16 Years old?

  • 51 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by soduh2 (865 posts) - - Show Bio
#2 Posted by Squalleon (4640 posts) - - Show Bio

@soduh2: i hope so because i cannot see how this two bonded in five years(minus the year bruce was missing and at least one solo year)

#3 Posted by SUNMAN (7256 posts) - - Show Bio

don't think about the time frame. Honestly I wish DC would stop rubbing it in people's face cause it doesn't make sense no matter how you spin it.

#4 Posted by X9 (767 posts) - - Show Bio

So true, he seems to have no more than 14... but the comics usually draw teenagers shorter than adults, don't matter if they're already 17 and described as tall or strong. Then they turn 18 and, hey, they're the same size of the rest of the adults!

#5 Posted by Crash_Recovery (850 posts) - - Show Bio

Let's just roll with it and enjoy the stories.

Sure we can nitpick the numbers, but just remember that you're doing that in a world where people can fly.

#6 Posted by htb106 (1641 posts) - - Show Bio

He does look quite small for a 16 year old but comics aren't too good at depicting the ages of children through how tall they are.

#7 Posted by Nathaniel_Christopher (1683 posts) - - Show Bio

DC doesn't know what the hell they're doing. This is just another case of the writers trying they're best to have a story make sense, but still fit into this idiotic five year timeline. It doesn't make sense, and it will never make sense. At some point they're probably going to make it into an event where Booster Gold or somebody tries to fix things.

Also, what's up with Mrs. Grayson's face in that last panel? Pretty sure that's not how a parent is supposed to look when their child gives them a birthday gift.

#8 Posted by SmoothJammin (2334 posts) - - Show Bio

These are not the Flying Graysons I once knew TT___TT

#9 Posted by X9 (767 posts) - - Show Bio

@Crash_Recovery said:

Let's just roll with it and enjoy the stories.

Sure we can nitpick the numbers, but just remember that you're doing that in a world where people can fly.

Agreed.

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

Also, what's up with Mrs. Grayson's face in that last panel? Pretty sure that's not how a parent is supposed to look when their child gives them a birthday gift.

True XD

#10 Posted by vernierhawk001 (539 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

DC doesn't know what the hell they're doing. This is just another case of the writers trying they're best to have a story make sense, but still fit into this idiotic five year timeline. It doesn't make sense, and it will never make sense. At some point they're probably going to make it into an event where Booster Gold or somebody tries to fix things.

Also, what's up with Mrs. Grayson's face in that last panel? Pretty sure that's not how a parent is supposed to look when their child gives them a birthday gift.

What bothers me most about the timeline (yes, I'm opening that can again...worms galore) is that it really hurts Dick's character.

A) It doesn't allow him the time to grow to have that really close tie with Bruce that makes it all the more traumatic when they go different ways.

B) Part of what was so awesome about grayson was that he started whe he was freakin 9. Nine! (Glad I still have YJ for that part of the canon). With this reboot he loses 7 years of training that really mae him awesome. And 7 years that also play another major role in his character...

C) He and Bruce are, out of all the Batman/Robin pairings, supposed to be the ones that were the most in sync, the most natural pairing. It seems like two years (if that) isn't really enough to develop that standing when you have guys coming behind you with the same amount of time.

D) Finally, If he's sixteen, that means his parents should have a MUCH larger impact on him than before New 52. At 9 I'm sure you remember the horror but some of the specifics about your parents are bound to be lost...giving credance to Bruce being like a father figure. Dick being 16 means that his father and mother are firmly fixed in his mind making Bruce "the nice guy who took me in"--not the surrogate father. Which, again, makes the "breakup" less traumatic

#11 Posted by ltbrd (562 posts) - - Show Bio

I really don't mind the fact that the new 52 is showing Dick as being 16 instead of 9. It makes a lot more sense for him to be at least 15 at the time his parents die and Bruce takes him in to start training as Robin (and actually Dick was 12 in his origin story, not 9 as Young Justice stated last season. He also didn't get 7 years of training. See Batman: Year Three, Year One Annual: Robin, Batman: Dark Victory, and Batman: The Gauntlet for the details of Dick's pre-Robin days) because the level of athleticism shown by Dick right from the start makes far more sense in a 15-16 year old boy than in a 9-12 year old boy. Look at all the great male gymnasts at the Olympics. Yes the girls may be a bit younger (though they have to be at least 15 by the end of the games now) however the guys are generally 18+. So for DC to age Dick a bit makes a great deal more sense (and just one more reason why the concept of Damian just doesn't work, genetic modifications or not).

Also, Dick didn't receive that much training under Bruce. All of the Robins got about the same 6 months of training, with Dick having to go through the Gauntlet and Tim having to do the European training tour (don't think Jason had any real initiations). It was Dick's time as an acrobat that allowed him to seamlessly fold into the role of Robin while rounding things out training under Bruce and of course the experiences he gained fighting crime. Bruce even acknowledges this when talking to Alfred about the differences between Dick, Jason, and Tim in which he states that neither Jason or Tim had the innate physical levels Dick did and that each had to put in far more time and effort to rise to Dick's level of physical and martial ability. By allowing Dick to be older in this new telling that statement makes a lot more sense than applying it to a 12 year old.

Lastly, about the surrogate father thing. I get why die-hard fans may not wish to get rid of that idea, but I don't think it hurts the relationship of Bruce and Dick that they be more like siblings than father/son. By using the fact that Bruce and Dick have a sibling relationship while Bruce and Tim have a father/son relationship, it gives more weight to the issues Jason and Damian need to deal with. As the middle Robin, Jason is not old enough to be considered a sibling, while at the same time one could make the argument Bruce didn't really know how to be a parent yet. So their relationship was much more professional than personal and could contribute to the fact the two never came together as a duo as well as Bruce/Dick or Bruce/Tim. At the same time, Bruce has already been a father to one Robin with Tim, so Damian is basically now the second child and that wouldn't really sit well with him as he's Bruce's biological son. So in the context of a shorter timeline, it actually makes more sense for Bruce and Tim to have a much closer, sibling relationship than what we would previously consider by older canon. This also makes a lot more sense in the new 52 as Dick directly confronts or calls out Bruce on a number of issues since the revamp began, which is something more in-line with a younger brother to an older brother than a son to a father.

#12 Posted by vernierhawk001 (539 posts) - - Show Bio

@ltbrd said:

I really don't mind the fact that the new 52 is showing Dick as being 16 instead of 9. It makes a lot more sense for him to be at least 15 at the time his parents die and Bruce takes him in to start training as Robin (and actually Dick was 12 in his origin story, not 9 as Young Justice stated last season. He also didn't get 7 years of training. See Batman: Year Three, Year One Annual: Robin, Batman: Dark Victory, and Batman: The Gauntlet for the details of Dick's pre-Robin days) because the level of athleticism shown by Dick right from the start makes far more sense in a 15-16 year old boy than in a 9-12 year old boy. Look at all the great male gymnasts at the Olympics. Yes the girls may be a bit younger (though they have to be at least 15 by the end of the games now) however the guys are generally 18+. So for DC to age Dick a bit makes a great deal more sense (and just one more reason why the concept of Damian just doesn't work, genetic modifications or not).

Also, Dick didn't receive that much training under Bruce. All of the Robins got about the same 6 months of training, with Dick having to go through the Gauntlet and Tim having to do the European training tour (don't think Jason had any real initiations). It was Dick's time as an acrobat that allowed him to seamlessly fold into the role of Robin while rounding things out training under Bruce and of course the experiences he gained fighting crime. Bruce even acknowledges this when talking to Alfred about the differences between Dick, Jason, and Tim in which he states that neither Jason or Tim had the innate physical levels Dick did and that each had to put in far more time and effort to rise to Dick's level of physical and martial ability. By allowing Dick to be older in this new telling that statement makes a lot more sense than applying it to a 12 year old.

