Episode 1708 Talkback - August 2018 Previews
Adam_Murdough
Posts: 506
All rise for Previews! We go through the August 2018 catalog for items shipping to stores beginning in October 2018. PLUS: You are cordially invited to attend a double-wedding discussion of Batman #50 and X-Men Gold #30. SPOILERS will be served at the reception! (1:48:30)
Listen here, or forever hold your peace!
Listen here, or forever hold your peace!
Comments
I said this in the Heroes in Crisis thread with regard to the controversy there; be creative within the constraints that exist. The constraints on these multi-billion dollar characters is that they can never *really* change. Fine, then don't do a story where one of them dies or gets married, etc.
There are plenty of other things to write about. Batman is the world's greatest detective. How about a story arc where, I don't know, a crime occurs and Batman has to do some detecting. That would be interesting to read. My favorite Batman story happens to be The Long Halloween and, iirc, no important character died in that.
So, it seems highly unlikely that King did not know this wedding wasn't going to happen rom the start. Perhaps he didn't see that ending as profoundly anti-climatic? And for me it wasn't the fault of all the marketing. The only effect the marketing had on the story for me was that it was the only thing that made me believe the wedding would happen at all. Without the marketing I wouldn't have believed the wedding was going to occur and the story would have been anti-climatic anyway (since I would have had my cynicism confirmed).
Honestly, I think it's easy to lay all the blame on editorial, but I don't know exactly why editorial would be so against it. After all, there's nothing about a wedding that couldn't be undone 18 months from now and allowing him to marry would have also gotten DC Comics name-checked on the mainstream news again. Why not?
I think the biggest no-no for a mainstream superhero writer is to give a major hero a child - there's something inherently problematic about having a child and choosing to spend every day of your life putting yourself at risk. (Morrison sidestepped this by giving Bats a fully formed ultimate fighter for a child.) But a marriage to Catwoman would have been perfect. Despite the whole (IMO ridiculous) idea that Bruce must be miserable in order to fight crime, the truth is Bruce would not have change at all (or very little) if he married Selina. He wouldn't have to "settle down" in the same way if he married a "normal" woman. Selina/Catwoman would WANT to be jumping around rooftops and getting into fights at night. Selina makes Lois Lane look like a soccer mom. And like @wildpigcomics said, there would have been so many interesting stories that King could have told in terms of hiding the marriage.
Perhaps King will fix all this down the line and have Bats get married anyway (again, why not? And why not undo it later if it's not working out?) but, for me anyway, that doesn't change that the issue was a huge misfire after a pretty amazing run. Especially in the way it was written, as I believe Adam noted: you spend the entire issue detailing how these 2 know each other so well and then at the last minute Holly tells Selina something about Bruce that she didn't know?
For me the best part of the King's take on the whole Bruce/Selina relationship was when Selina fought Talia. Talia tells her that Bruce is the perfect man and Selina says something like "You must be crazy. That man's got major issues." That's the kind of insight into the Bruce Selina relationship that I've never seen any other writer touch on. Prior to that moment I always got the sense that Selina kind of viewed Bruce/Bats in the same way Talia did: she "loved" him because he was profoundly exciting - the only man who could keep up with her. But that one line showed that Selina really was seeing Bruce as a profoundly flawed person but loved him anyway.
I haven't actually read Batman #50 yet, I think I'm on #48 right now. So I might very well like it; I don't know. I'm a Tom King fan for sure. I was speaking more about the general notion of not being able to make major changes to these franchise characters.
And this is something that is happening with "Heroes in Crisis". As you said, they might have told him that he's allowed to kill one of these characters. But Tom must know that they won't really stay dead. And maybe he's even ok with that. But why bother? Clearly a lot of people dislike it, as discussed on this podcast and elsewhere on the internet, every time this happens.
So why bother? Why not just write other stories, that don't require making sweeping changes to characters?
By the way, I respectfully disagree with something @wildpigcomics said and has said in the past. He mentioned that he prefers creator-owned books because they don't have these restraints. While I can't disagree that creator-owned has more freedom, what I disagree with is the idea that you can't create top-flight books even with these constraints.
Just look at Dynamite's James Bond books from the last several years. Spoiler alert: James Bond doesn't die in them. But they are still excellent comics, because James Bond doesn't have to die to make a good James Bond story. What makes a good James Bond story is the action and the espionage. And guess what, the Dynamite books have that.
I think the reason both companies do these death things/gimmicks is because it sells/is great advertising. We may not like it but it sells and attracts attention before the "gimmick" issue even arrives. For example, surely there are a lot of people who were not normally picking up Batman, but suddenly decided to jump on once they heard he was going to get married simply out of curiosity. There certainly has to be people who picked up issue 50 solely for the marriage. (Boy they must have been angry.) Quality storytelling does get fans, but it usually takes much longer and occurs after the fact. The James Bond story may be fantastic but if someone was writing a story where James Bond dies, I think a lot more people would read it - in real time, not later. It may be not as good as the current story where he doesn't die, but I think it would sell more. Stores would surely order more copies.
The question of course is does Tom King need those kinds of gimmicks at this point in his career? Probably not, but I think DC wants the King fans (you and I and CGS folk) to read this while simultaneously getting a lot of other people to come on. I would imagine the death also increases the store orders.
By the way, when you read it, I would love to hear what you think of issue 49's ending. I don't mind saying that I did not understand exactly what King was going for.
Re: Batman #50 (continuing the spoilers for Batman #50)
I will add, though, at least to judge by #51-53, and this should not spoil those issues, that even if there was a big build up to something that ended up NOT happening in #50, the issues that have come since have been largely about the consequences and fallout of, basically, Bruce being left at the altar for the specific reason that for him to be loved, or happy, would mean he could no longer be Batman. Or, at least, Selina was led to believe so by Holly.
To judge by the three issues since, even if there was a bait and switch on the wedding, it is not like post-50 things are back to business as usual as of none of that mattered. So far, it seems that is does. And it may continue to, narrative-wise and thematically for the next half of King's proposed 100 issue run on Batman.
So even if people are disappointed that the change of status quo for Bruce to be Bruce The Married Man did not happen, and I get that, I think it may be too soon to say that his near-miss at the altar does not *also* represent a significant change to the character to be explored. That heartbreak, and the idea it may represent a kind of mid-lifey 'Will I be alone forever' idea has the potential to be just as significant as a marriage that, itself, could end up lasting or not lasting.
And I would argue that Batman #50 has was not just a culmination for what King has been working on regarding the Bruce and Selina relationship, but that this has been building since The New 52 launched in 2011. I think it would all feel like a cheap ploy for some short term sales if this engagement came out of nowhere, and had been swept away right after. But to judge from the first story we've gotten post-50, I don't know that will be the case.