Comic Vine News

161 Comments

BATMAN: ZERO YEAR Announced

Now we'll finally know how it all began.

After Death of the Family, we've all been wondering what happens next. What could Scott Snyder and Greg Capullo have coming up? When looking at this coming year, Snyder did tell us the following:

Our big story in 2013 will be the most daring and ambitious one we've done. Hands down.
S

What could that mean? It appears it means they're going back to Bruce's roots. In a story with the Associated Press, it was revealed that BATMAN: ZERO YEAR would begin in issue #21.

BATMAN #21
It’s not ‘let’s redo the origin.' It’s time for a new story showing how Batman became who he is in the New 52.

Due to the nature of the New 52 in bringing new origins to many in the comics, a question has remained what has and hasn't happened with Batman? Snyder's plan is to show us how Batman found his calling and what challenges he first encountered. The story will be an 11-issue story beginning with June's issue #21 with art by Greg Capullo.

We tried to preserve as much of Batman’s history as we could and keep what we could of this history intact. It’s ‘The Zero Year,’ the one that no one has told the story of before. We see how Bruce became the Batman, built the cave, faced off with his first super villain.

It's pretty amazing in all these years, this story has never been fully told. Snyder also notes they do not plan to 'take apart' Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli's YEAR ONE.

It’s time for a new story showing how Batman became who he is in the New 52.

I say, it's about time. Many of us have been wondering how it all began in this New 52 Universe. And as Snyder put it, we never really saw how he actually became Batman in terms of building the Batcave and all. This should satisfy those that want these details plus deliver a new story to those that don't get hung up on the little details. It also sounds as if this will be pulling the comic away from the other Bat-titles. We'll have to find out more.

Source: Associated Press

161 Comments
  • 161 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Edited by BR_Havoc

@Equonox said:

@BR_Havoc said:

@Reignmaker: Honestly I have not bought a Batman issue since they reintroduced Freeze and did a horrible job making him another throw away rogue for Batman to beat up on for an issue or two.

I found Freeze's new story to be way deeper. They took the old MO that Freeze had and turned it into a figment of his (psychotic) imagination, which means not only is Batman dealing with an incredibly intelligent scientist hellbent on saving his wife, but he's doing that while simultaneously trying to convince Freeze it's not reality. Ever try to convince someone who was love stricken that it's all in their head? Can be harder to do than just beating someone up. Thus, they added more depth to the character, but I guess I'm the only one here willing to critically analyze the situation. It's also kind of like Manti T'eo...lol

You see I found it the opposite possibly because its highly influenced by the background of Norman Bates from Psycho. So to me they took aspects that Dini gave him that showed how twisted and how far you would go for love and how that can break a human. In many ways you felt bad for Freeze you thought is he truly a villain or just someone willing sacrifice everything to save his wife. This new Freeze is psychotic something completely new for Batman villains, Snyder managed to remove everything that made him a unique Batman villain the philosophical aspect of Dini's Freeze is lost he is now only a psychopath with a cold gun. So were was the new depth that was added? he is incredibly one dimensional.

So I guess you are not the only person that with is willing to analyze a character.

Online
Posted by arnoldoaad

It's pretty amazing in all these years, this story has never been fully told. Snyder also notes they do not plan to 'take apart' Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli's YEAR ONE.

And thats all i need to know

Posted by EuanLauder

Eh. I'm skeptical. Thats all i'll say.

Posted by Lvenger

@Equonox said:

@Fantasgasmic said:

I am trepidatious. Batman Year One was really good, and the only retcons to it I've seen is awful (Kevin Smith made Batman pee himself).

In my mind, a Year Zero wouldn't have him facing off with any supervillains. Year One was all about the Mafia, and the idea that the supervillains didn't get a foothold until organized crime lost its stranglehold on the city, and there was a power vacuum. Also, "Year Zero" makes almost no sense whatsoever as a concept. Year One didn't start with Bruce putting on the cowl, it started with him coming back to Gotham (at the end of the first issue, he made the decision to become a bat. So having the cave before Year One also makes little sense.

