BATMAN No. 18, May 2013 |
Dishearteningly in many ways the Dark Knight depicted
within the twenty eight pages of Issue Eighteen of “Batman” is a decidedly unlikeable
and unheroic character. Admittedly the man is understandably upset at the “much-publicized
comic book death” of his young son, Damian. But even so writer Scott Snyder has
still arguably created a much more aggressively violent and savagely
unchivalrous Caped Crusader than has been published before.
Clearly both angry and in emotional turmoil as a result
of his sudden loss, it is not unsurprising that the grieving father takes his
anguish out upon the criminal element of Gotham City. And as such this
magazine’s panels depicting Bob Kane's co-creation mowing down fleeing thugs
in the batmobile, ripping them by the hair from fast moving motorcars or
cracking the windows of their submersibles with a giant mallet is entirely
understandable, and even possibly acceptable behaviour.
But to have Batman viciously erupt into such a fit of ferocious
rage that without warning he breaks an adolescent girl’s nose is taking his Homeric despair
a little too far. Most especially when the so-called philanthropist’s victim is
teenager Harper Row, a “possible new female Robin” who had literally just saved
him from the jaws of a pack of drug-crazed “genetically modified” fighting dogs
and doubtless a painful drawn-out death.
Indeed it can’t even been argued that ‘the Bat’
inadvertently struck out at the city’s electrical grid worker by mistake during
the heat of the battle. For the bloodthirsty canines have already fled the alleyway and
their owner been beaten unconscious when the decidedly Dark(er) Knight
turns to his defenceless would-be-rescuer and asks “Why don’t you block this?”
before sending her reeling through a wooden fence.
Perhaps most alarming of all however, is that Snyder has
actually gone on record as describing this edition as one with which the New
Yorker wanted to demonstrate just how much “somebody can still look at Batman…
and see this figure that’s incredibly inspiring”. Just how does assaulting the character
that “represents a very young generation in Gotham” encourage “the poorer
section” of the City “to be inspired by a character like Batman”?
Bizarrely this messed-up mixed message by the American
author’s narrative is seemingly reinforced by the odd decision to utilise the
skills of two separate artists and split the comic’s storyline into two
chapters. Andy Kubert’s pencilling is impressive, especially when drawing a
wide-eyed manic-looking costumed vigilante breaking heads and cracking skulls.
The sheer wear and tear detailed into the significantly battered bat-suit is
incredible and really emphasises for just how long Bruce Wayne has been pursuing
his crime-fighting activities without respite.
Far less successful is Alex
Maleev’s work, which in comparison to his colleague’s pictures, appear roughly sketched
and lack any dynamism whatsoever. True, the Bulgarian’s script is a far more sedentary
affair than that of The Kubert School graduate. But that doesn’t entirely
account as to why the Russ Manning Award-winner’s illustrations are far less
impactive or exciting.
No comments:
Post a Comment