Batman comic? All those old comics will still be there. There will probably never be a movie made about DickieBats, and he probably won't figure in any big-name minis or oneshots (think DKR).

What's the harm?
John McCarthy
36. Ouranosaurus
To everyone who's writing "This is why I don't read comics anymore!" please, a gentle reminder that superhero comics are not all comics.

This is like saying "Ugh! Twilight (or insert your literary bete noir here) sucked! This is why I don't read books anymore!"

Even as the industry's biggest comics are glutted with terrible storylines (just from the last few years, Spider-Man's Satanic deal, Avengers Disassembled, Countdown, Infinite Crisis) there are still lots of great comics being produced. Just to keep things on Grant Morrison territory, check out the trade of We3, which has nothing to do with heroes, was a three-issue standalone, and which is ideally suited for comics.

So even if the Batman Inc. storyline does suck, it does not damage, as bigscary said, any of your favourite old Batman stories like Year One or Dark Knight Returns. And we know it won't be forever. And it doesn't harm any of the ongoing indie or creator-owned titles, or any of the good superhero books on the market.
Zack Heikkala
37. Yardsale
Dick Grayson was created in 1940 by the original creator of Batman: Bob Kane. In 1980 something, it was decided to change his persona. I understand that characters need to evolve, but it was done in bad form. I think if Bob Kane had any influence on the decision, he would rather have had him killed off permanently.
John McCarthy
38. CapeMonkey
I don't see the contradiction here - Bruce Wayne is Batman, a man so obsessed with seeing that no one is hurt by crime ever again that he dresses like a bat and punches muggers in the face. Now he'll be using more corporate techniques not as a business opportunity, but as an opportunity to prevent even more people from being hurt - while still dressing like a bat.

It IS probably out of character for Dick Grayson to carry on being Batman, but I'm willing to wait and see if they provide a good reason for that.
John McCarthy
39. gladiusdei
I'm thrilled about this development. Half classic Batman, half Global Frequency-style conglomerate of Batmen? Awesome. And given you've admitted yourself that you haven't read the 3 years of books building up to this change of POV on Bruce's part, perhaps you should look into doing so before sounding off with fanboy rage.

Though, if I myself hadn't been following the books and read that article, I too would be "Batman franchise, WTF?!"
John McCarthy
40. Dean Trippe
This post is just way off base. Grant Morrison, one of the best writers to ever write comics, has been telling some of the most reverent, continuity-friendly, and intellectually satisfying runs on the series, ever.

Batman, Inc. has nothing to do with editorial mandate or selling more books. Honestly, I don't think some of the folks running the show over there even understand the books Morrison writes.

This article barely makes sense, anyway. The number of ongoing Batman titles is not at all dependent on the number of active Batmans. Honest.
John McCarthy
41. AndrDrew
"Batman Inc." Pfft. It's not a moneymaking intitiative, it's a club. A club of folks networked around the world who follow the (oddly) charismatic leader Batman. Who has a secondary identity as a "normal" Bruce.

"First rule of Batman Club, don't talk about Batman Club."

Actually, that could be a pretty entertaining story.
Dave Robinson
42. DaveRobinson
I think it's worth a look - Morrison's Dick Grayson Batman has been very good.

People forget that the idea of Dick Grayson as Batman with Bruce's son as his Robin is fifty years old. As for the Bat-franchise, that's just a logical riff on the "Batmen of Many Nations," "Club of Heroes," idea that's been around for the same amount of time or longer.

Morrison is just trying new takes on previously existing ideas, examining the nature of Batman as depicted throughout his over seventy year career, not just the latter half of it.
John McCarthy
43. Ales Kot
I second everything Dean Trippe said. Also:

Bruce Wayne flashes his wealth when necessary, has a high tech armory and all of a sudden he’s looking at being Batman as a business opportunity?

Your assumption (being Batman now perceived as a business opportunity by Bruce Wayne) doesn't have any facts behind it.

More so, Batman’s identity is based on the fact that he chooses to fight for Gotham because of his emotional connection to the city in lieu of having emotional connections with individual people.

And again, your assumption isn't backed up by any facts. Batman repeatedly fought for the world, not just Gotham.

So. Six paragraphs, TWO big factual mistakes. How many issues/trades worth of Morrison's run did you read?
John McCarthy
45. The Ninja
I find it amusing when comics readers get so obsessed with continuity... They are ALL imaginary stories! Just because one storyline deviates from another doesn't invalidate any of them. If it's a good story, it's a good story. Grant Morrison's take on Batman is different than Neal Adams's, which is different from Frank Miller's which is different from Steve Englehart's, etc., but they all have their strengths and weaknesses.

Personally, I think Batman, Inc. is a great starting point for a series. Logically, a real-life Batman would be often hurt or even killed in the kind of day-to-day activities he does, so it makes sense to have substitutes ready to step in. Whether Morrison handles this with the same quality he has shown on other titles remains to be seen, but I am looking forward to trying out this new series.
46. MasterAlThor
Here is my personal problem with Batman Inc.

1. Batman is not a franchise
2. DC has a world savior.....He is called Superman
3. There used to be an unwritten rule amongst the heroes, you don't hunt in others backyards. Now Bruce is just going to hunt wherever he pleases?

