?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Page | Next Page

Since I haven't read this before, I won't bother with a spoiler section. But if someone who has read it wants one, please let me know, and I'll put one up! I mean, there will be spoilers for today's reading obviously, but since I don't even know what's coming next myself, I won't be spoiling that. :p


Yeah, I expected this to be dark, so... no real comment about that. Except that maybe I would blame this book and others like it for starting the trend for things to have to be "dark" and "gritty" and "mature" or whatever. Feh.

The introduction works well enough, basically setting the scene, and that's what it's there for so it does its job.

The first bit of the actual comic though throws me - what the hell does a race have to do with anything? I guess it's trying to get us into the current mind-set and attitude of Bruce Wayne but... really, it just confuses me. It made me think he'd become a race-car driver or something in this version of things, but no. He's still a millionaire, if not a "playboy" these days, and that was just... whatever.

It's a bit awkward for me to get into this. Some of the scenes jump around with little or no or confusing segues, the art is murkier and the colors blander than I'd like, and the writing is good, certainly, but the characters don't feel right to me. Of course they've been written by so many people in so many styles, that's not as much of a complaint, plus there's the fact that this is ten years + on from what I suppose was the "current" DC Universe at the time, so there's that.

And having the Joker attempting to assassinate Harvey Dent via proxy, using a disguised bomb, was pretty nifty. Along with the villains starting to crop up again as the Batman re-emerges. And it does raise some good thoughts about vigilantes, as to whether they're good because they stop criminals, or worse because they're unlawful themselves and just add to the chaos. I'm not really sure where I stand on vigilantes myself - I guess like so many things, it's a matter of each case being different.

"Arkham Home for the Emotionally Troubled" is a nice touch... and subtle.

I also like the crack about painting a big target on his chest - because he can't armor his head/face against gun shots. ;) And I'm assuming with the bit about "inspires the same level of loyalty from his men" that it means that although we don't see it, Dent was "helped" from the copter by his underlings? *boot*

And I'm left wondering just what he did with Harvey at the very end. I'm assuming left him for the cops, but who knows?

And I'm so glad that hairstyles didn't really go in this direction, because ye gods.

As one last note: the whole red eye bar thing, and term "mutants," makes me think of Cyclops from the X-Men each time I see them crop up. Anyone else? And I wonder if that's deliberate...


Remember, Tuesday we discuss Book Two. See you then!

Comments

stormfeather
Oct. 8th, 2010 05:15 am (UTC)
Might have more to add tomorrow but...

1) Good, glad it's not just me. I know I can be nitpicky with art, and not necessarily in agreement with others on it. :p But yeah, I felt the same thing about Bruce... it didn't look like, well, Bruce.

2) I also had the Batmobile thought, which I guess we're supposed to, but I still felt that at the end, it was a bit out of place. Since when is Bruce Wayne a race-car driver?

2b) Yeah, the bit about Batman being a separate personality from Bruce Wayne (more so in this than in some other things) was another thing I'd meant to mention. The Batman persona definitely seems to have a life of its own, here, and in some disturbing ways. And with the bit about the "dark mirror" that you said... that plays into the end of the chapter, where Batman just says he sees Two-Face as a reflection.

I didn't catch the split panels bit though. (And damn, the bats in this are scary... since when are Vampire Bats around the U.S. anyhow? :p

3) Hrm, I missed it where they said Gordon was dead...?

4) Even aside from the vigilante question, I think the line of thought opens up interesting questions, like... is it justified to fight violence with violence? Or I guess to some extent it would have to be yes unless you believe in total pacifism... but to what extent? How far before the people fighting against the violent become just as bad as what they're fighting against?

Blah, then again, it's a bit too late at night to be pondering these things. To bed!