Lastly, about the surrogate father thing. I get why die-hard fans may not wish to get rid of that idea, but I don't think it hurts the relationship of Bruce and Dick that they be more like siblings than father/son. By using the fact that Bruce and Dick have a sibling relationship while Bruce and Tim have a father/son relationship, it gives more weight to the issues Jason and Damian need to deal with. As the middle Robin, Jason is not old enough to be considered a sibling, while at the same time one could make the argument Bruce didn't really know how to be a parent yet. So their relationship was much more professional than personal and could contribute to the fact the two never came together as a duo as well as Bruce/Dick or Bruce/Tim. At the same time, Bruce has already been a father to one Robin with Tim, so Damian is basically now the second child and that wouldn't really sit well with him as he's Bruce's biological son. So in the context of a shorter timeline, it actually makes more sense for Bruce and Tim to have a much closer, sibling relationship than what we would previously consider by older canon. This also makes a lot more sense in the new 52 as Dick directly confronts or calls out Bruce on a number of issues since the revamp began, which is something more in-line with a younger brother to an older brother than a son to a father.

Wow! Awesome thoughts, and thanks for setting me straight on some of those points. I watched YJ and took it for granted that they would not have changed that aspect.

Regarding it making sense, I never said that it doesn't make sense to have an older kid on the streets.....it def does. Who would really expect a kid to be able to seriously fight crime? :) But this is comic world and I always thought that little bit elevated Dick's character.

Regarding Dick's training, I haven't seen that. I'm assuming the gauntlet was pre-New 52? Anyway, 6 months is a short amount of time to learn the martial art forms he supposedly knows. And when considering books like [insert title here] (one of the issues with Cass in it...where she lost her body reading ability and had to relearn martial arts), Batman said it would prob take her a year before she would be fit for the streets, if i recall correctly.

And the relationship, the timeline works for the characterization of the new 52, at least in regards to Dick. They view each other more as brothers now an, I guess, that's fine. Growing up on Batman, though, that just seems...well...wrong, to me. Obviously DC can do what they want but I think that relationship has a lot to do with how Dick viewed the cowl and caused some of those struggles he really had in Battble for the Cowl and subsequent stories in trying to fill the role. I guess you could say that trying to live up to an older brother could have a similar effect and maybe you would be right, but I would disagree. I think a large protion of Battle for the Cowl, at least as it relates to Dick, was about responsibility-a sort of coming-of-age story. And again, I think that played a huge part in who he is/was before New 52

#13 Posted by KnightRise (4785 posts) - - Show Bio

@soduh2: If it helps, he is a natural acrobat. Like gymnasts, successful acrobats tend to be quite small in frame, which it compensated by their high core strength and muscle control.

#14 Edited by Nathaniel_Christopher (1683 posts) - - Show Bio

@vernierhawk001 said:

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

DC doesn't know what the hell they're doing. This is just another case of the writers trying they're best to have a story make sense, but still fit into this idiotic five year timeline. It doesn't make sense, and it will never make sense. At some point they're probably going to make it into an event where Booster Gold or somebody tries to fix things.

Also, what's up with Mrs. Grayson's face in that last panel? Pretty sure that's not how a parent is supposed to look when their child gives them a birthday gift.

What bothers me most about the timeline (yes, I'm opening that can again...worms galore) is that it really hurts Dick's character.

A) It doesn't allow him the time to grow to have that really close tie with Bruce that makes it all the more traumatic when they go different ways.

B) Part of what was so awesome about grayson was that he started whe he was freakin 9. Nine! (Glad I still have YJ for that part of the canon). With this reboot he loses 7 years of training that really mae him awesome. And 7 years that also play another major role in his character...

C) He and Bruce are, out of all the Batman/Robin pairings, supposed to be the ones that were the most in sync, the most natural pairing. It seems like two years (if that) isn't really enough to develop that standing when you have guys coming behind you with the same amount of time.

D) Finally, If he's sixteen, that means his parents should have a MUCH larger impact on him than before New 52. At 9 I'm sure you remember the horror but some of the specifics about your parents are bound to be lost...giving credance to Bruce being like a father figure. Dick being 16 means that his father and mother are firmly fixed in his mind making Bruce "the nice guy who took me in"--not the surrogate father. Which, again, makes the "breakup" less traumatic

I agree completely. Its really just one more way Dick's role in the DCU is being diminished. (Was never a part of the Teen Titans, Roy's younger than him, probably never led the Justice League, Donna and Wally are on a bus in a black hole somewhere, etc.) Dick is and always has been the first son of the Bat Family. His partnership with Bruce and the breakup of said partnership shook the family to its core and is something that took years to fix, and led to growth for both characters. Bruce's relationships with Jason and Tim are a direct result of his relationship with Dick, so for one to be diminished only leads to the others being diminished as well. As it is it doesn't even look like Dick worked with Bruce for that much longer than the other Robins. This messes with Dick and Jason's relationship, in that Jason's always been jealous of Dick, because he believes that Bruce would've killed the Joker if Dick had been the one who was killed. The line of reasoning made sense. Bruce worked with Dick for a longer amount of time, raised Dick, experienced a lighter time with Dick, and genuinely missed Dick when he was gone. Jason felt as if he was always in Dick's shadow, and in a way he was. If he and Dick worked with Bruce for the same general amount of time, what the hell is Jason supposed to be angry at Dick for? His bond with Bruce would be just as strong as Bruce's bond with Dick, if not more so because Bruce and Dick wouldn't have been communicating that much at the time. And of course this isn't touching on Tim or Damian.

I believe Dick first started when he was 8 actually, and then that was later retconned to 12. In a darker world, its simply hard to imagine an 8-12 year old fighting grown men and winning, no matter how much training he has. I don't like it by any means, but that's just the way it is, so I can understand where DC is coming from with aging Dick. It doesn't work however for the reasons you stated, and I touched on in my previous paragraph. Dick and Bruce are supposed to have the closest relationship of all the Robins. How is this possible when they all worked with Bruce for the same amount of time, and Dick then spent time estranged from Bruce?

Dick Grayson is Bruce Wayne's son. His heir. I don't think this is something that ever needs to be stated, tweaked, or removed in any way. They are father and son. That's it. Having Dick be 16 when his parents die craps all over that for what I think are obvious reasons. I'm not saying that you won't be traumatized by losing your parents, but the older you get, the more ok you get with the idea. (Think about it) Because the older you get, the less of a role they play in your life, the more you start to become your own person and spend time away from them, and they are firmly fixed as your parents. At 16, you know who they are and what they mean to you. They aren't going to be replaced by anybody, because you're almost an adult and ready to go out into the world on your own. This again damages Bruce and Dick's relationship. At 16, he's not really going to need Bruce to help him get through his parents death, or raise him. He's again almost a fully grown adult. In fact i'd say he'd clash with Bruce a lot and have far less respect for him. Sure Bruce took him in, but he didn't raise him. He basically gave him a roof over his head for a few years, and then started acting like a dick and forced Dick to leave. Really, if the relationship is like an older and younger brother, it simply doesn't make sense. Dick really shouldn't be following Bruce's lead so closely. He should be the one off doing his own thing, not Jason. This again messes with all the other relationships as well, as Jason should have been far closer to Bruce and less jealous of both Dick and Tim. Tim really shouldn't even have as close a relationship with Dick as he does. Dick should be more of a surrogate father than an older brother. And Damian....just Damian smh.

All of this just comes back to the fact that the Batman timeline makes no sense in a 5 year context. Take into account that Bruce was apparently still dead for a year and Dick was Batman, along with Jason having died and been resurrected, and Damian being 10, and I have to say that the timeline is even more screwed up.

#15 Posted by The Stegman (25074 posts) - - Show Bio
@Crash_Recovery:  
 

Let's just roll with it and enjoy the stories.

This should be the motto of the New 52 seriously.
#16 Posted by KnightRise (4785 posts) - - Show Bio

@The Stegman said:

@Crash_Recovery:


Let's just roll with it and enjoy the stories.

This should be the motto of the New 52 seriously.

Agreed.

@Nathaniel_Christopher: One thing, Roy isn't much younger than Dick now. He's Jason's age so only about a year+ younger. And who knows how many adventures they had, maybe with more members, with the psuedo-Titans from that flashback.

#17 Posted by vernierhawk001 (539 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

@vernierhawk001 said:

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

DC doesn't know what the hell they're doing. This is just another case of the writers trying they're best to have a story make sense, but still fit into this idiotic five year timeline. It doesn't make sense, and it will never make sense. At some point they're probably going to make it into an event where Booster Gold or somebody tries to fix things.