If Snyder wants to show us a Batman Origin story fitting into the New52, he should show us Bruce's travels around the world training. The "Missing Years" as it were. We saw a little of it in some of the Zero issues, but we know he trained with Henri Ducard and his son from the Nobody arc in Batman and Robin. Those are the stories I think would be good to tell; they would add to the Batman origin, without completely rewriting it and retelling/changing the same old stories over and over again.

Year Zero makes perfect sense - it's the time before Bruce returns to Gotham (as you said yourself, Year One was the first year with the Cape and Cowl in Gotham).

Something everyone seems to be missing here (at least the people hating on the idea) is this isn't going to retcon anything about Year One - this is the period of time BEFORE Year One that really has never had a lot of time dedicated to it in comics before. Stop whining and complaining, especially if you can't conceptualize what time period Year Zero would encapsulate. I, for one, am incredibly interested in seeing where Bruce went and who he specifically learned from during that year, and really you should only be complaining if you know the incredibly specific details to those points already (which you don't, because it hasn't ever been told in detail).

Interesting argument. But you have to admit Snyder runs the risk of going over too much familiar ground with this story. If he was willing to do this separately whilst furthering Batman's current timeline that would be fine

Posted by Reignmaker

@mcbean said:

@Reignmaker: Not me I'm dropping this title also Snyder Superman cover price is 4.99 way to much for a comic.

Yeah, the price of comics have gotten ridiculous. I wish DC would start up a digital subscription service like Marvel.

It's getting tougher to justify these single issue prices when a book takes maybe 20 minutes to read at most.

Edited by Equonox

@BR_Havoc said:

@Equonox said:

@BR_Havoc said:

@Reignmaker: Honestly I have not bought a Batman issue since they reintroduced Freeze and did a horrible job making him another throw away rogue for Batman to beat up on for an issue or two.

I found Freeze's new story to be way deeper. They took the old MO that Freeze had and turned it into a figment of his (psychotic) imagination, which means not only is Batman dealing with an incredibly intelligent scientist hellbent on saving his wife, but he's doing that while simultaneously trying to convince Freeze it's not reality. Ever try to convince someone who was love stricken that it's all in their head? Can be harder to do than just beating someone up. Thus, they added more depth to the character, but I guess I'm the only one here willing to critically analyze the situation. It's also kind of like Manti T'eo...lol

You see I found it the opposite possibly because its highly influenced by the background of Norman Bates from Psycho. So to me they took aspects that Dini gave him that showed how twisted and how far you would go for love and how that can break a human. In many ways you felt bad for Freeze you thought is he truly a villain or just someone willing sacrifice everything to save his wife. This new Freeze is psychotic something completely new for Batman villains, Snyder managed to remove everything that made him a unique Batman villain the philosophical aspect of Dini's Freeze is lost he is now only a psychopath with a cold gun. So were was the new depth that was added? he is incredibly one dimensional.

So I guess you are not the only person that with is willing to analyze a character.

You claim to analyze the character, and yet your description of him is "a psychopath with a cold gun" which completely ignores the specific degree of his psychosis. I was mostly joking with the quip about analysis, my point is just that you don't seem to be willing to explore the new dimensions that have been added to the character, evidenced by your (my apologies) rather surface-level dismissal of his psychosis. He's not just another psychopath - he's a psychopath who is fueled by an imaginary love...add that to his already genius intellect, and the cold gun, and you have an incredibly intelligent and dangerous villain with an impossibly strong modus operandi. Nothing about that eliminates the aspects Dini gave him - he's still willing to go far and do twisted things for love, it's just that the love exists in his mind. Instead of Batman's old dynamic with him where we often was able to reconcile (and even ally) with Freeze (because both had Nora's best interests in mind) you now have a dynamic in which Batman CAN'T reason with him or reconcile with him because Nora doesn't exist (well, she does, but she's not his wife). I think that's an incredibly compelling character and one that has much more depth than you give him credit for, but I suppose it is your opinion.