Or is he going to (gasp) subcontract his Batman persona?

It's the Men of Steel all over again I tells ya!!!

John McCarthy
47. Dean Trippe
MasterAlThor/"Dragon" - I'm just gonna tackle your first point, because the others are nonsensical.

Batman IS a franchise. He's just realized he needs to take it more seriously. Consider:

Robin (Dick Grayson)
Batwoman (Kathy Kane)
Bat-Girl (Betty Kane)
Batgirl (Barbara Gordon)
Robin (Jason Todd)
Huntress (Helena Wayne)
Nightwing (Dick Grayson)
Robin (Tim Drake)
Huntress (Helena Bertinelli)
Oracle (Barbara Gordon)
Batman (Jean Paul Valley)
Batman (Dick Grayson)
Batgirl (Cassandra Cain)
Robin (Stephanie Brown)
Robin (Damian Wayne)

And that's just the heavy hitters, man. Batman is ABOUT embowering others to operate under his emblems with his tools and training. Check it.
Joseph Blaidd
48. SteelBlaidd

For those who are completly fed up with the Editorial decisions of "the Gotham Post."
go here-> http://catwoman-cattales.com/
Brett Dunbar
49. Brett
It isn't as if DC having several charecters with the same moniker is new. There were substantial periods with two Green Arrows (Oliver Queen and Connah Hawke) who at least dressed quite differently. There have been two Flashes for decades, Jay Garrick and Wally West. There are currently three, two of whom (Barry Allen and Wally West) dress almost identically (the lighting belt is slightly different, Wally's has a dip by the crotch while Barry's dosen't). That is without getting into the Starman situation or the Green Lanterns (Alan Scott and four Green Lantern Corps members from earth, Hal Jordan, John Stewart, Guy Gardner and Kyle Rayner) or Doctor Light &c.
John McCarthy
50. David Ano
I am not sure why people are making a fuss about this ... the "Batmen of All Nations" was introduced in 1955 as well as an expanded version implied heavily in Kingdom Come in 1996. Bruce Wayne will be "the Batman" no matter if he wears the costume or not, but to say that he is the only Batman would be false.
John McCarthy
51. jbelkinsii
With Grant Morrison at the helm of the Bat-verse I'm going to hold my opinions for at least a year. While I missed the whole "Batman: R.I.P." storyline (Thomas Wayne's a criminal master-mind?) I have thoroughly enjoyed the most of the current crop of Bat-centric titles. Which brings me to a general call for Detective Comics and Batman to become anthology titles ala the UK's 2000AD and Judge Dredd (but that's another geek topic for another day).
William Hassinger
53. iObject
I'm going to play a wait-and-see approach because I like this idea because Bruce Wayne is still the original Batman, he's still the Boss, all that kind of thing, but it puts him into a subtly different role. It's a logical thing for the character to do in many ways and is an extension of things he's already done. He's trained a number of Robins, he's inspired or trained a bunch of other people (let's not forget Batman Beyond, while we're at it) and worldwide Batman-based organizations are not actually a new idea as has been stated above, and I'd like to point to the Batmen of the fantastic Superman: Red Son as an example of what it might be like. It was pointed out in the Hush storyline that, for a man whose shtick is "dark loner" he has a lot of dependents and compatriots.

It's also not unlike Kick Ass, or the Batman movies, where, gods forbid, there might actually be consequences to what Batman is and what he does rather than the baseline assumption that Hero=Good & Proper.

Let's also not come down on DC for trying to make money. It's a business. They've ALWAYS been trying to make money. Maybe, just maybe, they tell a good story in the process. It's been known to happen once in a while. We give them money when they do it right and make something we want to read. I'm comfortable with that, just as I am when I buy a good book from Tor. I could accuse this site of being a money-grabbing attempt at creating brand loyalty to sell more books. But that's neither fair or polite.
John McCarthy
55. sergio_garcia
I'm gonna check out the mini-eries first and then quit batman. I've been holding out for bruce's return but this idea looks like a bomb to me. Dick is just a guy in the batsuit pretending to be bruce. I always thought he got a way from the bat to find his own way? lame.
John McCarthy
56. Phaedrusgr
I do believe that having identical heroes is kind of ridiculous. Nevertheless, having two batmen is more than ridiculous. Bruce Wayne is the Batman, Dick Grayson is the Batman, I am the Batman, everyone can be the Batman. The Batman needs you, join him! He may have as many associates he wants, he may train as many heroes he wants, but being the President Batman in a big hero corporation seems ridiculous. I think that Morrison needs to complicate things. So, we could see many Batmen, all over the world, maybe they could have a recruitment office, you know cv, interview, salary etc. Bad idea, terrible story. That's my opinion, I don't want to change anyone's mind. It's my personal opinion. I always considered ridiculous the many human green lanterns concept...Never imagined DC could manage to create something more ridiculous than this concept. There you go, DC. You did it! Last but not least, didn't Bruce actually reveal his secret identity, when he confessed his financial aid towards the BAT?

Subscribe to this thread

Receive notification by email when a new comment is added. You must be a registered user to subscribe to threads.
Post a comment