Also, what's up with Mrs. Grayson's face in that last panel? Pretty sure that's not how a parent is supposed to look when their child gives them a birthday gift.

What bothers me most about the timeline (yes, I'm opening that can again...worms galore) is that it really hurts Dick's character.

A) It doesn't allow him the time to grow to have that really close tie with Bruce that makes it all the more traumatic when they go different ways.

B) Part of what was so awesome about grayson was that he started whe he was freakin 9. Nine! (Glad I still have YJ for that part of the canon). With this reboot he loses 7 years of training that really mae him awesome. And 7 years that also play another major role in his character...

C) He and Bruce are, out of all the Batman/Robin pairings, supposed to be the ones that were the most in sync, the most natural pairing. It seems like two years (if that) isn't really enough to develop that standing when you have guys coming behind you with the same amount of time.

D) Finally, If he's sixteen, that means his parents should have a MUCH larger impact on him than before New 52. At 9 I'm sure you remember the horror but some of the specifics about your parents are bound to be lost...giving credance to Bruce being like a father figure. Dick being 16 means that his father and mother are firmly fixed in his mind making Bruce "the nice guy who took me in"--not the surrogate father. Which, again, makes the "breakup" less traumatic

I agree completely. Its really just one more way Dick's role in the DCU is being diminished. (Was never a part of the Teen Titans, Roy's younger than him, probably never led the Justice League, Donna and Wally are on a bus in a black hole somewhere, etc.) Dick is and always has been the first son of the Bat Family. His partnership with Bruce and the breakup of said partnership shook the family to its core and is something that took years to fix, and led to growth for both characters. Bruce's relationships with Jason and Tim are a direct result of his relationship with Dick, so for one to be diminished only leads to the others being diminished as well. As it is it doesn't even look like Dick worked with Bruce for that much longer than the other Robins. This messes with Dick and Jason's relationship, in that Jason's always been jealous of Dick, because he believes that Bruce would've killed the Joker if Dick had been the one who was killed. The line of reasoning made sense. Bruce worked with Dick for a longer amount of time, raised Dick, experienced a lighter time with Dick, and genuinely missed Dick when he was gone. Jason felt as if he was always in Dick's shadow, and in a way he was. If he and Dick worked with Bruce for the same general amount of time, what the hell is Jason supposed to be angry at Dick for? His bond with Bruce would be just as strong as Bruce's bond with Dick, if not more so because Bruce and Dick wouldn't have been communicating that much at the time. And of course this isn't touching on Tim or Damian.

I believe Dick first started when he was 8 actually, and then that was later retconned to 12. In a darker world, its simply hard to imagine an 8-12 year old fighting grown men and winning, no matter how much training he has. I don't like it by any means, but that's just the way it is, so I can understand where DC is coming from with aging Dick. It doesn't work however for the reasons you stated, and I touched on in my previous paragraph. Dick and Bruce are supposed to have the closest relationship of all the Robins. How is this possible when they all worked with Bruce for the same amount of time, and Dick then spent time estranged from Bruce?

Dick Grayson is Bruce Wayne's son. His heir. I don't think this is something that ever needs to be stated, tweaked, or removed in any way. They are father and son. That's it. Having Dick be 16 when his parents die craps all over that for what I think are obvious reasons. I'm not saying that you won't be traumatized by losing your parents, but the older you get, the more ok you get with the idea. (Think about it) Because the older you get, the less of a role they play in your life, the more you start to become your own person and spend time away from them, and they are firmly fixed as your parents. At 16, you know who they are and what they mean to you. They aren't going to be replaced by anybody, because you're almost an adult and ready to go out into the world on your own. This again damages Bruce and Dick's relationship. At 16, he's not really going to need Bruce to help him get through his parents death, or raise him. He's again almost a fully grown adult. In fact i'd say he'd clash with Bruce a lot and have far less respect for him. Sure Bruce took him in, but he didn't raise him. He basically gave him a roof over his head for a few years, and then started acting like a dick and forced Dick to leave. Really, if the relationship is like an older and younger brother, it simply doesn't make sense. Dick really shouldn't be following Bruce's lead so closely. He should be the one off doing his own thing, not Jason. This again messes with all the other relationships as well, as Jason should have been far closer to Bruce and less jealous of both Dick and Tim. Tim really shouldn't even have as close a relationship with Dick as he does. Dick should be more of a surrogate father than an older brother. And Damian....just Damian smh.

All of this just comes back to the fact that the Batman timeline makes no sense in a 5 year context. Take into account that Bruce was apparently still dead for a year and Dick was Batman, along with Jason having died and been resurrected, and Damian being 10, and I have to say that the timeline is even more screwed up.

Phew! Glad I have that off my chest. haha. That being said, I am interested in the way his continuing story develops. Not sure how I feel about the "supposed to be a Talon" thing....seems a little contrived but, hey, I'll deal. And what I don't like from this continuity....well, let's just say, I will continue cutting and pasting to the satisfaction of my head canon

#18 Edited by soduh2 (865 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher: I agree! 16 is way too old. If the problem was keeping Bruce younger then I for one don't mind a Bruce that's older and more experienced than the other League members

#19 Posted by soduh2 (865 posts) - - Show Bio

@KnightRise said:

@soduh2: If it helps, he is a natural acrobat. Like gymnasts, successful acrobats tend to be quite small in frame, which it compensated by their high core strength and muscle control.

Yes, but a lot of the time they stay small throughout their life. Rather than getting bigger when they grow up (which apparently is the case for Grayson).

#20 Posted by KnightRise (4785 posts) - - Show Bio

@soduh2 said:

@KnightRise said:

@soduh2: If it helps, he is a natural acrobat. Like gymnasts, successful acrobats tend to be quite small in frame, which it compensated by their high core strength and muscle control.

Yes, but a lot of the time they stay small throughout their life. Rather than getting bigger when they grow up (which apparently is the case for Grayson).

That can be blamed on artists and the standard convention that superheros must be six foot and chiseled from marble. Officially, Dick is 5'10" and 170lbs (the exact same portions as Georges St. Pierre) but he's drawn bigger.

#21 Edited by Nathaniel_Christopher (1683 posts) - - Show Bio

The Talon thing, the Gray Son thing, and really Dick's entire Court of Owls story was contrived. Really I just comfort myself by remembering everything that was there before Flashpoint.

The way I see it that gives them a relationship more akin to Dick/Jason, where one is clearly the superior at the start, instead of both being equals from the get go. And really that's my problem with the Bruce/Dick brother relationship. There comes a time when two brothers, despite any difference in age, are going to be equals. Partners. One is going to defer to the other any longer. However, with the Batman Family, that's the way it always has to be. Bruce at the top, with no equal.

It definitely stems from them de-aging Bruce, but still needing all the Robin's to be a certain age. And again, Damian throws a wrench into everything, because he is canonically (Until its retconned) 10 years old, when Bruce is I think about 30. Really I don't understand why Damian can be Robin at 10 but Dick has to be 16.

#22 Posted by SmoothJammin (2334 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher: The reboot has actually caused me to buy less and less comics. I haven't been to my shop in months, If I by chance feel there's a fantastic issue I need to read then I hit up comixology, even then it's highly unlikely. I'm so sick of all these changes man.

#23 Posted by KnightRise (4785 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

The Talon thing, the Gray Son thing, and really Dick's entire Court of Owls story was contrived. Really I just comfort myself by remembering everything that was there before Flashpoint.

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

The way I see it that gives them a relationship more akin to Dick/Jason, where one is clearly the superior at the start, instead of both being equals from the get go. And really that's my problem with the Bruce/Dick brother relationship. There comes a time when two brothers, despite any difference in age, are going to be equals. Partners. One is going to defer to the other any longer. However, with the Batman Family, that's the way it always has to be. Bruce at the top, with no equal.

Now we're getting back into the character analysis of Dick. In many ways, he already is Bruce's equal, and a top tier hero in his own right. Father/son, mentor/ward, brother/brother, either way Dick has grown beyond Bruce's shadow.

