Comments on: ComicNerd.com Review: Batman #676 (R.I.P.)

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Thu, 22 May 2008 15:26:28 +0000

Pretty much all comic book companies (DC, Marvel, Top Cow, etc.) has done this before. Don’t give up on Batman. I was disappointed with #676 but the ones before it were really good!

It seems nowadays that yeah, it’s probably largely a marketing ploy. Is it just me or did comics have so much more to offer for your money back then?

By: JC

JC — Thu, 22 May 2008 15:13:16 +0000

Stephanie, it’s great to discuss this topic, as this problem occurs in a lot of books lately.

I agree with you, that to be involved in the rich canon, one needs to take the time to explore the story’s characters and settings. I think we can both agree though from what we’ve both been saying, that it’s not difficult to make an effort to at least catch readers up on a current situation in every book - and an effort should be made.

I wonder if it’s laziness or a marketing ploy, either way this is a folly I have seen DC make before, and it lost me as a reader then.

By: Batman: R.I.P. Official Checklist by ComicNerd: Comic Book Reviews

Thu, 22 May 2008 15:08:18 +0000

[...] Now that you have the checklist, go and read the ComicNerd.com review of Batman #676… [...]

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Wed, 21 May 2008 19:54:28 +0000

Yes and no, JC. Comics are a continuous storyline, so it’s only logical that having some prior knowledge should be necessary. But they could have done much better with this one. Putting too much backtracking/review in the comic can slow it down, but they really didn’t take the time to put anything in.

And there could have been SOMEthing before the actual comic like you suggested. I always like that. It doesn’t slow down the comic and you don’t have to read it if you’re already familiar with what’s going on. Sometimes putting character profiles or recaps after the comic, too, can be helpful, as well. I’ve read comics (and I’m sure you have, too) where they did some sort of review that didn’t interfere too much with the comic (either before it or during it), so obviously it can be done (and done well).

By: JC

JC — Wed, 21 May 2008 19:24:30 +0000

Stephanie, do you think it’s right that you should have to invest that much time and money into acquiring older issues blindly, holding out on the hope that they will fill in some gaps and shed light on this storyline?

Agreed about the art, btw.

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Tue, 20 May 2008 20:00:03 +0000

Well, finally read it, lol! I both liked and didn’t like it. Of course, the artwork was stunning as usuall—but yeah, some things were pretty random. I’ve been catching up only since #672, so I feel your pain, JC. I want to track down the previous issues, but it will probably be awhile.

At any rate, you’re right that you should get more for your money. It didn’t seem like that much happened in this comic; stuff was kind of randomly thrown about, as I mentioned. All in all, it was good, but it could have been better.

But wtf, didn’t Jezebel have short hair the last time we saw her? X)

By: New Comics for 05/21/08 + Tuesday Wrap-up by ComicNerd: Comic Book Reviews

Tue, 20 May 2008 15:14:52 +0000

[...] our hands on the Official Batman R.I.P. checklist. Unfortunately, I was extremely disappointed in Batman #676, and my review is less than happy. We got some sneaky set pics from G.I. Joe: Dark Sky , which [...]

By: JC

JC — Sun, 18 May 2008 01:46:26 +0000

Will88, you raise some interesting points but this is what we do here at ComicNerd.com - review comics. As a new reader I felt disappointed in this book, and as one going completely off the hype, it did not deliver.

One thing about sweeping stories like this, yes it’s a buildup and yes it’s the beginning of an entire arc, but the fact remains that as a reader you have to ask yourself if this comic, on its own, is worth the money.

In this case, my view is absolutely not. If this is the way the story will pace, then the best thing for the consumer is to deliver it at once in graphic novel form.

For $3-5 per week, we rightfully should expect more from each and every issue. That’s my opinion anyway.

But seriously, it is ok for us to disagree, I’m really glad someone came in here and stuck up for Morrison and didn’t allow this to become one sided.

By: Will88

Will88 — Sat, 17 May 2008 23:42:14 +0000

I do agree that this is a tough issue for those who have just gotten into Morrison’s run with this book but I almost disagree completely with everything written on this page. This issue is merely a chapter of a much greater peice which started over a year ago. Grant Morrison has spent all his time in previous issues building up and giving clues, simliarly to New X-Men. It’s all one big story which can only be apreciated if one reads what came before. Then you’d know who the red-head is, who the black glove is and what the Joker’s up to. And for those who liked Arkham Asylum, you’d see that Morrison pays homage to his previous depiction of Joker as a man who constantly changes his inner-self (but you have to read what came before to figure it out).
This is actually a greeat issue since finally all the plot threads are converging (and quite beautifully too) and a great reward for the fans who have followed the title from Morrison’s start.

The truth is this issue in itself cannot be reviewed since it is merely another stage of Morrison’s wild ride and I recommend everyone to follow up on what’s been happening. You cannot be dissapointed.

By: JC

JC — Sat, 17 May 2008 19:13:53 +0000

Hey thanks for the comments guys - Damosbomber and Léo, I’m really happy to hear it is not just me on this.

Tim, that is the kind of info I was looking for, I was kind of afraid that was the case and it is a bummer that DC isn’t interested in catching up new readers so we can get in on the fun too.