#1 Posted by dmreyn (28 posts) - - Show Bio

First off, this question isn't meant to blow off the New52 concept as a whole, as I am giving it a shot and some ideas seem cool.

That being said, I don't feel that Batman needed to become more modern or for a new generation. That was a bad excuse for rebooting. Maybe it's just me, but as I'm reading the older universe stuff, story arcs 10, 20, even 30 years ago, I'm usually not actively noticing "wow, this comic is OLD" besides the ads and sometimes the dialogue/slang. I feel that most of the stories could have very well been set in the here and now just as well back in say 1990. For one, Batman is so technologically advanced that most of his gadgets are just as groundbreaking today as they were in the original stories. Weapons have essentially remained the same for ages - M16s, AKs, and Uzis are just as deadly and common today as they were back then. The only things needing modernizing are subtle things here and there, most of which my mind overlooks when reading. For example, a person using a phone booth or a classic cord telephone would in todays comic probably be using an iPhone, but that wouldn't change the story. Thugs stealing VCRs would today be thugs stealing DVD/BluRay players. I guess the style of clothing has changed some, but when you consider most of the art is on a man who dresses up like a bat and villains who always wear gimmicky outfits, you don't pay attention to some background chump who just happens to have a rat-tail or a mullet or some guy wearing a green leisure suit. Anybody agree? Disagree? Just curious to hear others' opinions.

#2 Edited by xephyr417 (5 posts) - - Show Bio

I would agree with you. The more and more I read into the New 52 changes the more I notice how totally unnecessary they are. I mean, I guess it DOES feel like it's the 90's to me when I am reading the Modern Age stuff, but that's fine for me.

To play devil's advocate, I do understand that if they want to reach the kids born in the new century they might have a bit more trouble connecting. However, I wouldn't have noticed if they just randomly started throwing more modern tech in without a full reboot.

#3 Posted by DeathpooltheT1000 (12968 posts) - - Show Bio

Batman was created before the WW2, i dont see no one want him back at that time period, even when it was his origins and people over look how much more reallistic he tried to be during some small period of time.

Make him more modern makes sense, since after all this years there is no way to follow his story and stop being relevant.

#4 Posted by Durakken (1591 posts) - - Show Bio

The difference between pre crisis and post crisis is that pre crisis while it does have some loose canon it is largely very very very very loose or complete nonsense... All aspects that were worthwhile was folded into post crisis well. Post crisis was well formed when it was created and since then the comics have been more serial rather than episodic (like pre crisis) This move towards serial makes it more or less impossible to reboot in the same way and that's why flashpoint doesn't work... because the timeline doesn't work and it's a completely different thing to mess with a serial story than it is to mess with episodic stories. Star Trek did it.

But not only is that the problem... but like you said it is completely unnecessary, It doesn't serve any stated purpose and reading the last 30 years of comics isn't really out of date overall. You can tell that they are from that decade, but other than the style they hold up and work presently for the most part. I personally caught up all in the last 3 years. They also don't use very many topical issues that you need to know whats happening in the real world to get and while tech has advanced over the last 30 years the tech used in the comics has evolved naturally rather than being static.

I think Flashpoint is purely egotistical along with bad business...

I do think that there are some good things about DCnU and I think you could easily preserve those, bring back the pre-flashpoint DCU, and move forward... but the biggest problem with the DCnU is really that when I read New52 Batgirl vs Vol5 DCU Batgirl... I'm not too excited about New52 Batgirl and every issue is just OK for the most part, but Vol5... I laugh or smile or tear up or something with everty issue. That's the problem. The New52 is just soulless more or less...

#5 Posted by MasterDetective (887 posts) - - Show Bio

#6 Posted by PunyParker (13033 posts) - - Show Bio

The New 52 can be called "Modernizing" too.........

#7 Posted by dmreyn (28 posts) - - Show Bio

@punyparker: That was my point. I hear people saying the new52 was done in part to "modernize" the characters. That to me is meant to convey that the old characters were out of style, out of place, etc. in today's modern world. Even Batman's origin still works well today. A shooting in the city could happen just as easily today as it could when he was originally conceived in the 1940s. I guess what I'm trying to say is that when I read the older comics, I don't feel that I'm reading something 10, 25 years old. For example, I'm currently in the middle of No Man's Land - and the comic doesn't feel like it was written before year 2000 - it feels as if it could very well have been written yesterday.

That's not to say New52 doesn't have other reasons - for example, giving writers a chance to come up with new stories, new characters, new plots and twist the history to their liking in order to give fans a different perspective. This would make sense. The modernization point does not. I'm excited to follow Year Zero, for instance, as a fresh take on Batman's start, but I never felt like Year One didn't fit in this day and age either, if you catch my drift.

#8 Posted by Alexander505 (2177 posts) - - Show Bio

Batman is always the same character, don't worry about New 52, he is still awesome.

Of course, I would like to see again a Batman from TAS, really really do, I love the TAS and his Batman.