#24 Posted by Krissyjump (104 posts) - - Show Bio

To be honest, I don't have a huge problem with the timeline issues. The 52 universe was created, it was caused by an event that pulled multiple timelines, realities, and continuities together. This is how I look at it... The things that happened before 52 for the most part still all happened the way they happened, over the same amount of time, but when reality was changed to create the 52, the characters only remember it happening over the course of 5 years, even though it was actually much longer than 5. Dick was only 12 when he first became robin, but because of the creation of the 52, memories were altered to make things fit within the new timeline, so he only THINKS he was 16 when it happened (which is what we're seeing here, the new continuity being built on top of the old), but was actually 12. A little odd yes, but that's my theory and I'm sticking too it. :)

#25 Posted by Nathaniel_Christopher (1683 posts) - - Show Bio

@KnightRise And that's not how he's been portrayed, which is the problem. They don't portray the two as equals, and when you look at the relationship in an older brother/younger brother context it doesn't work. The relationship is always Dick being noticeably lower than Bruce on the chain, not equal to him. DC wants to show one thing, but doesn't back it up properly. And again, it will echo throughout the relationships of the entire family.

#26 Posted by Mr_Ingenuity (7677 posts) - - Show Bio

@SUNMAN said:

don't think about the time frame. Honestly I wish DC would stop rubbing it in people's face cause it doesn't make sense no matter how you spin it.

This.

#27 Posted by KnightRise (4785 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

@KnightRise And that's not how he's been portrayed, which is the problem. They don't portray the two as equals, and when you look at the relationship in an older brother/younger brother context it doesn't work. The relationship is always Dick being noticeably lower than Bruce on the chain, not equal to him. DC wants to show one thing, but doesn't back it up properly. And again, it will echo throughout the relationships of the entire family.

Then thats a matter of opinion. I can call on quite a few people that don't think Nightwing is just Batman-lite, and who know that that Dick is not Bruce's subordinate.

#28 Posted by LuigiBat (225 posts) - - Show Bio

I get the feeling that they made Dick into a 16 year old when Bruce took him in as a means of making things more realistic, all things considered it is more believable to have a 16 year old holding his own against bad guys than a 12 year old regardless of the training he received. (Note that I do see the flaw in this explanation given how Damian is represented) Unfortunately in trying to make things more believable by having Dick as a 16 year old Robin they've made other aspects of the character and his relationships with others become very unrealistic. As has already been pointed out by it makes all this great history between Bruce and Dick rather void. A 16 year old will need some guidance but he won't need another father figure, a 9 or 12 year old (whichever age you think he was when taken in by Bruce) on the other hand will need someone to step into that role because at that age you just aren't ready to stand on your own two feet and be independent. At the age of 16 is Dick really going to view Bruce as a father figure? I highly doubt it.

Moreover, Dick as a 16 year old really cheapens the whole 'breakup' between him and Bruce. Pre-52 it was a very traumatic thing, primarily because Dick viewed Bruce as a father and Bruce viewed him as a son, but now it just seems like Dick said "Hey thanks for giving me a roof over my head but I'm gonna do my own thing now because you seem like a bit of a d*ck" or something to that effect (I'm probably trivialising it far too much but thats the kind of stupidity with which I imagine it was/will be handled). In the New 52 I imagine that Dick went off in a strop on his own, became Nightwing, Bruce went about all angry and picked up Jason Todd, 6 months later they apologise to each other but Dick finds its too late to return to being Robin as Todd has the mantle now. Then Jason dies sometime in the next 6-12 months, Dick doesn't know how to help Bruce because they don't have that great a bond (hooray for stupid 5 year timelines). Tim Drake comes along with all his crazy skillset and deduces Batman's identity and confronts Bruce but instead of becoming Robin (wounds would be very fresh for Bruce given the short timeline as opposed to them being quite old by the time Tim approached him pre-flashpoint when there were years between Jason dying and Tim finding out his identity) he becomes Red Robin as Bruce refuses to have another Robin alongside him so soon after Jason's death. Then Damian gets dumped onto Bruce suddenly, RIP and Final Crisis occur so Dick becomes Batman for a year (probably at the age of 20 with this timeline) with Damian as his Robin, Bruce then returns and takes back his role as Batman.

You probably read the above timeline (a very spontaneous outburst on my part so I may have left some things out) and thought it was a massive clusterf**k, and if you think that then you've entirely understood what I'm getting at. The whole altering of ages for the Robin's as a means of making it more plausible for them to fill the role (with the exception of Damian, who is made out to be the second coming of Christ with all his skillset), and the subsequent use of the 5 year timeline to incorporate this, basically renders everything else which we are told has occurred within the universe (which is basically everything that happened pre-flashpoint) to be completely unrealistic and severely cheapened on the whole. For me the 5 year timeline destroys important parts of Dick's relationship with Bruce, it cheapens the whole thing of Jason dying and then coming back to life (I mean did he die only to return a month later?), Tim was never a Robin and had his entire origin changed to something utterly ridiculous (Olympian? Bit cliché, no?) and Dick supposedly became Batman at the age of 20, looking after a 10 year old Damian as his Robin, when he'd only really trained/been active for four years tops.

#29 Posted by vernierhawk001 (539 posts) - - Show Bio

@LuigiBat said:

I get the feeling that they made Dick into a 16 year old when Bruce took him in as a means of making things more realistic, all things considered it is more believable to have a 16 year old holding his own against bad guys than a 12 year old regardless of the training he received. (Note that I do see the flaw in this explanation given how Damian is represented) Unfortunately in trying to make things more believable by having Dick as a 16 year old Robin they've made other aspects of the character and his relationships with others become very unrealistic. As has already been pointed out by it makes all this great history between Bruce and Dick rather void. A 16 year old will need some guidance but he won't need another father figure, a 9 or 12 year old (whichever age you think he was when taken in by Bruce) on the other hand will need someone to step into that role because at that age you just aren't ready to stand on your own two feet and be independent. At the age of 16 is Dick really going to view Bruce as a father figure? I highly doubt it.

Moreover, Dick as a 16 year old really cheapens the whole 'breakup' between him and Bruce. Pre-52 it was a very traumatic thing, primarily because Dick viewed Bruce as a father and Bruce viewed him as a son, but now it just seems like Dick said "Hey thanks for giving me a roof over my head but I'm gonna do my own thing now because you seem like a bit of a d*ck" or something to that effect (I'm probably trivialising it far too much but thats the kind of stupidity with which I imagine it was/will be handled). In the New 52 I imagine that Dick went off in a strop on his own, became Nightwing, Bruce went about all angry and picked up Jason Todd, 6 months later they apologise to each other but Dick finds its too late to return to being Robin as Todd has the mantle now. Then Jason dies sometime in the next 6-12 months, Dick doesn't know how to help Bruce because they don't have that great a bond (hooray for stupid 5 year timelines). Tim Drake comes along with all his crazy skillset and deduces Batman's identity and confronts Bruce but instead of becoming Robin (wounds would be very fresh for Bruce given the short timeline as opposed to them being quite old by the time Tim approached him pre-flashpoint when there were years between Jason dying and Tim finding out his identity) he becomes Red Robin as Bruce refuses to have another Robin alongside him so soon after Jason's death. Then Damian gets dumped onto Bruce suddenly, RIP and Final Crisis occur so Dick becomes Batman for a year (probably at the age of 20 with this timeline) with Damian as his Robin, Bruce then returns and takes back his role as Batman.

You probably read the above timeline (a very spontaneous outburst on my part so I may have left some things out) and thought it was a massive clusterf**k, and if you think that then you've entirely understood what I'm getting at. The whole altering of ages for the Robin's as a means of making it more plausible for them to fill the role (with the exception of Damian, who is made out to be the second coming of Christ with all his skillset), and the subsequent use of the 5 year timeline to incorporate this, basically renders everything else which we are told has occurred within the universe (which is basically everything that happened pre-flashpoint) to be completely unrealistic and severely cheapened on the whole. For me the 5 year timeline destroys important parts of Dick's relationship with Bruce, it cheapens the whole thing of Jason dying and then coming back to life (I mean did he die only to return a month later?), Tim was never a Robin and had his entire origin changed to something utterly ridiculous (Olympian? Bit cliché, no?) and Dick supposedly became Batman at the age of 20, looking after a 10 year old Damian as his Robin, when he'd only really trained/been active for four years tops.

