Batman: Year One - Part 1

[history79]

The A.V. Club: So you actually consciously set out to change things in the comics industry?

Frank Miller: Well, I set out to remark upon them. And seeing how all these heroes had been castrated since the 1950s, and just how pointless they seemed to be... In this perfect world of comic books, which was what it was back then, why would people dress up in tights to fight crime?

The A.V. Club: Because there wasn't anything bad enough going on back then to justify that extremism?

Frank Miller: It was just a bunch of goofy villains. It was 1985 when I started working on this, and I thought, "What kind of world would be scary enough for Batman?" And I looked out my window.

Comments

[jeremyp]

This highlights one of the biggest issues I have with batman. He started in response to his parent's deaths, and in this story he starts by targeting street crime. But really, being a vigilante is not a good way to fight street crime. He's more likely to have an impact by focusing on education and economic development.

Of course, that wouldn't be a very exciting comic book.

[informationgeek]

To be fair, I believe Bruce has made attempts with using some of his fortune to fund education and economic developments. I think the first issue of Snyder's Batman series had him pitch a plan on cleaning the city up a bit.

[lucean]

Bruce Wayne is, well was, the biggest charity benefactor of Gotham City and it has been shown in multiple stories that he is huge driving force of societal change in Gotham.

The problem with the argument here is the assumption that alone would clean the streets of crime, which is as likely to happen as Batman cleaning them up.

[jeremyp]

I appreciate that the Wayne Foundation has often been presented as a huge charitable organization in the city.

I think it is really just my issue - at some point, the idea of superheroes, especially nonpowered or low powered superheroes, fighting street crime just stopped making sense to me - it seems like such an impractical approach.

I seem to remember a Spider Man comic where he is teaching younger characters about going on "patrol", and they point out all the flaws in that approach, which I thought was entertaining.

Of course, that's really my problem, not the comics, since it has long been a staple of the superhero genre!

[silverhammerman]

I remember that scene being posted here, and I actually found it a little annoying because it's nitpicking something which is, as you said, a staple of the superhero genre. And honestly I prefer seeing (certain) superheroes out on patrol taking on semi-real problems or thinly veiled allegories to the alternative that we've seen in recent years, of having all the superpeople only ever hang out, interact, or fight with other superpeople, which sets up a creepy little elitist community that plays by its own rules.

I'd actually disagree with your point about more street level superheroes, because as the most recent Mighty Avengers series argued, what else are they going to do? Sure a character like Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne can help through financial and other means (and are frequently shown doing so) but for characters who are just sorta tough and/or good at punching things, their skills aren't really useful for anything other than punching things, so they might as well just punch the people who deserve it.

[laughing_tree]

Interestingly, I believe Spider-Man under Stan Lee pretty much never went on patrol. He'd always just be minding his own business until he heard of a situation on the news or a situation erupted right in front of him, or he'd swing around to blow off steam or because he had a specific goal. Folks like Tom Brevoort have talked about how it always feels somehow off when Spider-Man is seen genuinely just swinging around looking for crime, like there's something about that doesn't quite fit the character.

[janegray]

To be fair, superheroes don't just fight "street crime," they also fight insanely dangerous supervillains that cops can't deal with.

Heck, in their first confrontation Joker was about to poison Gotham's water supply. Wayne Foundation can't help the city if everybody is dead.

[jeremyp]

I totally agree that when super villians are introduced, super heroes make more sense.The interesting thing for me is that, usually, Bruce Wayne's decision to become batman isn't about super villians, its a response to his parents being killed in a random murder. So he wasn't thinking "I need all this training and equipment to fight super villians." He was thinking he needed it to address street crime. This story follows that same idea - he's not thinking about fighting super villians, he's just  walking around beating up criminals.  Of course, it leads to stories that people enjoy reading, but it always seems odd to me.

[starwolf_oakley]

Even the 1989 Batman movie covered this in the Armory scene. "He gives to charitable causes and collects all this.. stuff."

Basically, Bruce Wayne focuses on education and economic development in Gotham City. And he dressed like a bat and punches criminals in the face because he has a lot of anger issues.

And he treats other superheroes like crap because... I don't know. He just does. (Can you tell that bugs me?)

[espanolbot]

The "treats other heroes like crap" part I main put down to a combination of anger issues and trying to hold up his own projected image of being a scary loner.

Unless it's the Miller version, where All Star Batman heavily implied it's because he's jealous of their superpowers.

[captainbellman]

And he hasn't looked since.

[reveen]

Catwoman's appearance is kind of hilarious in hindsight. She's just a dominatrix yet she jumps out of a window and starts kung fu fighting like it's a beat 'em up game. It's very 80's.

[mrstatham]

"I didn't really like these awesome silver-age comics that blossomed out of these horrible rules that neutered comics in the fifties and I'm entirely ignorant of how awesome these characters became under more mature creators in the seventies, so I'm here to grimdark Batman forever with some admittedly decent story, but thus create this awful conflict in the writers of the late 90's and onwards who blowjob the silver age but don't correctly understand how to marry that to my grimdark darkness."

[cyberghostface]

It's not Miller's fault that other writers copied him. It always happens when something is successful or critically acclaimed.

Hypothetically you could say the same about Christopher Nolan's Batman films and how other superhero films tried to copy his approach.

[lego_joker]

Ehhh. Superman in the Silver Age, one could argue was awesome. Batman in the Silver Age... felt for the most part like a pale reflection of that. The Adam West show was the one undeniable gem that spun out of it, but in a way I feel that show was as reactionary to the Silver Age as Miller's stuff was, except in a different direction.

[espanolbot]

Pretty sure Dennis O'Neil deserves more credit for making Batman more respectable than Miller, but that's just me.

O'Neil's Batman was progressively more mature in the traditional sense, while Miller's Batman (particularly in DKR) was more clownish in how seriously it wanted people to take it. Year One is largely better in that it was written early in his career and didn't become host to the usual Miller-isms (that was what Daredevil was for).

[laughing_tree]

This reminds me, has everyone heard about the recent Q&A where Miller says he wants to do a children's book about Carrie Kelly as a Nancy Drew-type?

[silverhammerman]

Looking it up, that sounds... interesting. I mean, Frank Miller did Give Me Liberty, which stars a teenage female protagonist and is pretty great, but that was decades ago at this point and I don't have much confidence left in him.

[espanolbot]

Ah, Year One. Arguably the best thing Miller ever did, by transplanting Gotham in the New York of the 70s and 80s which really was like how it was depicted here.

I have a lot of issues with Miller's other Batman work (even Dark Knight Returns with its REALLY right wing leanings), but Year One pretty much acted as a good springboard for later, better series. Such as the Brubaker/Cooke Catwoman series (which is still one of my all time favourites), Gotham Central and Scott Snyder's Batman stuff.

And although the legislation in the 1950s did "castrate" a number of heroes, it also enabled them to go outside the box and try new things. If it wasn't for the CCA we wouldn't have Batgirl, the Martian Manhunter, Barry Allen, Hal Jordan etc. etc.

Though it did lead to Catwoman to be retired for a time, for reasons I'll post shortly...