Morrison's Batman sucks

>Satan trips

I knew this viewpoint was evil.

Morrison is a shitty writer
>muhhh so deep
fuck off

>>94192999
Kids these days have shit standards.

>>94192999
tim drake sucks.

>>94193049
>>94192999
OP seems to be sperging again

So does Snyder's Batman. And King's Batman.

>>94192999
Tim drake is gay.

>>94193100
but that's why we love him

The problem with Morrison's Batman and Morrison in general is if he isn't working with what are essentially blank slates (Doom Patrol) then his stuff is absolutely OOC. He wants to write everything as he interprets them from the concept up, not from the vast history of that character. His only good contribution was Dick and Damian being bros.

Morrison's run is best read as a grand overarching story. Batman & Son through Inc really isn't bad. Final Crisis sucked though.

>>94193205
All Morrison runs should be read like that.

>>94193197
>Morrison's Batman is an exploration of the character as the most adaptable Superhero, and he puts Batman through a glut of genres using his old stories and characters
Genuinely tough for me to believe you read the story, or know much about Batman considering his Dick bats is a twist on prodigal and Damian a twist on son of the demon
His Talia is OOC and that's about it.

It was sort of neat that those new Batman animated movies were based on a mix of Morrison's run and New 52 stuff.

>>94193271
Just about everyone in his run was OOC

and Batman Inc. was a stupid idea

>>94193197
That's not a problem. That's just characterfags going not muh.

What about O'Neil's Batman?

>>94193485
as if you'd know.

Morrison's only top-tier on a short leash.
If given half an opportunity he will always veer off into Crazyland.

>>94193664
It's overhyped, but it doesn't suck

It should've ended with Bruce coming back.

>>94193739
It should've ended with Bruce not coming back.

>>94193630
>characterfags going not muh
this is a legitimate complaint if the characterfag has an actual history with that character and knows what that character is supposed to act like upon generally adopted characteristics common among most of that character's stories

>>94193630
You mean like >>94193485

>>94193690
if he didn't habitually veer off into crazyland he wouldn't have such a loyal fanbase. that's why we read his stuff in the first place

>>94193760
I mean, I actually agree but that's something that wasn't going to happen.

Is this another one of those threads where someone is using a bot to pretend-argue?

>Batman kills people
>lmao another NOT MUH BATMAN

>>94193763
I doubt that most characterfags even read comics. Especially when they claim OOC for a character who has gone through lots of changes for 70+ years.

>>94193803
Morrisonfags only read comics written by Morrison and then claim it to be the definitive version of that character when it's not.

>>94193763
cancerous mentality, retard fans thinking they know better is a big part of the problem.

>>94193953
Wouldn't that apply to >>94193923

>>94193923
Nah, you're the only one who is screaming not muh rather than Morrison fags saying that Morrison's version should be the default. There's a reason characterfags are considered to be most autistic on this board.
I doubt anyone who has read O'Neil's as well as Dixon era Batjerk can consider there to be just one version of the character.

>>94194082
>the only one
considering I didn't write the other two posts regarding Morrison writing OOC characters, there are at least three people in this thread who don't agree with you

>>94193100
Wait, really?

>Gordon sees a new very young Robin get paralysed
>Just let's Batman take him like it's no big deal
NOT
MY
COMMISIONER

>>94193760

Superman shouldn't have come back either.

>>94192999
It's not bad, but its pretty flawed.

First, other writers generally try to make Batman stories about SOMETHING. Human flaws, grief, greed, rage, jealousy - something like that. Alan Grant made his entire run by talking about social issues through Batman. And Grant... just writes stupid "fun" stories that are mostly driven by nostalgia and nothing else. It's like Marvel movies or Transformers, entertainment - but with no redeeming qualities. It's like popcorn of comics, you won't come out of it any richer or with better understanding of you as a person, you just saw some cool shit.

Second is the problem that he tries to reinvent Batman - Batman Incorporated, Death of Bruce Wayne, War for the Cowl, dickbats, Damian Wayne as new Robin - except, here's the thing. Batman didn't NEED reinvention. Late 2000's DC Comics had a lot of flawed comics that were chasing their own tail and were in desperate need of a reboot (which is why New52 happened) but Batman WASN'T one of them. Batman was perfectly fine before, with Jeph Loeb and Paul Dini on helm, respectively. In fact, Batman sold better under Loeb that it did under Morrison. There's a reason that when almost every story in New52 did some dramatic, drastic changes, Batman instead was DEBOOTED - it was brought back to pre-Morrison status quo as a noir detective thriller, with emphasis on regular villains and solving crimes, over bullshit like Batman Incorporated.