I think we are pretty much on the same page. Sadly, New 52 hurts some of the growth for Grayson.

#30 Posted by vernierhawk001 (539 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

The Talon thing, the Gray Son thing, and really Dick's entire Court of Owls story was contrived. Really I just comfort myself by remembering everything that was there before Flashpoint.

The way I see it that gives them a relationship more akin to Dick/Jason, where one is clearly the superior at the start, instead of both being equals from the get go. And really that's my problem with the Bruce/Dick brother relationship. There comes a time when two brothers, despite any difference in age, are going to be equals. Partners. One is going to defer to the other any longer. However, with the Batman Family, that's the way it always has to be. Bruce at the top, with no equal.

It definitely stems from them de-aging Bruce, but still needing all the Robin's to be a certain age. And again, Damian throws a wrench into everything, because he is canonically (Until its retconned) 10 years old, when Bruce is I think about 30. Really I don't understand why Damian can be Robin at 10 but Dick has to be 16.

I was wondering if I was the only one.

@Krissyjump said:

To be honest, I don't have a huge problem with the timeline issues. The 52 universe was created, it was caused by an event that pulled multiple timelines, realities, and continuities together. This is how I look at it... The things that happened before 52 for the most part still all happened the way they happened, over the same amount of time, but when reality was changed to create the 52, the characters only remember it happening over the course of 5 years, even though it was actually much longer than 5. Dick was only 12 when he first became robin, but because of the creation of the 52, memories were altered to make things fit within the new timeline, so he only THINKS he was 16 when it happened (which is what we're seeing here, the new continuity being built on top of the old), but was actually 12. A little odd yes, but that's my theory and I'm sticking too it. :)

So its more of like a mind altering thing than the timeline as a whole being squeezed into five years?

I have some hope that this is just a phase based on some article I read on the 'Vine somewhere. Some huge conspiracy that Booster Gold came back to fix or something than everything will go back to normal

#31 Posted by Nathaniel_Christopher (1683 posts) - - Show Bio

that's what i'm hoping. That this is all eventually going to lead into a massive crossover event (Maybe another Crisis...nevermind. Hopefully not. I think Final Crisis showed us that DC doesn't have the talent to pull those off anymore) And that Booster Gold will be the catalyst to setting things straight, and if we're all lucky Donna Troy and Wally West will be right there with him. Because I can understand why DC would want to keep so much of the Batman Timeline, but it simply cannot mesh with the timeline of the rest of the universe. So I say just do away with it all.

#32 Posted by LuigiBat (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

that's what i'm hoping. That this is all eventually going to lead into a massive crossover event (Maybe another Crisis...nevermind. Hopefully not. I think Final Crisis showed us that DC doesn't have the talent to pull those off anymore) And that Booster Gold will be the catalyst to setting things straight, and if we're all lucky Donna Troy and Wally West will be right there with him. Because I can understand why DC would want to keep so much of the Batman Timeline, but it simply cannot mesh with the timeline of the rest of the universe. So I say just do away with it all.

To be honest the crux of the problem is not that they wanted to keep most of the Batman timeline intact, the issue is that they wanted to cram everything into 5 years which just doesn't make sense. I know there are sites with theories on what the 'actual' timeline length could be, some speculated that Bruce could've been active as Batman for another 5 years or so before going public (around the same time he adopted Dick and the JLA was formed) but was simply an urban legend type figure. The recent issue 0 from Snyder does support the idea that Batman operated for some time as an urban legend, hence why Jim Gordon is seen with a brand new Bat-symbol-light-thingy and talks about showing people that Batman isn't just a myth. However in the latest Detective issue 0 it shows Bruce, 10 years ago, still in training. So really I don't know what to believe. I certainly find it very hard to believe that Bruce became Batman 5 years ago and has been through all the pre-flashpoint events (more or less) in that space of time, if they'd have given a 10 year timeline for everything to happen (that includes Bruce becoming Batman and going through all the Robins etc) it'd have been easier to believe but still a tad fantastical. Personally I'd have gone for a 15 year timeline, with Bruce becoming Batman at the start of that, adopting Dick (at the age of 12) in his second year, spending years with Dick at his side and so on.

#33 Posted by vernierhawk001 (539 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

that's what i'm hoping. That this is all eventually going to lead into a massive crossover event (Maybe another Crisis...nevermind. Hopefully not. I think Final Crisis showed us that DC doesn't have the talent to pull those off anymore) And that Booster Gold will be the catalyst to setting things straight, and if we're all lucky Donna Troy and Wally West will be right there with him. Because I can understand why DC would want to keep so much of the Batman Timeline, but it simply cannot mesh with the timeline of the rest of the universe. So I say just do away with it all.

There was an aritcle somewhere on here mentioning how that might very well be the case. Something about the happenings in the New 52 resembling a rejected comic book event idea a while back that would bring about the end of superheros.

@LuigiBat said:

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

that's what i'm hoping. That this is all eventually going to lead into a massive crossover event (Maybe another Crisis...nevermind. Hopefully not. I think Final Crisis showed us that DC doesn't have the talent to pull those off anymore) And that Booster Gold will be the catalyst to setting things straight, and if we're all lucky Donna Troy and Wally West will be right there with him. Because I can understand why DC would want to keep so much of the Batman Timeline, but it simply cannot mesh with the timeline of the rest of the universe. So I say just do away with it all.

To be honest the crux of the problem is not that they wanted to keep most of the Batman timeline intact, the issue is that they wanted to cram everything into 5 years which just doesn't make sense. I know there are sites with theories on what the 'actual' timeline length could be, some speculated that Bruce could've been active as Batman for another 5 years or so before going public (around the same time he adopted Dick and the JLA was formed) but was simply an urban legend type figure. The recent issue 0 from Snyder does support the idea that Batman operated for some time as an urban legend, hence why Jim Gordon is seen with a brand new Bat-symbol-light-thingy and talks about showing people that Batman isn't just a myth. However in the latest Detective issue 0 it shows Bruce, 10 years ago, still in training. So really I don't know what to believe. I certainly find it very hard to believe that Bruce became Batman 5 years ago and has been through all the pre-flashpoint events (more or less) in that space of time, if they'd have given a 10 year timeline for everything to happen (that includes Bruce becoming Batman and going through all the Robins etc) it'd have been easier to believe but still a tad fantastical. Personally I'd have gone for a 15 year timeline, with Bruce becoming Batman at the start of that, adopting Dick (at the age of 12) in his second year, spending years with Dick at his side and so on.

10 to 15 sounds good to me as well. I guess you'd get into the age issues but...he's Batman! Regardless, if they made the "5 years" thing just since he has "gone public" then I could deal. Add another 5 for the urban legend thing before that, as you said, and I could accept this! The Robins would have to be spread throughout the 10 years as you said but I think that could work. I think the urban legend idea is one that is important for the Batman character (perhaps even underrated)---I hope they don't/haven't done away with that

#34 Posted by vernierhawk001 (539 posts) - - Show Bio

@Krissyjump said:

To be honest, I don't have a huge problem with the timeline issues. The 52 universe was created, it was caused by an event that pulled multiple timelines, realities, and continuities together. This is how I look at it... The things that happened before 52 for the most part still all happened the way they happened, over the same amount of time, but when reality was changed to create the 52, the characters only remember it happening over the course of 5 years, even though it was actually much longer than 5. Dick was only 12 when he first became robin, but because of the creation of the 52, memories were altered to make things fit within the new timeline, so he only THINKS he was 16 when it happened (which is what we're seeing here, the new continuity being built on top of the old), but was actually 12. A little odd yes, but that's my theory and I'm sticking too it. :)

I think you just hurt my head. lol

#35 Posted by LuigiBat (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@vernierhawk001 said:

@LuigiBat said:

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

that's what i'm hoping. That this is all eventually going to lead into a massive crossover event (Maybe another Crisis...nevermind. Hopefully not. I think Final Crisis showed us that DC doesn't have the talent to pull those off anymore) And that Booster Gold will be the catalyst to setting things straight, and if we're all lucky Donna Troy and Wally West will be right there with him. Because I can understand why DC would want to keep so much of the Batman Timeline, but it simply cannot mesh with the timeline of the rest of the universe. So I say just do away with it all.