@Lvenger said:

@Equonox said:

@Fantasgasmic said:

I am trepidatious. Batman Year One was really good, and the only retcons to it I've seen is awful (Kevin Smith made Batman pee himself).

In my mind, a Year Zero wouldn't have him facing off with any supervillains. Year One was all about the Mafia, and the idea that the supervillains didn't get a foothold until organized crime lost its stranglehold on the city, and there was a power vacuum. Also, "Year Zero" makes almost no sense whatsoever as a concept. Year One didn't start with Bruce putting on the cowl, it started with him coming back to Gotham (at the end of the first issue, he made the decision to become a bat. So having the cave before Year One also makes little sense.

If Snyder wants to show us a Batman Origin story fitting into the New52, he should show us Bruce's travels around the world training. The "Missing Years" as it were. We saw a little of it in some of the Zero issues, but we know he trained with Henri Ducard and his son from the Nobody arc in Batman and Robin. Those are the stories I think would be good to tell; they would add to the Batman origin, without completely rewriting it and retelling/changing the same old stories over and over again.

Year Zero makes perfect sense - it's the time before Bruce returns to Gotham (as you said yourself, Year One was the first year with the Cape and Cowl in Gotham).

Something everyone seems to be missing here (at least the people hating on the idea) is this isn't going to retcon anything about Year One - this is the period of time BEFORE Year One that really has never had a lot of time dedicated to it in comics before. Stop whining and complaining, especially if you can't conceptualize what time period Year Zero would encapsulate. I, for one, am incredibly interested in seeing where Bruce went and who he specifically learned from during that year, and really you should only be complaining if you know the incredibly specific details to those points already (which you don't, because it hasn't ever been told in detail).

Interesting argument. But you have to admit Snyder runs the risk of going over too much familiar ground with this story. If he was willing to do this separately whilst furthering Batman's current timeline that would be fine

Agreed, but I think there is actually a lot of wiggle room...all we really know about "Zero Year(s)" (I add the "s" because something tells me this will span more than just a single year) is that after Bruce's parents were killed he traveled the world, learning every martial arts style known to man while honing his intellect...THAT'S IT. They have SO many specific details to expand on, I feel 11 issues is actually not nearly enough (tho I will admit, that's a long time to go without seeing current Batman, which I think Snyder and Capullo have done masterfully). At least the other Bat comics will remain in the present...

Posted by danhimself

@End_Boss said:

@danhimself: Yep. Just re-read it to make sure I didn't miss anything important. I didn't.

then you should know that this isn't him as a child and his parents getting killed....this is (despite what Snyder is saying) probably going to replace Year One

Posted by End_Boss

@danhimself said:

@End_Boss said:

@danhimself: Yep. Just re-read it to make sure I didn't miss anything important. I didn't.

then you should know that this isn't him as a child and his parents getting killed....this is (despite what Snyder is saying) probably going to replace Year One

Which is exactly my problem with it. Yes, in my first post I referred to the early origin, but I was being facetious. The issue is that they're not expanding on the mythos, not doing anything that furthers Batman as a character. Just rehashing the first year of his life as a crime fighter and calling it a day. It's too safe and too boring.

Posted by danhimself

@End_Boss said:

@danhimself said:

@End_Boss said:

@danhimself: Yep. Just re-read it to make sure I didn't miss anything important. I didn't.

then you should know that this isn't him as a child and his parents getting killed....this is (despite what Snyder is saying) probably going to replace Year One

Which is exactly my problem with it. Yes, in my first post I referred to the early origin, but I was being facetious. The issue is that they're not expanding on the mythos, not doing anything that furthers Batman as a character. Just rehashing the first year of his life as a crime fighter and calling it a day. It's too safe and too boring.

we don't really know that though....this time period is really an unexplored part of Batman's past....I could care less if it replaces Year One or not since I'm probably one of the few that didn't think that it was a "masterpiece" but if it doesn't then I would imagine that it's taking place after it...which I think it'll be cool to see a less experienced Batman with no supporting Bat Family....I'm also one of the people who wants Batman and Robin to be reworked and set in the past and focus on Bruce and Dick in the New 52....I loved the Nightwing Zero Issue

Posted by Lvenger

@Equonox said:

@Equonox said:

@Fantasgasmic said:

I am trepidatious. Batman Year One was really good, and the only retcons to it I've seen is awful (Kevin Smith made Batman pee himself).