#9 Posted by sinestro_GL (3352 posts) - - Show Bio

Batman was threatened to be cancelled back in the day...so yes, modernization from time-to-time is necessary

#10 Posted by edge007 (26 posts) - - Show Bio

The only part of "modernizing" the character I dislike is that I think they go overboard with his personal tech a bit, especially his costume. Super lightweight bullet and fireproof material is about as far as I like it, personally. Some times when I read old comics and I see him get dosed with a needle or a poison dart or whatever I just think "Really, Bats? Way not to prepare at all, there."

That said, I dislike that people get electrocuted or gassed trying to remove his mask when knocked unconscious or the whole flying bit they stole from the movies (especially that last one. I really, really, really hate it). I also don't like flying Batmobiles and the fact that he doesn't actually even have to be in a morgue to examine a corpse anymore. IMHO, it really takes away from what he can actually do and has spent years learning. It becomes more about the toys than the man. Learned skills and physical abilities impress me way more, personally. It's probably why the last James Bond movie impressed me way more than any non-Sean Connery James Bond movie ever has. It became more about the man than what the man has on him (homages like his original car with the machine gun headlights not withstanding, of course :)). Hell, they even used Q in the most realistic way he can possibly be used.

#11 Posted by lifeofvibe (3519 posts) - - Show Bio

here is some bad news evantually man will creat armor tech then what?

#12 Posted by RustyRoy (14448 posts) - - Show Bio

@dmreyn: Nice article and I agree with many of your points and the other posts. To me Batman is adaptable i.e he changes with time, so "modernizing" is a big reason why he's still relevant, but he definitely didn't need New 52 to "modernize" him, and New 52 didn't even change Batman that much, in fact the reason New 52 happened was because of Superman lawsuit.

#13 Posted by PunyParker (13033 posts) - - Show Bio

@dmreyn said:

@punyparker: That was my point. I hear people saying the new52 was done in part to "modernize" the characters. That to me is meant to convey that the old characters were out of style, out of place, etc. in today's modern world. Even Batman's origin still works well today. A shooting in the city could happen just as easily today as it could when he was originally conceived in the 1940s. I guess what I'm trying to say is that when I read the older comics, I don't feel that I'm reading something 10, 25 years old. For example, I'm currently in the middle of No Man's Land - and the comic doesn't feel like it was written before year 2000 - it feels as if it could very well have been written yesterday.

That's not to say New52 doesn't have other reasons - for example, giving writers a chance to come up with new stories, new characters, new plots and twist the history to their liking in order to give fans a different perspective. This would make sense. The modernization point does not. I'm excited to follow Year Zero, for instance, as a fresh take on Batman's start, but I never felt like Year One didn't fit in this day and age either, if you catch my drift.

Exacly!
New villians,new characters amd new takes on older characters!....who the hell,DIDNT like Snyder's "Batman:COO"...it was going on for like a year,and i didnt get bored at ANY time....so the Joker welcomeback-ing(yes,this is a word,now......shut up.)was even sweeter!

I am a hardcore Spider-Man fan and a HUGE Batman fan,and Batman is my favorite book right now!....

Q:Bruce returned with the New52?....i mean before New52 Dick was Bats,and afterthe reboot,Bruce came back?!

#14 Posted by Strongarm (5857 posts) - - Show Bio

the batman of tomorrow won't be the same as the batman of yesterday

#15 Posted by lifeofvibe (3519 posts) - - Show Bio

@strongarm: in a sense that is unfortionit next thing you know will have iron bat

#16 Posted by Breadspread (774 posts) - - Show Bio

Any character as old as Batman, that wants to endure, has to reinvent it self in order to stay relevant. Most of the time, especially in comics, that means modernizing, but it's all about timing. If you wait too long to modernize you become retro, yesterday's news, played out,.... But if you modernize too often you risk becoming disposable, weightless, directionless, confusing... Right now Batman is leaning towards the latter. I do think Batman needs to modernized from time to time, but not anytime soon.

#17 Posted by MartianManhunterIsBetterThanCyborg (2275 posts) - - Show Bio

Batman is modernized and relevant enough now, however his other DC pals like Wonder Woman and others will need some help.

#18 Posted by Durakken (1591 posts) - - Show Bio

@martianmanhunterisbetterthancy said:

Batman is modernized and relevant enough now, however his other DC pals like Wonder Woman and others will need some help.

I would say, that's actually the problem with Wonder Woman... She's never fit in enough and DC is constantly trying to reinvent her and reboot her and other nonsense which results in her not being a popular read.

#19 Edited by Strongarm (5857 posts) - - Show Bio

@lifeofvibe: bruce wayne with a baseball bat? soo in

and we already have that

they call it batwing

#20 Edited by Breadspread (774 posts) - - Show Bio

I really like what Capullo said in an interview, he referred to Batman as the "shark of comic book characters - created so perfect that little evolution has taken place since his birth."

The only evolution batman needs is to be modernized from time to time, but not his character, his character is timeless. His gadgets and methods need to be modern. (unless the story is set in a different time period.) Imagine the bat computer using dail-up.

Again, to repeat myself, Batman does not need to be modernized anytime soon, he's good.