Mr. Freeze's Revised Origins (SPOILERS for Batman Annual #1, 2012)

[Silver Nemesis]

I rewatched the B:TAS episode 'Heart of Ice' a few evenings ago, and it got me wondering what everyone thinks about the latest version of Freeze's origin story from 'Night of the Owls: First Snow' (Batman Annual #1, 2012).

For those who haven't read it, beware of spoilers. The main divergences from the traditional 'Heart of Ice' origin are:

•   Victor Fries murdering his mother as a child
•   Bruce Wayne being the businessman who terminated Fries' research and triggered his transformation into a supervillain
•   Nora no longer being Victor's wife, but a young woman cryogenically-frozen in the 1940s that Victor's delusions fixated on

So what are your thoughts? An interesting twist on a familiar narrative, or an unnecessary revision that strips his story of its pathos?

[johnnygobbs]

So what are your thoughts? An interesting twist on a familiar narrative, or an unnecessary revision that strips his story of its pathos?

Having read your outline Silver, it unfortunately sounds like the latter to me.

SPOILER WARNING:

The notion of Victor Fries killing his mother just turns him into another 'bad mad' guy like Black Mask or Hush (both of whom killed their parents) than a more sympathetic 'sad mad' character.  Turning him into a stalker with a fixation on a woman who is not his wife further detracts from the pathos traditionally associated with the character (at least for the last twenty years or so).

The only element I care for is having Bruce Wayne be the businessman who terminated Fries' research, thus adding to the emnity that exists betwen the two men.

Overall though I have to ask why anyone would think any of these changes were necessary...

[Paul (ral)]

I read it last month. The annual itself was quite good.

The changes are just for the sake it I fear. It makes Freeze more black and white, which isn't as interesting to me.

[Silver Nemesis]

Victor Fries has been one of Batman's more relatable adversaries ever since Paul Dini gave him that tragic origin story. This new origin undoes all that in one fell swoop. Instead of being driven by a desire to help someone he loves, he's now driven by the pursuit of an insane delusion. That makes him less sympathetic in my eyes, and a lot less interesting.

I also didn't like the bit about him killing his mother. I didn't like it when Cobblepot killed his father and brothers in Pain and Prejudice either. I hope this isn't going to be the trend now – that every Batman villain murdered their parents when they were a child.

[Azrael]

Haven't read it, so I go by this thread.

I removes any iota of sympathy. I really liked the 1997 "Mr. Freeze" one-shot (basically a re-telling of the Heart of Ice origin) so this is bad. Now he's practically a Complete Monster without redeeming qualities. Like many things (the crappy DC logo or pressing the reset button on the numbering of titles that were around since the 30s), I can't see why they did it.

[GBglide]

Victor Fries has been one of Batman's more relatable adversaries ever since Paul Dini gave him that tragic origin story. This new origin undoes all that in one fell swoop. Instead of being driven by a desire to help someone he loves, he's now driven by the pursuit of an insane delusion. That makes him less sympathetic in my eyes, and a lot less interesting.

I also didn't like the bit about him killing his mother. I didn't like it when Cobblepot killed his father and brothers in Pain and Prejudice either. I hope this isn't going to be the trend now – that every Batman villain murdered their parents when they were a child.

Agreed^

[riddler]

I agree with most of the above posts. The neat thing about batman villains is that they are essentially off the book extremists who don't fit a psychological pattern hence why they necessitate a need for an unconventional vigilante. Having so many of them with child issues including killing their parents is clichee. I like the notion of having Hush do it because they created him as a contemporary rival of Bruce Wayne.

I like having Mr. Freezes overall path being similar to two faces up to his origin; a very intelligent successful person who becomes a villain due to tragedy. The difference is that after their tragedies, Dent chooses to be a villain whereas Freeze is basically doing what he feels he has to do.

[thecolorsblend]

Finally read Court of Owls/Night of Owls so here we go.

Hate to be the lone voice of dissent here but it didn't faze me. It fit the story being told (Freeze is hardly an innocent victim in what goes in with the Court of Owls) but it doesn't somehow unmake the revised Dini origin. If that's your preference, those movies, comics and TV shows are still out there. Hell, that's basically the Mr. Freeze presented in Smallville- Season 11 from a few months ago.

But the other reason it works for me is because as much as I like Dini's Mr. Freeze (let's cut the crap, it is definitive), to me that marked the beginning of villains being less villainous and being more "misunderstood". It worked basically any time BTAS attempted it because Paul Dini and the other writers have balls the size of pumpkins but I fear it led to a trend where evil isn't evil anymore; it's just "a different point of view". Well, um, no! Maybe my moral outlook is too inflexible and black and white but there is good and there is evil, and evil must be punished. Even in the face of Armageddon I do not want a superhero to compromise in this. I mean, why not write, say, General Zod as just being a mean, spiteful, evil, irredeemable SOB? I don't always want to sympathize with a villain. Sometimes I want to cheer the hero on as he beats the piss out of the villain. What's so bad about that?

Is Freeze the best character to start a trend going the other way? Well, since he arguably touched off the "tragic villain" thing to begin with, yeah, maybe so.

[The Dark Knight]

I mean, why not write, say, General Zod as just being a mean, spiteful, evil, irredeemable SOB? I don't always want to sympathize with a villain. Sometimes I want to cheer the hero on as he beats the piss out of the villain. What's so bad about that?

I don't mind sympathetic villains in the vein of Freeze, but indeed, some characters just need to be set in their ways and downright evil. Big, ol' Baney boy bashes Bats and stomps around Gotham with a bad attitude and an ever badder (meaning terrible) plan. But it's all 'three dimensional' once he drips a tear from his eye over Talia. Yep..that worked a treat Chris. Masterful writing. That doesn't redeem anything (it's a point against if anything) but why even try it here? In my opinion it just wasn't needed. I didn't feel sorry for him and didn't want to. And that's ok.