You're viewing a single thread.
This is the white people spicy of "cooking" about Batman lol.
Tim Walz making fun of white people tacos gave them permission to have the mildest takes.
Lol right? they busted out a 15yo (at least) criticism of the premise of Batman like it's fresh. But i'll actually take it anyway. It's a deep thought for someone and if say 10,000 people make the leap that 'crime is driven by poverty and propagated by the rich' thats lucky for the cause.
I in general agree with this critic of Batman (and superheroes at large) as a comic fan, but this sort of headline is the exact type of "dork making fun of another dork and by doing so become a lame-ass dork and a big fuckin' loser" type of writing I hate. Mostly because it's usually disingenuous and it just drips with a smugness that doesn't seem to be interested in anything. Like a Fan of ABC nerdy thing saying XYZ nerdy thing is childish and stupid or whatever. The type of dork you'd push into a locker as a dork for being a lame-o
.Yes there are a LOT of critiques of comic books and superheroes, and they should be talked about. This one may be accurate even correct it seems so fuckin' lame.
I like the critiques don't get me wrong. In fact that kind of discussion, of the material conditions behind any given art that is created. That shits right up my alley.
Now I'm not a super-informed comic historian, but Batman has changed significantly since the start. I think perhaps Bruce Wayne's character being 'a millionaire playboy) was simply the creators originally trying to explain 'realistically' a character who could afford all these toys and the time and energy to fight crime at night.
The flanderization of his character (maybe power-creep is a better term) that happened to change him over time until he's now a super-genius billionaire both deeply invested in his company and crime fighting. I feel like this is a subtle but very important difference. This plus his cynical distrust of everyone, even other supes, the way Robin is treated as a character, all fascinate me.
Gonna try to wrap up my ramblepoint with one more story, i recently rewatched star trek TNG. I was absolutely blown away at my reaction to the show vs the first time. So often they avoided violence, preferring the diplomatic solution. This is great but i found myself yelling at the crew for their "naivete". I had, between the years, grown more accustomed to violence, had come to expect it, to want it in my entertainment.
I had to sit down with myself for awhile. I dunno if i for a conclusion, sorry bout that, but thanks for coming with me
Now I'm not a super-informed comic historian, but Batman has changed significantly since the start. I think perhaps Bruce Wayne's character being 'a millionaire playboy) was simply the creators originally trying to explain 'realistically' a character who could afford all these toys and the time and energy to fight crime at night.
Sort of, not really. He was originally rich because he’s loosely based off of Zorro, who was loosely based off the Scarlet Pimpernel and The Count of Monte Cristo, who are rich aristocrats. Being an old-money aristocrat of European descent is kind of important to Batman’s gothic byronian hero thing. If they reimagined him as a nouveau-rich tech bro billionaire it would make the character fundamentally different.
Oooooh that's some tasty brain food, can you tell me where to find more on the characters connection to zorro?
Edit: did a little looking on my own, Batman creators cite zorro as an influence
I had to sit down with myself for awhile. I dunno if i for a conclusion, sorry bout that, but thanks for coming with me
Don't apologize, this is is good stuff here! This is exact type of critique I rock with, it's actually worthwhile and worth thinking about. This is the exact opposite of the
lame-o guy I was referring to, this is good.