- Welcome to Batman-Online.com.
Recent posts
#11
Misc Comics / Re: DC has sunk to a new low
Last post by thecolorsblend - Sat, 22 Mar 2025, 21:09My initial reaction was that this is obviously intended to be funny. But I just don't see it. Without even bothering to check, I just assumed that it was written by a woman. After Slash Man's reply, I checked it out.
Sure nuff, Joanne Starer.
Women aren't funny.
Sure nuff, Joanne Starer.
Women aren't funny.
#12
Comic Film & TV / Re: Spider-Man 2 (2004) Comic ...
Last post by thecolorsblend - Sat, 22 Mar 2025, 21:06Agreed. I doubt it would've been a big problem. Raimi took a certain amount of grief over Peter's organic web shooters but it subsided soon enough. I don't think revelations involving Peter's parents would've been such a big deal for most people.
#13
Misc Comics / Re: DC has sunk to a new low
Last post by Slash Man - Sat, 22 Mar 2025, 04:03I'm curious how Harley can be one DC's most successful characters, yet they seem to have no direction for her. For a while they were pushing the sex appeal aspect (exemplified by Margot Robbie's skimpy outfit in Suicide Squad), but that's completely at odds with whatever this is.
I can understand throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks, but do they not see the damage this does to the brand?
I can understand throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks, but do they not see the damage this does to the brand?
#14
Comic Film & TV / Re: Spider-Man 2 (2004) Comic ...
Last post by Slash Man - Fri, 21 Mar 2025, 01:14Quote from: The Joker on Sun, 16 Mar 2025, 07:03I think the MCU gets a pass for some reason (though the Mandarin was a bridge too far), but I remember the first Raimi film got a lot of crap for the organic web shooters and the Green Goblin suit. As the third film got a lot of crap for... well, everything. The second film doesn't get a lot of flack for accuracy, but I think that's because it doesn't feature any significant deviations.
The script involving a decidedly less sympathetic Doc Ock, whom is responsible for the deaths of Peter's parents, certainly has shades of Batman 1989.
I'm sure the comparison would've been made, but who's to really say how that would have gone over with the fans? Since deviating from the comic source doesn't seem to get the amount of critique with the MCU, as it does with DC.
Could just be a Superman/Batman thing though.
The wisdom I've gained over the years is that films shouldn't be a 1:1 adaptation of the comics because they're different mediums. What's most important is that you capture the spirit of the original stories.
You might be able to get away with altering Spider-Man's backstory when it comes to his parents; they weren't as engrained in his backstory as Uncle Ben and Aunt May, for example.
#15
Graphic Novels / Re: Batman: Year Two
Last post by Slash Man - Fri, 21 Mar 2025, 00:00Continuing to read through the TPB, I'm surprised how tight the continuity was in early post-Crisis comics. Detective Comics #574 does a lot to bridge the old and the new. Specifically relating to this topic, I thought it was crazy that Bruce kept Joe Chill's gun from the crime scene in Year Two, but that was already explained in this issue that it was thrown through a fence.
Other tie-ins include references to Dick Grayson retiring from Robin after being shot (an issue that wouldn't come out until next month), and Jason's revised introduction as a street kid (months later). There's even a flashback to Bruce donning his first batsuit from Year One in here. It's actually a good tie-in to Year Two, as it goes into a good amount of detail of the Wayne's being killed (combining elements from a few different retellings), and focuses heavily on Leslie Thompkins' relationship with Bruce.
Though the one thing preventing it from being a direct sequel to Year Two is that the current timeline concludes a two-parter from when the Mad Hatter wounds Robin.
Other tie-ins include references to Dick Grayson retiring from Robin after being shot (an issue that wouldn't come out until next month), and Jason's revised introduction as a street kid (months later). There's even a flashback to Bruce donning his first batsuit from Year One in here. It's actually a good tie-in to Year Two, as it goes into a good amount of detail of the Wayne's being killed (combining elements from a few different retellings), and focuses heavily on Leslie Thompkins' relationship with Bruce.
Though the one thing preventing it from being a direct sequel to Year Two is that the current timeline concludes a two-parter from when the Mad Hatter wounds Robin.
#16
Comic Film & TV / Re: Daredevil: Born Again (Dis...
Last post by Gotham Knight - Wed, 19 Mar 2025, 13:57I'm still debating as to whether to even bother with this.