To be honest the crux of the problem is not that they wanted to keep most of the Batman timeline intact, the issue is that they wanted to cram everything into 5 years which just doesn't make sense. I know there are sites with theories on what the 'actual' timeline length could be, some speculated that Bruce could've been active as Batman for another 5 years or so before going public (around the same time he adopted Dick and the JLA was formed) but was simply an urban legend type figure. The recent issue 0 from Snyder does support the idea that Batman operated for some time as an urban legend, hence why Jim Gordon is seen with a brand new Bat-symbol-light-thingy and talks about showing people that Batman isn't just a myth. However in the latest Detective issue 0 it shows Bruce, 10 years ago, still in training. So really I don't know what to believe. I certainly find it very hard to believe that Bruce became Batman 5 years ago and has been through all the pre-flashpoint events (more or less) in that space of time, if they'd have given a 10 year timeline for everything to happen (that includes Bruce becoming Batman and going through all the Robins etc) it'd have been easier to believe but still a tad fantastical. Personally I'd have gone for a 15 year timeline, with Bruce becoming Batman at the start of that, adopting Dick (at the age of 12) in his second year, spending years with Dick at his side and so on.

10 to 15 sounds good to me as well. I guess you'd get into the age issues but...he's Batman! Regardless, if they made the "5 years" thing just since he has "gone public" then I could deal. Add another 5 for the urban legend thing before that, as you said, and I could accept this! The Robins would have to be spread throughout the 10 years as you said but I think that could work. I think the urban legend idea is one that is important for the Batman character (perhaps even underrated)---I hope they don't/haven't done away with that

I guess the over-arching issue with the whole reboot thing is that when it comes to Batman they really didn't reboot anything at all when it came to the content of the universe. Having a 10-15 year timeline makes sense but if it was in place I'd have to ask whether a reboot would even be worth it in the first place. I kinda feel that if you want a reboot to make sense then it has to be a proper reboot with the slate being wiped clean and no extra crap. This wouldn't necessarily mean losing series about Nightwing, Red Hood, Batgirl etc, all DC would have to do is launch them with little backstory/origin info and have the Batman series eventually working towards the set point in the timeline where each character took on that mantle. This would mean DC doesn't lose out on titles but can still alter origins and such like.

#36 Posted by Nathaniel_Christopher (1683 posts) - - Show Bio

@LuigiBat said:

@vernierhawk001 said:

@LuigiBat said:

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

that's what i'm hoping. That this is all eventually going to lead into a massive crossover event (Maybe another Crisis...nevermind. Hopefully not. I think Final Crisis showed us that DC doesn't have the talent to pull those off anymore) And that Booster Gold will be the catalyst to setting things straight, and if we're all lucky Donna Troy and Wally West will be right there with him. Because I can understand why DC would want to keep so much of the Batman Timeline, but it simply cannot mesh with the timeline of the rest of the universe. So I say just do away with it all.

To be honest the crux of the problem is not that they wanted to keep most of the Batman timeline intact, the issue is that they wanted to cram everything into 5 years which just doesn't make sense. I know there are sites with theories on what the 'actual' timeline length could be, some speculated that Bruce could've been active as Batman for another 5 years or so before going public (around the same time he adopted Dick and the JLA was formed) but was simply an urban legend type figure. The recent issue 0 from Snyder does support the idea that Batman operated for some time as an urban legend, hence why Jim Gordon is seen with a brand new Bat-symbol-light-thingy and talks about showing people that Batman isn't just a myth. However in the latest Detective issue 0 it shows Bruce, 10 years ago, still in training. So really I don't know what to believe. I certainly find it very hard to believe that Bruce became Batman 5 years ago and has been through all the pre-flashpoint events (more or less) in that space of time, if they'd have given a 10 year timeline for everything to happen (that includes Bruce becoming Batman and going through all the Robins etc) it'd have been easier to believe but still a tad fantastical. Personally I'd have gone for a 15 year timeline, with Bruce becoming Batman at the start of that, adopting Dick (at the age of 12) in his second year, spending years with Dick at his side and so on.

10 to 15 sounds good to me as well. I guess you'd get into the age issues but...he's Batman! Regardless, if they made the "5 years" thing just since he has "gone public" then I could deal. Add another 5 for the urban legend thing before that, as you said, and I could accept this! The Robins would have to be spread throughout the 10 years as you said but I think that could work. I think the urban legend idea is one that is important for the Batman character (perhaps even underrated)---I hope they don't/haven't done away with that

I guess the over-arching issue with the whole reboot thing is that when it comes to Batman they really didn't reboot anything at all when it came to the content of the universe. Having a 10-15 year timeline makes sense but if it was in place I'd have to ask whether a reboot would even be worth it in the first place. I kinda feel that if you want a reboot to make sense then it has to be a proper reboot with the slate being wiped clean and no extra crap. This wouldn't necessarily mean losing series about Nightwing, Red Hood, Batgirl etc, all DC would have to do is launch them with little backstory/origin info and have the Batman series eventually working towards the set point in the timeline where each character took on that mantle. This would mean DC doesn't lose out on titles but can still alter origins and such like.

Well I completely agree. A reboot is washing away everything that came before a start from scratch. So anything that happened within the specific continuity is gone. The point of this (and the point DC used for why the New 52 needed to happen) is to end continuity lock-out, which is when there is so much in the universe that it has become hard for new readers to jump in. This is why for the Bat Family there hasn't been a reboot. All the old stories apparently still happened, but there have been minor tweaks here and there that have been revealed, not particularly well, as we've gone along. For the Bat Family this is basically just a bunch of mini retcons taking place throughout their history, that have pretty large effects, and in many cases just confused things that were clear before. This leads me to wonder how exactly new fans are supposed to jump right in an understand it if even us old fans are confused.

I could live with a 10 year timeline, and a 15 year one would be even better, as I could then honestly believe all the old stories did indeed take place. With 5 (Really only 4 as Bruce was apparently dead for a year) it just doesn't make sense.

#37 Posted by vernierhawk001 (539 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

@LuigiBat said:

@vernierhawk001 said:

@LuigiBat said:

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

that's what i'm hoping. That this is all eventually going to lead into a massive crossover event (Maybe another Crisis...nevermind. Hopefully not. I think Final Crisis showed us that DC doesn't have the talent to pull those off anymore) And that Booster Gold will be the catalyst to setting things straight, and if we're all lucky Donna Troy and Wally West will be right there with him. Because I can understand why DC would want to keep so much of the Batman Timeline, but it simply cannot mesh with the timeline of the rest of the universe. So I say just do away with it all.

To be honest the crux of the problem is not that they wanted to keep most of the Batman timeline intact, the issue is that they wanted to cram everything into 5 years which just doesn't make sense. I know there are sites with theories on what the 'actual' timeline length could be, some speculated that Bruce could've been active as Batman for another 5 years or so before going public (around the same time he adopted Dick and the JLA was formed) but was simply an urban legend type figure. The recent issue 0 from Snyder does support the idea that Batman operated for some time as an urban legend, hence why Jim Gordon is seen with a brand new Bat-symbol-light-thingy and talks about showing people that Batman isn't just a myth. However in the latest Detective issue 0 it shows Bruce, 10 years ago, still in training. So really I don't know what to believe. I certainly find it very hard to believe that Bruce became Batman 5 years ago and has been through all the pre-flashpoint events (more or less) in that space of time, if they'd have given a 10 year timeline for everything to happen (that includes Bruce becoming Batman and going through all the Robins etc) it'd have been easier to believe but still a tad fantastical. Personally I'd have gone for a 15 year timeline, with Bruce becoming Batman at the start of that, adopting Dick (at the age of 12) in his second year, spending years with Dick at his side and so on.