In my mind, a Year Zero wouldn't have him facing off with any supervillains. Year One was all about the Mafia, and the idea that the supervillains didn't get a foothold until organized crime lost its stranglehold on the city, and there was a power vacuum. Also, "Year Zero" makes almost no sense whatsoever as a concept. Year One didn't start with Bruce putting on the cowl, it started with him coming back to Gotham (at the end of the first issue, he made the decision to become a bat. So having the cave before Year One also makes little sense.

If Snyder wants to show us a Batman Origin story fitting into the New52, he should show us Bruce's travels around the world training. The "Missing Years" as it were. We saw a little of it in some of the Zero issues, but we know he trained with Henri Ducard and his son from the Nobody arc in Batman and Robin. Those are the stories I think would be good to tell; they would add to the Batman origin, without completely rewriting it and retelling/changing the same old stories over and over again.

Year Zero makes perfect sense - it's the time before Bruce returns to Gotham (as you said yourself, Year One was the first year with the Cape and Cowl in Gotham).

Something everyone seems to be missing here (at least the people hating on the idea) is this isn't going to retcon anything about Year One - this is the period of time BEFORE Year One that really has never had a lot of time dedicated to it in comics before. Stop whining and complaining, especially if you can't conceptualize what time period Year Zero would encapsulate. I, for one, am incredibly interested in seeing where Bruce went and who he specifically learned from during that year, and really you should only be complaining if you know the incredibly specific details to those points already (which you don't, because it hasn't ever been told in detail).

Interesting argument. But you have to admit Snyder runs the risk of going over too much familiar ground with this story. If he was willing to do this separately whilst furthering Batman's current timeline that would be fine

Agreed, but I think there is actually a lot of wiggle room...all we really know about "Zero Year(s)" (I add the "s" because something tells me this will span more than just a single year) is that after Bruce's parents were killed he traveled the world, learning every martial arts style known to man while honing his intellect...THAT'S IT. They have SO many specific details to expand on, I feel 11 issues is actually not nearly enough (tho I will admit, that's a long time to go without seeing current Batman, which I think Snyder and Capullo have done masterfully). At least the other Bat comics will remain in the present...

It is supposed to take place after Batman 0 when Bruce has all the martial arts training and other stuff under wraps. It basically deals with him in between crime fighting and becoming Batman if I were to hazard a guess.

Posted by End_Boss

@danhimself: On what earth are Batman's early years "unexplored"? They've been done to death. In movies, on TV, in books and comics, even in videogames! Just about everywhere you can possibly imagine. The approach they're taking is far too granular, and if it replaces Year One then it will likely be replaced by another all-too-similar tale in a few years when the Batman writer of the future decides he also needs to muck with Batman's past instead of propelling the character into the future.

Posted by hunter5024

I thought this was basically announced in last years zero issue. It's going to last longer than I expected though, so that's nice.

Posted by lightsout

I will probably like it in isolation, but I hate that they're F'n with Batman more. I liked that Batman (&GL) was hardly changed in the new 52 compared to the other titles.

Edited by Fastblender

"what has and hasn't happened with Batman?"

