Batman: The Brave and the Bold news, discussion and reviews

[Mr. Adventure]

DC has a long history of setting soldiers against Nazi gorillas and dinosaurs, hell, even the very notion of GI Robot. Technically, if you start going down the road that it's inappropriate you'd have to dismiss a lot of stuff.

I think it's only Batman himself that gives the negative impression you are getting, had that same scene been played without him I bet there would be any problem.

 

[Too Much Fun]

Yet it was set against the context of something very solemn and grave. And that just felt like a tonal mismatch to me. YMMV.

Ebert had a similar objection to the Holocaust being used to fill in Magneto's back story in "X-Men". He thought it might be in bad taste to reference such a serious real historical event for a comic book movie. I think it depends on the context and in that case, he was overreacting. On the other hand, referencing black slavery for a "Candyman" movie seems a bit much. There are times when mixing harsh reality with fiction is in bad taste, but I also think it can be acceptable.

 

[Christopher]

DC has a long history of setting soldiers against Nazi gorillas and dinosaurs, hell, even the very notion of GI Robot. Technically, if you start going down the road that it's inappropriate you'd have to dismiss a lot of stuff.

Why is it so hard to get my point across? I'm not talking about Nazis. There's a long tradition of using Nazis as villains in fantasy and comics. I'm talking about the invasion of Normandy on June 6, 1944. I'm talking about the horrific loss of life incurred in that event, the profound trauma endured by the survivors. I'm talking about an event that's commemorated by graveyards that stretch as far as the eye can see. Maybe it's a generational thing, but I grew up with stories and news reports where that event was treated with solemn reverence, the losses acknowledged and honored.

If it had been a fictitious battle, that would be one thing, but having it be the actual Normandy invasion just feels like using something way too painful as fodder for a goofy in-joke.

I think it's only Batman himself that gives the negative impression you are getting, had that same scene been played without him I bet there would be any problem.

You're 100 percent wrong. Batman isn't the problem. This show's Batman fits right in with the goofiness of an obscure comics character like G. I. Robot and the unapologetic absurdity of having a modern Batman inexplicably teamed up with him and Sgt. Rock's Easy Company. The part I have a problem with is using Normandy as the backdrop.

 

[the G-man]

Yet it was set against the context of something very solemn and grave. And that just felt like a tonal mismatch to me. YMMV.

Ebert had a similar objection to the Holocaust being used to fill in Magneto's back story in "X-Men". He thought it might be in bad taste to reference such a serious real historical event for a comic book movie.

Just out of curiosity, how did Ebert feel about the Nazis being the villains in two very comic-booky Indiana Jones movies?

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Nazi Gorillas was just an example of absurdity, I wasn't trying to make a statement about using Nazis themselves.

I guess what I was getting at is if the event is truly reverent shouldn't you be against adding any fantastical elements period? Is it OK to add Captain America and Red Skull because the art direction was moodier?

 

[Christopher]

You persist in absolutely failing to get my point. I don't know why, except that it's a subjective thing and maybe we just think too differently. Probably best to let it drop.

 

[kkozoriz1]

Would Hiroshima and Nagasaki also be inappropriate? It's the actual, real life events that should be avoided as opposed to a "generic" war battle or ataomic bombing and such?

 

[Christopher]

^For something like Barefoot Gen, that treats the event with proper gravity, sure. For something that's deliberately comical, goofy, and ludicrous, that would be an inappropriate setting. I've explained this very clearly. I don't understand why you're not hearing what I'm saying.

 

[kkozoriz1]

I'm not having a problem with it at all, I was just clarifying that it was the seriousness of the event that made it inappropriate as opposed to Normandy specifically.

 

[Too Much Fun]

Yet it was set against the context of something very solemn and grave. And that just felt like a tonal mismatch to me. YMMV.

Ebert had a similar objection to the Holocaust being used to fill in Magneto's back story in "X-Men". He thought it might be in bad taste to reference such a serious real historical event for a comic book movie.

Just out of curiosity, how did Ebert feel about the Nazis being the villains in two very comic-booky Indiana Jones movies?