10 to 15 sounds good to me as well. I guess you'd get into the age issues but...he's Batman! Regardless, if they made the "5 years" thing just since he has "gone public" then I could deal. Add another 5 for the urban legend thing before that, as you said, and I could accept this! The Robins would have to be spread throughout the 10 years as you said but I think that could work. I think the urban legend idea is one that is important for the Batman character (perhaps even underrated)---I hope they don't/haven't done away with that

I guess the over-arching issue with the whole reboot thing is that when it comes to Batman they really didn't reboot anything at all when it came to the content of the universe. Having a 10-15 year timeline makes sense but if it was in place I'd have to ask whether a reboot would even be worth it in the first place. I kinda feel that if you want a reboot to make sense then it has to be a proper reboot with the slate being wiped clean and no extra crap. This wouldn't necessarily mean losing series about Nightwing, Red Hood, Batgirl etc, all DC would have to do is launch them with little backstory/origin info and have the Batman series eventually working towards the set point in the timeline where each character took on that mantle. This would mean DC doesn't lose out on titles but can still alter origins and such like.

Well I completely agree. A reboot is washing away everything that came before a start from scratch. So anything that happened within the specific continuity is gone. The point of this (and the point DC used for why the New 52 needed to happen) is to end continuity lock-out, which is when there is so much in the universe that it has become hard for new readers to jump in. This is why for the Bat Family there hasn't been a reboot. All the old stories apparently still happened, but there have been minor tweaks here and there that have been revealed, not particularly well, as we've gone along. For the Bat Family this is basically just a bunch of mini retcons taking place throughout their history, that have pretty large effects, and in many cases just confused things that were clear before. This leads me to wonder how exactly new fans are supposed to jump right in an understand it if even us old fans are confused.

I could live with a 10 year timeline, and a 15 year one would be even better, as I could then honestly believe all the old stories did indeed take place. With 5 (Really only 4 as Bruce was apparently dead for a year) it just doesn't make sense.

Well, ironically, I guess you could classify me as a "new" reader (I've only just started actually buying comics and keeping up with them week to week). Before that, however, I kept up with the characters moreso through wiki's and stuff. So I am still not exactly happy with the reboot...but, I also think its a personal thing. I generally hate continuity breaks. I think part of that is because its hard to see a character changed when you have grown up relating to them. And, to a writer with a larger goal in mind, that type of connection may escape their notice/be secondary to sales, etc (which sucks but, oh well). I kind of feel that way with Grayson--especially regarding his relationship to Bruce. I felt that I could personally relate to the whole "heir to the legacy, living up to expectations, in the shadow of your father" thing. And I think that's a big chunk of why I'm against this timeline. The writers would probably argue that those elements are still there with Dick but...they aren't--at least, not as potently as before. As we've discussed elsewhere, the timeline changes the nature of the father-son dynamic. It's a very subtle thing that doesn't seem like it would have so many ramifications to a character's basic psychology but I think it does. Editorial oversight?

#38 Posted by LuigiBat (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@vernierhawk001 said:

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

@LuigiBat said:

@vernierhawk001 said:

@LuigiBat said:

@Nathaniel_Christopher said:

that's what i'm hoping. That this is all eventually going to lead into a massive crossover event (Maybe another Crisis...nevermind. Hopefully not. I think Final Crisis showed us that DC doesn't have the talent to pull those off anymore) And that Booster Gold will be the catalyst to setting things straight, and if we're all lucky Donna Troy and Wally West will be right there with him. Because I can understand why DC would want to keep so much of the Batman Timeline, but it simply cannot mesh with the timeline of the rest of the universe. So I say just do away with it all.

To be honest the crux of the problem is not that they wanted to keep most of the Batman timeline intact, the issue is that they wanted to cram everything into 5 years which just doesn't make sense. I know there are sites with theories on what the 'actual' timeline length could be, some speculated that Bruce could've been active as Batman for another 5 years or so before going public (around the same time he adopted Dick and the JLA was formed) but was simply an urban legend type figure. The recent issue 0 from Snyder does support the idea that Batman operated for some time as an urban legend, hence why Jim Gordon is seen with a brand new Bat-symbol-light-thingy and talks about showing people that Batman isn't just a myth. However in the latest Detective issue 0 it shows Bruce, 10 years ago, still in training. So really I don't know what to believe. I certainly find it very hard to believe that Bruce became Batman 5 years ago and has been through all the pre-flashpoint events (more or less) in that space of time, if they'd have given a 10 year timeline for everything to happen (that includes Bruce becoming Batman and going through all the Robins etc) it'd have been easier to believe but still a tad fantastical. Personally I'd have gone for a 15 year timeline, with Bruce becoming Batman at the start of that, adopting Dick (at the age of 12) in his second year, spending years with Dick at his side and so on.

10 to 15 sounds good to me as well. I guess you'd get into the age issues but...he's Batman! Regardless, if they made the "5 years" thing just since he has "gone public" then I could deal. Add another 5 for the urban legend thing before that, as you said, and I could accept this! The Robins would have to be spread throughout the 10 years as you said but I think that could work. I think the urban legend idea is one that is important for the Batman character (perhaps even underrated)---I hope they don't/haven't done away with that

I guess the over-arching issue with the whole reboot thing is that when it comes to Batman they really didn't reboot anything at all when it came to the content of the universe. Having a 10-15 year timeline makes sense but if it was in place I'd have to ask whether a reboot would even be worth it in the first place. I kinda feel that if you want a reboot to make sense then it has to be a proper reboot with the slate being wiped clean and no extra crap. This wouldn't necessarily mean losing series about Nightwing, Red Hood, Batgirl etc, all DC would have to do is launch them with little backstory/origin info and have the Batman series eventually working towards the set point in the timeline where each character took on that mantle. This would mean DC doesn't lose out on titles but can still alter origins and such like.

Well I completely agree. A reboot is washing away everything that came before a start from scratch. So anything that happened within the specific continuity is gone. The point of this (and the point DC used for why the New 52 needed to happen) is to end continuity lock-out, which is when there is so much in the universe that it has become hard for new readers to jump in. This is why for the Bat Family there hasn't been a reboot. All the old stories apparently still happened, but there have been minor tweaks here and there that have been revealed, not particularly well, as we've gone along. For the Bat Family this is basically just a bunch of mini retcons taking place throughout their history, that have pretty large effects, and in many cases just confused things that were clear before. This leads me to wonder how exactly new fans are supposed to jump right in an understand it if even us old fans are confused.

I could live with a 10 year timeline, and a 15 year one would be even better, as I could then honestly believe all the old stories did indeed take place. With 5 (Really only 4 as Bruce was apparently dead for a year) it just doesn't make sense.

Well, ironically, I guess you could classify me as a "new" reader (I've only just started actually buying comics and keeping up with them week to week). Before that, however, I kept up with the characters moreso through wiki's and stuff. So I am still not exactly happy with the reboot...but, I also think its a personal thing. I generally hate continuity breaks. I think part of that is because its hard to see a character changed when you have grown up relating to them. And, to a writer with a larger goal in mind, that type of connection may escape their notice/be secondary to sales, etc (which sucks but, oh well). I kind of feel that way with Grayson--especially regarding his relationship to Bruce. I felt that I could personally relate to the whole "heir to the legacy, living up to expectations, in the shadow of your father" thing. And I think that's a big chunk of why I'm against this timeline. The writers would probably argue that those elements are still there with Dick but...they aren't--at least, not as potently as before. As we've discussed elsewhere, the timeline changes the nature of the father-son dynamic. It's a very subtle thing that doesn't seem like it would have so many ramifications to a character's basic psychology but I think it does. Editorial oversight?

See I'm in a similar situation. I only started buying comics after choosing to use DC for a media studies A-level case study (we had to choose a traditional institution and cover how they're trying to adapt to modern times, DC is in the process of doing so and they were an ideal candidate) and subsequently looking into the reboot/comixology etc. Most of my knowledge of pre-Flashpoint Batman is from reading wiki's and other sites (though I've begun buying pre-52 arcs).

I can keep up with most of the continuity but as I said already, why call it a reboot at all if you aren't actually doing a reboot? In a sense all they've done is hire some new creative teams for certain series, continue where the old series left off (to an extent) but simply call the first issue from these new teams "issue 1". DC might claim that the reboot was to allow new readers easier access to their comics but in the case of the Bat-Family titles they've hardly made it easier (one might argue they've made it harder) for new readers. I mean for starters in one of the first pages of Nightwing issue 1 Dick says he's spent a year as Batman when Bruce was 'missing', anyone new to Bat-family comics is going to read that and be very confused. Then you factor in that these new readers are being told that everything that has ever happened did so in the space of 5 years, its not easier for new people to start reading Bat-family titles, its gotten harder and more confusing than ever.