Easy. The stories I've read with Batman in them have happened. They have progressed through my eyes to my brain and have been experienced. And if DC or Snyder wants to tell me one of those hasn't happened, they can do it till the cows come home, it isn't gonna make a lick of difference to me. However it makes a huge difference to some others out there *cough* comicvineeictonygmanguerro *cough* so we now have to retread old and familiar ground. When a press release begins with a pre-emptive "you haven't seen this part of the story before" then the company is well aware they're repeating themselves or else why not let the story speak for itself? This is the exact premise of Johns/Frank's Batman Earth One, it's the first hour or so of Batman Begins, and it's dangerously close to the material of Miller's Year One and Loeb's The Long Halloween plus many more obscure stories. Also, how do you top Mask of the Phantasm for a look into Bruce's early days? I've absorbed a lot of Batman stories on my 33 years on the planet, learning how they built the Bat Cave isn't one of them. I'm sure it'll be DC's top seller but it is not what I am looking for.

Also, let's now admit Death of the Family went out in a puff of smoke. With this and Damian's death, there's going to be no repercussions from the Joker's attack. Do yourself a favor and go read the digital-first Legends of the Dark Knight. Good storytelling, free on continuity or editor interference by some of the most talented creators around.

Posted by BR_Havoc

@Equonox said:

@BR_Havoc said:

@Equonox said:

@BR_Havoc said:

@Reignmaker: Honestly I have not bought a Batman issue since they reintroduced Freeze and did a horrible job making him another throw away rogue for Batman to beat up on for an issue or two.

I found Freeze's new story to be way deeper. They took the old MO that Freeze had and turned it into a figment of his (psychotic) imagination, which means not only is Batman dealing with an incredibly intelligent scientist hellbent on saving his wife, but he's doing that while simultaneously trying to convince Freeze it's not reality. Ever try to convince someone who was love stricken that it's all in their head? Can be harder to do than just beating someone up. Thus, they added more depth to the character, but I guess I'm the only one here willing to critically analyze the situation. It's also kind of like Manti T'eo...lol

You see I found it the opposite possibly because its highly influenced by the background of Norman Bates from Psycho. So to me they took aspects that Dini gave him that showed how twisted and how far you would go for love and how that can break a human. In many ways you felt bad for Freeze you thought is he truly a villain or just someone willing sacrifice everything to save his wife. This new Freeze is psychotic something completely new for Batman villains, Snyder managed to remove everything that made him a unique Batman villain the philosophical aspect of Dini's Freeze is lost he is now only a psychopath with a cold gun. So were was the new depth that was added? he is incredibly one dimensional.

So I guess you are not the only person that with is willing to analyze a character.

You claim to analyze the character, and yet your description of him is "a psychopath with a cold gun" which completely ignores the specific degree of his psychosis. I was mostly joking with the quip about analysis, my point is just that you don't seem to be willing to explore the new dimensions that have been added to the character, evidenced by your (my apologies) rather surface-level dismissal of his psychosis. He's not just another psychopath - he's a psychopath who is fueled by an imaginary love...add that to his already genius intellect, and the cold gun, and you have an incredibly intelligent and dangerous villain with an impossibly strong modus operandi. Nothing about that eliminates the aspects Dini gave him - he's still willing to go far and do twisted things for love, it's just that the love exists in his mind. Instead of Batman's old dynamic with him where we often was able to reconcile (and even ally) with Freeze (because both had Nora's best interests in mind) you now have a dynamic in which Batman CAN'T reason with him or reconcile with him because Nora doesn't exist (well, she does, but she's not his wife). I think that's an incredibly compelling character and one that has much more depth than you give him credit for, but I suppose it is your opinion.

Ok man if you want a full break down of the new Freeze he is a psychopath that had an Oedipus complex and when his mother got sick he saw her as weak and killed her. Nora now is a representation of his mother not the frail one that was in the wheelchair but the image of her, that he saw before her accident. Is there depth there yes but compared to what Freeze used to be he was a loving husband driven to the edge of insanity to save his wife. There were many interesting questions that were brought up when Batman fought Freeze in many ways people felt that Batman was wrong for doing it. What he was doing for was love and not an obsession that is manifested itself into something he believes is love. His intellect is barley there anymore he is no long philosophical he is just another rouge to Batman. I mean we have so many psychopaths that Batman can not reason with from Joker to Zsasz. So what sets this new Freeze apart from them? so in my opinion they striped the character of what made him unique and gave him a rather generic Batman villain back story were at the end of it all he is just insane. So to me the character of Freeze went from a rather dark philosophical character that I understood his motives and in fact routed for him a number of times. To being a run of the mill Batman villain that is insane it takes away those questions I would ask myself of morality and leave me with another C rated Batman rogue.