My thing is: I'm one of the rare people out there who thinks that Daredevil (2015) season 1 was one of the best superhero things ever done while also thinking that the rest of the show's run (especially season 2) was the worst crap I've ever wasted time on. I believe that the whole of the Netflix Marvel experiment was a horrendous disaster and when I heard that this show got completely retooled to be more like the OG show I found myself less and less interested in trying it out, especially because I'm told you can see the seams where they've cut and stitched this thing and most of the reviews I'm seeing claim that the original more episodic version of this show is the better stuff. I suppose that's to be expected as I personally think serialization has killed TV as a format because writers don't understand that serials and episodics still basically function the same way on a week to week basis.
My thing is: I'm one of the rare people out there who thinks that Daredevil (2015) season 1 was one of the best superhero things ever done while also thinking that the rest of the show's run (especially season 2) was the worst crap I've ever wasted time on. I believe that the whole of the Netflix Marvel experiment was a horrendous disaster and when I heard that this show got completely retooled to be more like the OG show I found myself less and less interested in trying it out, especially because I'm told you can see the seams where they've cut and stitched this thing and most of the reviews I'm seeing claim that the original more episodic version of this show is the better stuff. I suppose that's to be expected as I personally think serialization has killed TV as a format because writers don't understand that serials and episodics still basically function the same way on a week to week basis.
#17
Comic Film & TV / Re: Daredevil: Born Again (Dis...
Last post by Travesty - Wed, 19 Mar 2025, 13:43I'm really disappointed in this show. I know people are liking it, but man, this is a boring slog to get through. Sure, there's a few scenes that are good, but we're talking maybe 2-3min per episode.
And I binged all 3 seasons of the Netflix show, which I still think are the best live action depiction of a comic book property we've ever seen. This show has fallen well below its Netflix counterpart. I'll stick with it, but the first 4 episodes have been pretty bad, IMO.
And I binged all 3 seasons of the Netflix show, which I still think are the best live action depiction of a comic book property we've ever seen. This show has fallen well below its Netflix counterpart. I'll stick with it, but the first 4 episodes have been pretty bad, IMO.
#18
Graphic Novels / Re: Batman: Year Two
Last post by The Dark Knight - Tue, 18 Mar 2025, 08:23Exactly. The Reaper concept has a lot of potential but it's not explored in an interesting or even logical way. I think the better story would've been Batman beating The Reaper in all of their encounters with the latter becoming more desperate and increasing his methods, frustrated that the gun-less rival is holding his own. Reaper eventually fades away into irrelevance with Batman's modus operandi validated. Batman grabbing a gun after getting bested by the Reaper feels random and extreme considering what preceded the story.
#19
Graphic Novels / Re: Batman: Year Two
Last post by Slash Man - Tue, 18 Mar 2025, 02:35Quote from: The Dark Knight on Mon, 17 Mar 2025, 09:13I'd need to read the story again but I don't like the way the ideas were presented. I can buy Batman deciding to use Venom in his early years to compensate for a lack of strength in saving people. I don't have a problem with Batman being more ferocious in combat, or simply defending himself and manslaughter happens as a result. But holstering a gun?These both show Batman's response to being young and inexperienced. His stint with venom can be blamed on naiveté; his heart was in the right place, but he didn't think through the consequences of taking an experimental drug. Guns, on the other hand, are something that he already had a lot of time to think about.
Now that I think about it, there's no real revelation when it comes to guns. When Batman starts in Year One, he is vehemently anti-gun due to his past circumstances. When he ends Year Two, he's back to being anti-gun. There's no real drama that made you believe he was going to make a mistake that would carry serious weight. Writing a prequel is challenging in that respect.
#20
Graphic Novels / Re: Batman: Year Two
Last post by The Dark Knight - Mon, 17 Mar 2025, 09:13I'd need to read the story again but I don't like the way the ideas were presented. I can buy Batman deciding to use Venom in his early years to compensate for a lack of strength in saving people. I don't have a problem with Batman being more ferocious in combat, or simply defending himself and manslaughter happens as a result. But holstering a gun?
I like what Batman Beyond does with firearms, with their possible use being a very last resort when Batman is vulnerable and at risk of serious damage. But even then it's something he hates doing. Take away the 'no guns' argument for a second, it's also an admission he's not intimidating enough or physically capable without them. He's disgusted with himself and decides to retire.
I like what Batman Beyond does with firearms, with their possible use being a very last resort when Batman is vulnerable and at risk of serious damage. But even then it's something he hates doing. Take away the 'no guns' argument for a second, it's also an admission he's not intimidating enough or physically capable without them. He's disgusted with himself and decides to retire.