#39 Posted by Darkmaster006 (17 posts) - - Show Bio

As I said in other thread, the new 52 timeline, at least of Batfamily is horrible, all is confuse and in 5 years cannot be 4 Robins. I think in my timeline adapting it, you cant trust the News 52 timeline. ¿Six months of train and six months of being Robin for each Robin? Personally I think that thats is impossible.

#40 Posted by LuigiBat (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@Darkmaster006 said:

As I said in other thread, the new 52 timeline, at least of Batfamily is horrible, all is confuse and in 5 years cannot be 4 Robins. I think in my timeline adapting it, you cant trust the News 52 timeline. ¿Six months of train and six months of being Robin for each Robin? Personally I think that thats is impossible.

Well technically there have been only 3 Robins in 5 years, Tim went straight into being Red Robin ,presumably after some training period but we're meant to believe he was already highly intelligent and a very competent fighter/athlete before even meeting Bruce/Batman. I think its safe to say that Jason probably had 6 months training only to then be killed in his 2nd month as Robin. This leaves us with a decent amount of time for Dick and Damian.

#41 Posted by Darkmaster006 (17 posts) - - Show Bio

@LuigiBat: You know, I don't think that Jason only lasted two months, Jason was good as Robin, he died, yeah, but he was'nt bad. And he deserves the same time as Dick. And, obviously Tim had a lot of train, but he needs experience and if you think, to fight with a lot of criminals with guns and weapons only a athletic training is not enough, maybe he'll have a advanced knowledge of the theme, but he needed train.

#42 Posted by Nathaniel_Christopher (1683 posts) - - Show Bio

@Darkmaster006 said:

@LuigiBat: You know, I don't think that Jason only lasted two months, Jason was good as Robin, he died, yeah, but he was'nt bad. And he deserves the same time as Dick. And, obviously Tim had a lot of train, but he needs experience and if you think, to fight with a lot of criminals with guns and weapons only a athletic training is not enough, maybe he'll have a advanced knowledge of the theme, but he needed train.

Now don't get me wrong, I actually like Jason when he's written at his best (And i've liked the current work being done with him) but have you read his new origin and how he gets a message on the bat computer and runs off and gets blown up? That is really just him being stupid and ignoring everything Bruce taught him, and he even admits it. So I don't think it has anything to do with a lack of ability, but just the fact that he threw his ability to the wind and got caught up in emotions. At the end of the day he was still just a kid and he made a stupid decision. So just based on the character as he's been written, i'd say it makes sense for him to have had the least field time as Robin. With both TIm and Dick they had a foundation to build upon before becoming Robin, Tim especially, so they wouldn't have had to spend the same time training as Jason did.

#43 Posted by LuigiBat (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@Darkmaster006 said:

@LuigiBat: You know, I don't think that Jason only lasted two months, Jason was good as Robin, he died, yeah, but he was'nt bad. And he deserves the same time as Dick. And, obviously Tim had a lot of train, but he needs experience and if you think, to fight with a lot of criminals with guns and weapons only a athletic training is not enough, maybe he'll have a advanced knowledge of the theme, but he needed train.

Jason was a good Robin pre flashpoint but still ultimately allowed his emotions to lead him into danger which got him killed. Not saying he was a terrible Robin in the New 52 but as points out, the kid ignored everything Bruce taught him and got himself blown up, frankly I think allowing him 6 months of training (seems the standard amount for each of them, remember its gonna be round the clock training) and 2 months of being Robin was quite generous.

On Tim, from all I can gather the kid was some kind of MMA, Karate, Judo, Taikwondo (name any martial art under the sun) champion as well as an olympic gymnastic, swimming, weightlifting, sprinting, marathon, decathlon, heptathlon, triathlon and cycling champion. Note that I'm not sure all of that list is 100% accurate, though I'm sure most of it is given how much of a 'Mary Sue' Tim is.Anyway my point is that Tim was supposedly this God-child with plenty of training beforehand, really for him he'd have had minimal time adding to his skills with Bruce as the main issue would've been getting him to apply them to criminals.

#44 Posted by Nathaniel_Christopher (1683 posts) - - Show Bio

Really one of the things that annoys me most about all of this is Tim. As said, Tim's a Mary Sue. He always has been, and now they've revved it up to 11, at the expense of other characters. I just don't understand the reasoning behind that, especially when none of the changes made were necessary or even truly beneficial to the character.

#45 Posted by havoc1201 (518 posts) - - Show Bio

i think tim lost the most out of this new 52 he lost his back story of doing the detective work and learning batmans identity, then always trying to be better then dick and not make the same mistakes as jason.

#46 Posted by LuigiBat (225 posts) - - Show Bio

@havoc1201 said:

i think tim lost the most out of this new 52 he lost his back story of doing the detective work and learning batmans identity, then always trying to be better then dick and not make the same mistakes as jason.

Even though Tim was a 'Mary Sue' pre flashpoint he was likeable enough, now he's even more of a 'Mary Sue' and an unlikeable cocky one at that.

#47 Posted by BatWatch (2812 posts) - - Show Bio

Maybe I am missing something, but what makes us say Dick is supposed to be sixteen? Is sounds about right from my basic understanding of the timeline, but I'm just wondering where the number originated.@LuigiBat said:

@Darkmaster006 said:

@LuigiBat: You know, I don't think that Jason only lasted two months, Jason was good as Robin, he died, yeah, but he was'nt bad. And he deserves the same time as Dick. And, obviously Tim had a lot of train, but he needs experience and if you think, to fight with a lot of criminals with guns and weapons only a athletic training is not enough, maybe he'll have a advanced knowledge of the theme, but he needed train.

Jason was a good Robin pre flashpoint but still ultimately allowed his emotions to lead him into danger which got him killed. Not saying he was a terrible Robin in the New 52 but as points out, the kid ignored everything Bruce taught him and got himself blown up, frankly I think allowing him 6 months of training (seems the standard amount for each of them, remember its gonna be round the clock training) and 2 months of being Robin was quite generous.

On Tim, from all I can gather the kid was some kind of MMA, Karate, Judo, Taikwondo (name any martial art under the sun) champion as well as an olympic gymnastic, swimming, weightlifting, sprinting, marathon, decathlon, heptathlon, triathlon and cycling champion. Note that I'm not sure all of that list is 100% accurate, though I'm sure most of it is given how much of a 'Mary Sue' Tim is.Anyway my point is that Tim was supposedly this God-child with plenty of training beforehand, really for him he'd have had minimal time adding to his skills with Bruce as the main issue would've been getting him to apply them to criminals.

I love pre-Flashpoint Tim Drake, so I really want to leap to his defense right now, but when you are talking about this new Tim Drake...ugh, you are right. He is so annoying. Hate him! Hate, hate, hate!

In my own personal timeline, I always gave Jason about six months of training a six months of being Robin. Seems about right if you add in some of his pre-COIE appearances.

For more news, reviews, and commentary for the entire Bat Family, check out BatWatch.net.

@havoc1201 said:

i think tim lost the most out of this new 52 he lost his back story of doing the detective work and learning batmans identity, then always trying to be better then dick and not make the same mistakes as jason.

Yeah, absolutely except I think Tim might be worse than Jason post-Flashpoint. Jason let his anger get the better of him. Tim let his hubris defeat him and risked innocent lives in the process.

For more news, reviews, and commentary for the entire Bat Family, check out BatWatch.net.

#48 Posted by ULTRAstarkiller (6252 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nathaniel_Christopher: thank you someone gets it

#49 Posted by John Valentine (16313 posts) - - Show Bio

Grayson's only 5 ft 10" as an adult. He looks around 5 ft 6/7" in those scans.

Perfectly reasonable. I'm 6 ft now, aged twenty, and I was 5 ft 9" or so when I was sixteen.

#50 Posted by Onemoreposter (4069 posts) - - Show Bio

@SUNMAN said:

don't think about the time frame. Honestly I wish DC would stop rubbing it in people's face cause it doesn't make sense no matter how you spin it.

thisss

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.