Hopefully that shows you a little more of my side I tried to think of the new Freeze as deeper but he isn't. Maybe Snyder is not the writer to tell his story I know he is showing up in BOP soon with Christy Marx writing it maybe she can do better.

Online
Posted by danhimself

@End_Boss said:

@danhimself: On what earth are Batman's early years "unexplored"? They've been done to death. In movies, on TV, in books and comics, even in videogames! Just about everywhere you can possibly imagine. The approach they're taking is far too granular, and if it replaces Year One then it will likely be replaced by another all-too-similar tale in a few years when the Batman writer of the future decides he also needs to muck with Batman's past instead of propelling the character into the future.

everything is unexplored in the New 52...done to death? I could care less about what they do in the movies, tv, books, and video games since those are really marketed towards an audience with less experience with the character than we comic book readers have....now in the comics the only storylines worth noting that have taken place in that time period are Year One, Dark Victory, and Long Halloween....as for another writer doing it again somewhere down the line....that's a given...nothing in comics is ever permanent what one writer is doing today most chances are another writer will undo or redo eventually

Posted by thatlad

I may drop batman for this arc, nearly a whole year covering a story that has been retold so often with fixed plot points is not something I'm enthusiastic about. I'm sure Snyder and Capullo will craft a fantastic story, maybe ill pick it up in trade but right now it's not for me. Lets hope it serves it purpose and brings in new readers and doesn't confuse them. PS I concur, no Harper Row is a bonus

Posted by InnerVenom123

@SnakeEyes327 said:

I'm sure Snyder will deliver but I can't help but have that little tick in the back of my brain that says "Go back to when it all began, for the 100th time. Now remixed. With dubstep and lasers and cool sh*t"

LMFAO

I just pictured Batman raving in the cave with Alfred.

Posted by queenfrost_

@kennyshat said:

I'm sure this will be good, but I kind of wish they'd just keep pushing forward with the timeline instead of trying to go back and set everything. They already dug themselves into a pretty deep hole with some of the new continuity, and I feel like no matter what they do, they're just digging themselves in deeper trying to go into the past.

Besides that, if this ends up being that Riddler story that Scott and Greg have been talking about, I don't know that I'm thrilled with Edward Nigma of all characters being tied that closely with Bruce's start as Batman.

Posted by End_Boss

@danhimself: Well, if you're going to shut your eyes to everything that has occurred outside of the New 52, then there's a whole lot of stuff that will seem new to you. Doesn't mean it is. Doesn't mean that retelling it (with slight variations, of course) and stamping the "New 52!" sticker on it will make it so, either.

Anyway, I think this is just something that we're not going to agree on. You're going to think that having the story explored in four or more books (you forgot the Earth One stuff) isn't overdoing it, and I am.

Posted by TeamUnitedNerds

Cannot wait. Considering that Death of the Family wasn't quite as good as it could have been, this is a perfect way for Snyder to show how great he is

Posted by DMC

Couldn't help but roll my eyes when I heard this.

So this is suppose to take place before Year One?

Will Y-Zero be self contained and not alter the Year One story in any way?

Posted by danhimself

@End_Boss said:

@danhimself: Well, if you're going to shut your eyes to everything that has occurred outside of the New 52, then there's a whole lot of stuff that will seem new to you. Doesn't mean it is. Doesn't mean that retelling it (with slight variations, of course) and stamping the "New 52!" sticker on it will make it so, either.

Anyway, I think this is just something that we're not going to agree on. You're going to think that having the story explored in four or more books (you forgot the Earth One stuff) isn't overdoing it, and I am.

