How are they going to explain him in new 52?

#1 Posted by katanalauncher (934 posts) - - Show Bio

He was still in fetus during year one, and barely a toddle in Long Halloween, these are some of the most prominent story of Batman.

So in just "five" years he grew up and became a villain then ended up in Arkam?

Seems to me DC is just going to do another retcon, which makes me wonder what's the point of this five year thing is.

#2 Posted by ArturoCalaKayVee (13126 posts) - - Show Bio

Is he in The New 52 yet? I haven't caught up on any of the Batman books in the past 2 months so I'm behind. But I'm assuming they're just going to say he was born and raised normally prior the rise of costumed heroes and then snapped at some point.

#3 Posted by Icarusflies (12517 posts) - - Show Bio

@ArturoCalaKayVee: Yeah, he appeared in Arkham in Batman #1

Moderator
#4 Posted by ArturoCalaKayVee (13126 posts) - - Show Bio

@Icarusflies: Interesting.. completely forgot about that. Thank you

#5 Posted by ReVamp (22885 posts) - - Show Bio

Artificial aging? Does it matter? Lots of things were retconned in the New 52, DC isn't going to retcon anything further, because the New 52 was a series of retcons.

#6 Posted by katanalauncher (934 posts) - - Show Bio

@ReVamp said:

Artificial aging? Does it matter? Lots of things were retconned in the New 52, DC isn't going to retcon anything further, because the New 52 was a series of retcons.

New 52 is suppose to attract new readers and casual readers, and since most casual readers have already read classic Batman stories such as Year one and long Halloween it seems counter-intuitive to change anything from those stories and somehow keep most of the continuity intact.

#7 Posted by ReVamp (22885 posts) - - Show Bio

@katanalauncher said:

@ReVamp said:

Artificial aging? Does it matter? Lots of things were retconned in the New 52, DC isn't going to retcon anything further, because the New 52 was a series of retcons.

New 52 is suppose to attract new readers and casual readers, and since most casual readers have already read classic Batman stories such as Year one and long Halloween it seems counter-intuitive to change anything from those stories and somehow keep most of the continuity intact.

Because casual readers would remember that in that one story they read there was this kid and that this one kid was called James Gordon Jr.? 'Cause I read that book just under half a dozen times and I don't remember the kid even being there.

#8 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (36229 posts) - - Show Bio
@ReVamp said:

@katanalauncher said:

@ReVamp said:

Artificial aging? Does it matter? Lots of things were retconned in the New 52, DC isn't going to retcon anything further, because the New 52 was a series of retcons.

New 52 is suppose to attract new readers and casual readers, and since most casual readers have already read classic Batman stories such as Year one and long Halloween it seems counter-intuitive to change anything from those stories and somehow keep most of the continuity intact.

Because casual readers would remember that in that one story they read there was this kid and that this one kid was called James Gordon Jr.? 'Cause I read that book just under half a dozen times and I don't remember the kid even being there.

Casual readers couldn't care less about these kind of things, only we do. It's what separates us from the animals.   
#9 Posted by entropy_aegis (15622 posts) - - Show Bio

@ReVamp said:

Artificial aging? Does it matter? Lots of things were retconned in the New 52, DC isn't going to retcon anything further, because the New 52 was a series of retcons.

Why would anyone bother artificially aging him? LOL.I hope they forget he even exists,sorry but he tainted Batman Year.

So I'm supposed to believe that the baby Bruce Wayne saved would one day grow up to become a serial killer.

#10 Posted by ReVamp (22885 posts) - - Show Bio

@entropy_aegis said:

@ReVamp said:

Artificial aging? Does it matter? Lots of things were retconned in the New 52, DC isn't going to retcon anything further, because the New 52 was a series of retcons.

Why would anyone bother artificially aging him? LOL.I hope they forget he even exists,sorry but he tainted Batman Year.

So I'm supposed to believe that the baby Bruce Wayne saved would one day grow up to become a serial killer.

Apparently he's already been confirmed in DC #1 or something like that.

