I have heard very bad thing of that comic, like : "is the worst of all the new 52 Batman's comics" and similar things, buy Why?

I'm pretty simple, REALLY simple and I like it but it looks like u don't and I can't understand why.

Why?

Because DC created this book simply to keep David Finch(a guy who's not a writer) with them.He's allowed to do anything he wants.

It's like allowing a 6 year old to drive your car to make him/her happy.

He ignored Killer Croc's mutation,he made Penguin look like Danny Devito,he had Two-face become the Hulk, he had Flash make pointless appearence,venom was just a simple strength increasing drug.

ANOTHER breakout from Arkham,his first arc was a mixture of BTAS and Batman Begins whereas the new one seems like it's ripping off the Arkham video games.

Basically he using the popular perception of Batman as his source material and mixing it with his own perception,making it a fanfic.

@entropy_aegis said:

Because DC created this book simply to keep David Finch(a guy who's not a writer) with them.He's allowed to do anything he wants.

It's like allowing a 6 year old to drive your car to make him/her happy.

He ignored Killer Croc's mutation,he made Penguin look like Danny Devito,he had Two-face become the Hulk, he had Flash make pointless appearence,venom was just a simple strength increasing drug.

ANOTHER breakout from Arkham,his first arc was a mixture of BTAS and Batman Begins whereas the new one seems like it's ripping off the Arkham video games.

Basically he using the popular perception of Batman as his source material and mixing it with his own perception,making it a fanfic.

^this

@RedOwl_1: Well once you get over the campy feel and cheesy dialogue, I think it's alright considering you don't expect a complicated plot. The art is top notch though. David Finch should stay at D.C as an artist (I hated him at Marvel). If you can enjoy a simple hero vs villain scenario, with some try-hard endeavours in to character development, then this is your book.

@CitizenBane: What issue is that reworked scene from? A flashback panel or cover?

Because it's in the new 52.  
 
Hi-yo!  
 
But seriously, haven't read it, just screwing around. 

@yumyumbubblegum said:

@RedOwl_1: Well once you get over the campy feel and cheesy dialogue, I think it's alright considering you don't expect a complicated plot. The art is top notch though. David Finch should stay at D.C as an artist (I hated him at Marvel). If you can enjoy a simple hero vs villain scenario, with some try-hard endeavours in to character development, then this is your book.

@CitizenBane: What issue is that reworked scene from? A flashback panel or cover?

Cover for issue #6,which is 3 months away.

@entropy_aegis: Oh now I get your point. This really helped:

@CitizenBane said:

Yeah now I understand of what are you talking about = Too superficial but that's bad for us fans but maybe is a good way to introduce new readers into Batman's universe, u know guys that don't know ANYTHING

It does seem like the most 'basic' Batman in that respect, not excessively complex and relying on easily accessible prior knowledge...

Personally I don't hate it, I don't mind it hardly at all. In fact, there are bits of it I even quite enjoy. Hulked out Ventriloquist with a human Scarface puppet? Yeamazing. Is the plot otherwise treading familiar ground? Absolutely. Luckily, we do have several other bat titles... this one for me has mostly served as a vehicle for the art, and those who enjoy the Finch style. I think with a little more time, beyond this first arc, Paul Jenkins will be able to stretch a little more of the writer's muscle in the title and make it into something a little bit cooler. They tossed Finch a rope full of slack... now that time is coming to a close and they'll begin to reign it into something that might be forged into solid work, under closer guidance and direction.

As for Finch's artistic take, I allow some mental liberties for it in the same fashion that I view the Liefeld-esque style. Are Captain America's arm muscles really the size of a twelve-year old child? Nah, exaggeration. Is Dawn's waist really as thin as a pencil, with her upper body weight truly about to snap her in half because of the strain? Nah. Yeah, it isn't exactly realistic... but there are many other well received styles that aren't exactly realistic either. Sam Kieth, Bill Sienkiewicz, Humberto Ramos, Skottie Young and a host of others all have an anatomically incorrect style, but their fans are willing to excuse them as operating with artistic license, while their detractors mark them as churning out junk. The same thing is true with David Finch... clearly a host of people are into his style, even his opponents might admit that his draw is because other people perceive him to be talented in his style. So in the same vein, I shrug and accept excessive-muscle-extreme-mega-Bane, not-accurate-anatomically-or-historically-Killer-Croc and the other elements of his design, viewing them as an exaggerated interpretation of events.

I can understand other people not following this approach (because they don't like the hyper-style) but oftentimes I find it quite enjoyable. It isn't my ideal, but it doesn't offend me the way it does others.

I don't hate this comic either but there are MUCH better Bat titles out currently. Batman, Nightwing, Batwing, Batman and Robin. This comic does not shine with these other titles causing it to be bumped off many pull lists in this horrible economy.

I don't hate it but its not my favorite Bat title.

I'd agree that this is David Finch getting his own book simply for the its own sake. Yeah, his art is good, but even with Paul Jenkins, this book is so mediocre and so uninteresting compared to Scott snyder's Batman.

it's unnecessary with the other three Batman based books we have