Third problem is nostagia baiting. Jesus christ, the nostalgia baiting. When Marv Wolfman was writing Crisis on Infinite Earths, his motto in writing it was "each generation should have its own heroes", a motto I agree with.
Morrison's approach is completely and absurdly almost opposite, making pretty much a REQUIRED READING random Batman issues from the 1950's. That and Final Crisis proved continuity porn was cancer.

All in all, Morrison Batman wasn't TERRIBLE, and it was memorable - but it's one of the more average runs on the book.

>>94196007
>Batman instead was DEBOOTED - it was brought back to pre-Morrison status quo as a noir detective thriller, with emphasis on regular villains and solving crimes, over bullshit like Batman Incorporated.

Did you even read Snyder's run? Because it is all about over the top bullshit.

>>94193485
T. Someone who started reading comics in 2011.

>>94196007
>First, other writers generally try to make Batman stories about SOMETHING
It is about something, you tard.

>Second is the problem that he tries to reinvent Batman
There's nothing wrong with reinventing and adding to a character. If it weren't for writers doing that in the past, the characters you oh so love today wouldn't be as good.

>Third problem is nostagia baiting
Not sure if retarded or not, but the plebbiest Morrison Batman run fags are the ones obsessed with Batman & Robin and Dickbats. No nostalgia baiting there.

>>94196007
Once again i see that the people that don't like Morrison's run is because either a) they don't fully understand it b) it's too complicated or c) all of the above.

Serious House is the best Batman book

>>94196257
I mean, that post was clearly written by Scott Snyder himself. Over long, completely flawed, and attempting to subvert the influence and craft Grant put into the run before him.

I like Morrison's Batman but hate fans of Grant Morrison.

I dont like Morrison but his run was beautiful, it was a mash of Batman's history while adding to it without destroying it but rather creating this cohesive narrative about the nature of Batman, Morrison understands the crux of the character and simply adds his own twist to it, much like what he did with X-Men. It was great stuff.

>>94196154
It's over the top, sure, but it's classic Batman and not Morrison Batman. He's a detective who solves crimes, even if crimes involve putting magical seeds inside people of Gotham. He's NOT having adventures all over the world with Batman Incorporated and fighting evil spy organizations, he's fighting murderers in Gotham. Out of story arcs in his run, FOUR are about long established villains - Dr Death, Riddler, and TWO Joker arcs. If that doesn't scream "back to basics" after Morrison's run where not a SINGLE main villain was old recurring guy, then I don't know what does.

The thing is, after the 'three Batmen' arc, Morrison basically loses focus that Batman is a detective in a city, while during Snyder's run he is a detective all the time. When Morrison replaces Batman, it's so Batman can go on adventures around the globe while another superhero takes up the mantle.
When Snyder replaces the Batman, it's because Batman is down for the count, and he is replaced by an actual POLICE DETECTIVE.

I'm not particularly defending Snyder's run, it's not the best either - but it was attempt at well, making Batman about Gotham again. I mean, the very first words of the first issue of New52 Batman are a monologue about what Gotham is to people - Morrison's run would never do that.

>>94192999
Does not

>>94196187
>It is about something, you tard.
About what? Can you summarize the values, morals, or message of Morrison's run, or any story arc from it, in a single sentence?
Btw, "what story is about" doesn't mean what HAPPENS in it. It means what the story's ideas and message are about, and Morrison has nothing aside from "Batman being cool". Which is not horrible, but it's a flaw.

Morrison's Animal Man is about relationship to humans and animals - and parallels it has to humans and characters we create in stories, and that we should be kinder to both. But what is Morrison's Batman about? Can you tell?