I hate the New 52 but I feel that if they were going to reboot then they should have rebooted completely and not have given Batman and Green Lantern free passes since that screwed up continuity in every other book....I would have rather seen every character started over from the very beginning

Posted by havoc1201

@DMC said:

Couldn't help but roll my eyes when I heard this.

So this is suppose to take place before Year One?

Will Y-Zero be self contained and not alter the Year One story in any way?

this will not replace or change year one this is going to tell about Bruces training before he came back in year one

Posted by Lvenger

@entropy_aegis said:

@DarthShap said:

"It’s not ‘let’s redo the origin.' It’s time for a new story showing how Batman became who he is in the New 52."

This sentence is actually hilarious.

We are not redoing the origin, we are telling a new origin story. ^^

I laughed at that one,not cause of the statement itself but because of the idiots who are eventually gonna hail it as the best Batman origin story ever.

Oh and Zero year? Death of the Family? I like how these are supposed to evoke classic stories like Death in the Family and Year:One,nice way to market them,they're already classics and I couldn't care less for these mediocre,repetitive stories.

Once Fade gets here you 3 can double team the Snyder fanboys for your amusement. Might be pretty funny to see how you rip into them :P Oh by the way read Batman 17. OK but anti climatic needless to say.

Posted by Urban_Ronin

Capullo does some nice art but to much of the same thing is never good. Having said that, sounds cool.

Posted by Fantasgasmic

@Equonox said:

@Fantasgasmic said:

I am trepidatious. Batman Year One was really good, and the only retcons to it I've seen is awful (Kevin Smith made Batman pee himself).

In my mind, a Year Zero wouldn't have him facing off with any supervillains. Year One was all about the Mafia, and the idea that the supervillains didn't get a foothold until organized crime lost its stranglehold on the city, and there was a power vacuum. Also, "Year Zero" makes almost no sense whatsoever as a concept. Year One didn't start with Bruce putting on the cowl, it started with him coming back to Gotham (at the end of the first issue, he made the decision to become a bat. So having the cave before Year One also makes little sense.

If Snyder wants to show us a Batman Origin story fitting into the New52, he should show us Bruce's travels around the world training. The "Missing Years" as it were. We saw a little of it in some of the Zero issues, but we know he trained with Henri Ducard and his son from the Nobody arc in Batman and Robin. Those are the stories I think would be good to tell; they would add to the Batman origin, without completely rewriting it and retelling/changing the same old stories over and over again.

Year Zero makes perfect sense - it's the time before Bruce returns to Gotham (as you said yourself, Year One was the first year with the Cape and Cowl in Gotham).

Something everyone seems to be missing here (at least the people hating on the idea) is this isn't going to retcon anything about Year One - this is the period of time BEFORE Year One that really has never had a lot of time dedicated to it in comics before. Stop whining and complaining, especially if you can't conceptualize what time period Year Zero would encapsulate. I, for one, am incredibly interested in seeing where Bruce went and who he specifically learned from during that year, and really you should only be complaining if you know the incredibly specific details to those points already (which you don't, because it hasn't ever been told in detail).

I don't think you got my point about Year Zero as a concept making no sense in the context of the original post. I obviously know that Year Zero is supposed to mean it's the year before Bruce comes back to Gotham, but if you read the quote he says:

We see how Bruce became the Batman, built the cave, faced off with his first super villain.

The first bit about how Bruce became the Batman is a bit vague, but we certainly see him honing his skills by kicking trees in half, and wearing the cowl for the first time in Year One, (when he takes out the robbers on the fire escape). If they're being vaguer, I was in favor of a "Missing Years" concept. If they're being more literal, I don't think we need to see it in as many discrete steps as Batman Begins; generic SWAT suit, ordering all the pieces, etc. We don't see him building the cave, but that has to be something that happens AFTER he comes back to Gotham and gets the idea to fight crime while dressed as a bat (the iconic scene, which Year One reproduces and places in the timeline as after Bruce is beat up by Selina and Holly's pimp, and stabbed in the leg by Holly. I am against the notion of Bruce facing off with supervillains prior to becoming Batman because of the reason I mentioned above. Also, I could've sworn The Saturn Club in the New52 Batman and Robin was a reference to Batman and the Mad Monk, which is set just after Year One and is widely accepted to be his first supervillain fight.