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

Poor Babs, one more problem to deal with...

I'd like to see how they're going to interact in the New 52

Plus, I like the idea that Batman once saved the kid who'd grow to be a killer. It's realistic and it's the dilema every hero has to face. You don't always make the right thing by saving lives. And you can't tell if it's worth rescuing someone or not. It's a price they have to pay for this doubt they'll always have.

#12 Posted by War Killer (20344 posts) - - Show Bio

I still think it's dumb to try and fit ALL of the history of these characters into those five years, in my mind I'm just saying those five years only apply to the Justice League as a team, not every character in the whole DC Universe.

#13 Posted by ReVamp (22885 posts) - - Show Bio

@War Killer said:

I still think it's dumb to try and fit ALL of the history of these characters into those five years, in my mind I'm just saying those five years only apply to the Justice League as a team, not every character in the whole DC Universe.

They apply mostly for everyone though. Exceptions are Bat-Family, Superman and perhaps GLs.

#14 Edited by War Killer (20344 posts) - - Show Bio
@ReVamp said:

@War Killer said:

I still think it's dumb to try and fit ALL of the history of these characters into those five years, in my mind I'm just saying those five years only apply to the Justice League as a team, not every character in the whole DC Universe.

They apply mostly for everyone though. Exceptions are Bat-Family, Superman and perhaps GLs.

I know that's what DC and others have tried to tell me before, but looking at how they're trying to fit everything into those five years is just absurd and looking through things that were mentioned in Justice League with how Green Lantern and Flash having adventures and team-ups before the JL's formation I'd actually like to believe that those five years have only applied to the Justice League, not the DC Universe and all its characters as a whole, because like I said before, it would be absurd.
 
Now I know DC and Geoff Johns have said otherwise but I mean looking at this thread and the million other threads concerning characters and where certain things from their past fit into this new DC timeline simply doesn't add up. Now I'm not looking to argue this, if people want to try and fit everything into those five years then I say good luck, as for me and my confused little brain, not to mention my money that I spend on these stories, I'm telling myself that those fives years only apply to the JL and that these characters have been around and doing stuff longer than five years ago. Similar to how their doing in books that have been mentioned like Batman and GL, but on a universal scale.
#15 Posted by ReVamp (22885 posts) - - Show Bio

@War Killer said:

I know that's what DC and others have tried to tell me before, but looking at how they're trying to fit everything into those five years is just absurd and looking through things that were mentioned in Justice League with how Green Lantern and Flash having adventures and team-ups before the JL's formation I'd actually like to believe that those five years have only applied to the Justice League, not the DC Universe and all its characters as a whole, because like I said before, it would be absurd.

I don't think so as the events have been cancelled and many things are retconned. I mean, they were active for more than five years, but not in manners that "matter".

Now I know DC and Geoff Johns have said otherwise but I mean looking at this thread and the million other threads concerning characters and where certain things from their past fit into this new DC timeline simply doesn't add up.

I disagree. Certain things are wrong, have to be, like the Nightwing Flash back (or the Roy Harper "2 Years" comment), obviously.

Now I'm not looking to argue this, if people want to try and fit everything into those five years then I say good luck, as for me and my confused little brain, not to mention my money that I spend on these stories, I'm telling myself that those fives years only apply to the JL and that these characters have been around and doing stuff longer than five years ago.

More power to you.

Similar to how their doing in books that have been mentioned like Batman and GL, but on a universal scale.

Mhmm. I hope they expand and make a freackin' cosmic line.

#16 Posted by tahmidk (283 posts) - - Show Bio

well aaccording to the new 52 now, hes five years old aaand already in arkham...

#17 Posted by molotovzav (40 posts) - - Show Bio

@tahmidk: As of now, I know you posted a month ago, but as of now, James Jr. is full grown in Gotham, and talking to Barbara's roommate. So as far as the new 52 is concerned, he's an adult, and he's already done serial killing, he got out of arkham when other crazies escaped. If anyone cares it's around Batgirl #12

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.