The problem with reinventing Batman is the old adage "don't fix what aint broke". Animal Man was a boring bad character when Morrison got to him, and he made a minor background character a B/C-lister. When he got to Doom Patrol, it was a directionless X-Men ripoff (which was pointless because Teen Titans existed) and he made it into a minbender of a story. When Morrison got to Batman, it was a perfectly running story about a detective superhero in a gritty city, taking on crazy villains and shadowy conspiracy. He then tried to force it to become 'fun' and 'cool', but eventually it was rejected, and story is still about detective in a city, as it was before.

As for nostalgia baiting - I'm referring to all the pointless and de facto meaningless references to older Batman stories. Dr Hurt, Club of Heroes, Black Casebook - all that crap was more or less pointless because noone read Batman stories from the 50s anymore, so noone got the references. It's like a prime example of how NOT to use continuity.

>>94196257
>>94196281
>2deep for you
Morrisonfag spotted. I don't even like Snyder's run that much, but you seem to think that Batman started running in 2006 and no Batman story was written before? Miller, Loeb Grant and O'Neill are all leagues better Batman writers than EITHER Morrison and Snyder.
(mind you, I'm saying they're better at writing Batman, I'm not saying they're better writers in general. Morrison is a good writer, but his Batman is not his finest work.)

>>94197122
Its all about the legacy Bruce leaves behind and the idea of Batman. That's why all the elements from the older stories are used, because he aims to unite the Batman mythos into a single run.

>>94192999
Morrison's everything sucks to be honest

>>94197329
Someone's jealous he doesn't own a castle in Scotland.

>>94197370
Just never really enjoyed the guy's writing. I guess I could say he's objectively good but just not for me

>>94197303
That's... interesting. I didn't get that from the first writing. Sure, I don't think that theme fits ALL of it, but I kinda get it.
I guess I'm gonna give Morrison's Batman another read, keeping what you said in mind. We'll see if that will change my opinion on it.

>>94197676
*first reading, not first writing. Derp.

>>94193032
satan trips are 666 you fucking newfag

>>94197025
> He's a detective who solves crimes,
There is the whole "Club of Heroes" interlude where Batman solves a murder, classic detective work, but you have obviously forgotten it, Scott, as you haven't aped it yet.

>Morrison's run where not a SINGLE main villain was old recurring guy
Joker showed up. Darkseid was heavily involved.
>When Snyder replaces the Batman, it's because Batman is down for the count, and he is replaced by an actual POLICE DETECTIVE.
Who promptly forgets that he is one, and becomes instead, bizzarly, an action hero devoid of all Gordon's established personality or habitus.

>>94192999
OP sucks. But we all knew that already.

>>94193803
>I doubt that most characterfags even read comics
They are the reason why comics aren't died yet. Like seriously, who the heck would bother with cape comics if they weren't fans of the characters?

>>94196007
You call Morrison's Batman popcorn flick, but defend mediocre runs like Snyder and Loeb?
Snyder even copied all of Morrison's run without any of the thematic meaning.
Batman was shit in the 2000s before Morrison. A lot of people would agree that pre Morrison 2000s and new 52 are the worst eras for Batman. Only Gotham Central and City of crime were the good Bat books from that era.

>>94197178
It may not be his best work, but no way do hacks Like Loeb come anywhere near it.
O'Neil's run was good, but he's known more for his impact on the character.
Grant's run is highly overrated by /co/. It went to shit once Wagner left and is filled with a lot of mediocre stories. The three 50th anniversary fill in guest issues by the Batman movie writer were far superior to his run. Milligan's run from around the time is far superior too.
I'd say Morrison, Englehart, Puckett, Lapham, Milligan were the superior Batman writers compared to the ones you named.

>>94199390
>Like seriously, who the heck would bother with cape comics if they weren't fans of the characters?
This.

>>94197676
You don't need to be a genius to understand that it's about Batman's legacy, his impact and immortality in pop culture since he can transcend genre.

>>94193777

So it's not because you guys are an actual cult?

>>94197178
>Loeb
>better Batman writer than EITHER Morrison and Snyder.

No. I mean, I still find Loeb's stuff enjoyable, but you're fucking wrong here.

>>94202084
They're not part of a cult any more than the guy saying Morrison's Batman is bad is part of a Batman cult

>>94200533
You're overestimating the intelligence of Capefags. Morrison's stories are pretty straightforward most of the time and his themes are on the nose, and it's still surprising that people claim that they're incoherent. That's what happens when you read a lifetime of Johns and Loeb.