I never thought about it that way, but your question brings up a good point that he often has double standards about these things. He never objected to the Nazis in the "Indiana Jones" movies, but he's always been a big fan of those. He obviously has a bias against "X-Men". I love the guy, and I'm one of his biggest fans, but I'll always resent his referring to "X2" as "dumb, but good". Condescend much?

 

[Nerys Myk]

I didnt see this segment as "trivial" or just "a fun adventure." It leaned towards the more serious end of kids cartoon entertainments.

But it's G.I. Robot. A bizarre, obscure character from a goofy age of comics. And it's Batman back in time without explanation. The whole scenario felt like a big joke, the kind of playful celebration of Silver-Age lunacy that's a trademark of this show. Yet it was set against the context of something very solemn and grave. And that just felt like a tonal mismatch to me. YMMV.

Maybe its because I grew up reading that stuff, but I dont find GI Robot all that goofy. I don't think the folks writing about the character did either. Most of DCs War Books weren't handled in the same "goofy" manner as the Superhero books. Even the ones about robots.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Has anyone seen "The Knights of Tomorrow" yet? This has to be my favorite episode aside from "Chill of the Night" simply because it uses Adult Damien Batman in it! Interesting that they made him the son of Selena and Bruce and not Talia and Bruce but perhaps that is because they introduced Talia earlier in the season. I've been watching episodes on youtube and this series is fantastic. I was skeptical when it first came out but I'm hooked now. Week after week is like one big giant love fest for the history of Batman!!!

 

[Nerys Myk]

It was a pretty good episode, that borrowed from the Silver Age stories of Batman II and Robin II ( penned by Alfred) and Batman & Superman: Generations mini series. Naming Bruce and Selina's son "Damien" was a nice twist. Though he wasn't much like the Damien from the comics. Liked cameos at the wedding ( and elsewhere) as well. Dick's more Neals Adams/1970s style costume was also a treat.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Yeah I thought Dick's Neal Adams-esque costume was great. Damien was no where near his comic book counterpart but still it was nice to see him make his media debut. The ending was quite nice and I laughed at Alfred's line to Bruce about his costume. I thought Old Joker was on top form. This is what I love about this show it seems to be taking everything from all facets of Batman history and making it work, kind of like what Morrison has been attempting to do. I also loved the teaser with the Question and Kalibak. Interesting that both "Smallville" and "Brave and the Bold" are using Darkseid.

 

[byron lomax]

Enjoyed this episode too, though I wish Damien was more like his comic self. Loved the cameos from the Morrison villains (Mr Toad, El Flamingo, Professor Pyg and the Club of Villains) at the end.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Yep I caught those as well. The armored Batman and Robin suits are kind of like what Batman, Inc is looking at introducing. Didn't like the colors on Damien's suit though.

 

[Professor Zoom]

I thought it was hilarious to see that Alfred was writing the story.

There's something going on with Alfred, like he hates kids or something. Oh, Damien, you think you have a happy life? Guess what, your parents have just BURNED in front of you, yep, now go be the Batman.

Alfred, come on, man, haven't you seen what obsession does to a guy, now you want kids to go through it too?

 

[jep316]

There's something going on with Alfred, like he hates kids or something. Oh, Damien, you think you have a happy life? Guess what, your parents have just BURNED in front of you, yep,

It's even more than that,he's writing a story where he kills off Bruce,the man that he's raised as a son.

 

[Professor Zoom]

There's something going on with Alfred, like he hates kids or something. Oh, Damien, you think you have a happy life? Guess what, your parents have just BURNED in front of you, yep,

It's even more than that,he's writing a story where he kills off Bruce,the man that he's raised as a son.

That's RIGHT. Alfred is SICK. Maybe he resents how Bruce treats him or something. Maybe Alfred will someday be Bruce's greatest enemy.

There's something to that.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

There's something going on with Alfred, like he hates kids or something. Oh, Damien, you think you have a happy life? Guess what, your parents have just BURNED in front of you, yep,

It's even more than that,he's writing a story where he kills off Bruce,the man that he's raised as a son.

That's RIGHT. Alfred is SICK. Maybe he resents how Bruce treats him or something. Maybe Alfred will someday be Bruce's greatest enemy.

There's something to that.

Didn't that sort of already happen like back in the 50s or 60s?