Posted by CitizenJP

Legit.

Posted by Boxinbeard

another reason why DC needs to speed up their trades

Posted by batman11223

I find it hard to say that scott snyder decides the batmans true origin story. I think the only one who has the right to do something like that would be bob kane himself. Or even bill finger for that matter.

Posted by cincyducksfan35

I'd be more excited if we didn't just get a lot of Batman origin with zero month. I'm sure it will still be good

Posted by knightofthechronicle

I like the idea. I've got to say that for the most part change is good, even though some of you guys are pretty strong on your hold of Year One. I think that Scott's going to tell a good story and Gregg's going to put in some good art so I say it's going to go well.

Posted by DMC

@havoc1201 said:

@DMC said:

Couldn't help but roll my eyes when I heard this.

So this is suppose to take place before Year One?

Will Y-Zero be self contained and not alter the Year One story in any way?

this will not replace or change year one this is going to tell about Bruces training before he came back in year one

hmm.....that sounds interesting.

I guess none of the past writers have gone into detail about his training, except when needed for whatever story they're telling.

Posted by RedOwl_1

I'm kinda unsure about this, we'll see

Posted by DocFishstick

can't wait to get my hands on it

Posted by MadeinBangladesh

@haydenclaireheroes said:

I trust Scott Snyder to make this new and interesting

Posted by Eternal19

I kind of on the ropes on whether im want to buy this or not. I've already seen batmans origin several times in every form of media, i dont really want to see a slightly reworked version of it again. I would be much more excited if Snyder said that he was going to do a Riddler arc.

Posted by Brit

FTW!!!

Posted by wmwadeii

New 52 already retconned Year One, so why does it matter. Hopefully this can tieup some of the time descrepencies from 0 issue the 5 years and Damiens age.

Posted by BIGALWILLIAMS

Not to thrilled of everything coming to a halt for an origin story lasting until May 2014!

Posted by dontbelievethehyperion

Man, I'm still in but this is kind of a let down. I feel like we've been getting Batman's origin forever with the Dark Knight movies and Batman: Earth One.

I hope it's the best origin ever told, otherwise it will be 11 months of criticism with people comparing this to Batman Year One.

Posted by RedheadedAtrocitus

I'm quite intrigued by this. We've had One, we've had Two...only natural we have a Year Zero now. But if they do this for Batman, clearly they should do it for others in New 52, don't you think?

Posted by The Average Bear

Cool, cool

Posted by JamDamage

as long as it's Snyder and Capullo it doesn't really matter what Batman story they are telling. As for early years, I could care less. I've read so many early year stories already.

Posted by Onemoreposter

@Trodorne said:

Who is willing to bet that Bruce will fight crime motivated by the death of his parents.

lol

Posted by soumya

I think after Robin's death DC realized that Bruce needs some alone time.So they considered an upcoming zero year arc..

Posted by UncleEmu

eh, Snyder's run has been okay to cool so far, but I don't think he can do an origins type story justice. Hopefully I'm wrong

Posted by johnkmccubbin91

I'm looking forward to this, should be interesting.

Edited by b_lam

There are a lot of titles just about Batman

The best one is about his relationship to Gotham (Batman), one that more about actions & rogues (Batman: The Dark Knight), one about his global organization (Batman Incorporated), one with his sidekick & emotional relationships (Batman & Robin), Then there is the Family and extended family (Red Hood, Batgirl, Nightwing, Catwoman, Teen Titans, Batwing and Batwoman).

So what is wrong with Scott Synder take his comic in a different direction. The continuity has been bugging me and the crossovers are getting tired. To bad he can't keep writing Harper Row. He made the character and who knows if others can write her as well.

Edited by mickeymayhew

I'm not seeing how the Riddler could fit into a story like this

  • 161 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4