Batman >> View Thread

Author
CensusTaker




in that interview talking about hurt/black gloves identity being biggest reveal of year/decade or whatever (I cant find it), did he specifically say "been there since the beginning of Batman' or just the more vague `beginning'. Because, while all the blogosphere was guessing about early Batman characters being BlackGlove/Hurt (alfred, thomas wayne, thomas wayne junior, batman himself, joe chill) maybe Morrison did really mean `the beginning of time' and was letting us know the reveal- that Hurt is the Devil in disguise- it a criptic manner. I wouldn't put it past him.

Thoughts?


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
matt mash




having him be the devil is just the kind of boring "twist" morrison loves to write. he probably thinks it's genius, and his boosters will agree, but some of us know better.

sorry if i sound like i'm hard on morrison. if i am, it's only because he's explosively overrated and should be kept away from established mainstream characters. "ultimate" and "all-star" comics were made for guys like him. it's a wonder he doesn't do more of them.


Posted with Apple Safari 3.1.2 on MacOS X
Icon




> having him be the devil is just the kind of boring "twist" morrison loves to write. he probably thinks it's genius, and his boosters will agree, but some of us know better.
>
> sorry if i sound like i'm hard on morrison.

No, but you're "some of us know better" IS just being slightly rude to those who DO like his work on RIP


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
Gawain




> > having him be the devil is just the kind of boring "twist" morrison loves to write. he probably thinks it's genius, and his boosters will agree, but some of us know better.
> >
> > sorry if i sound like i'm hard on morrison.
>
> No, but you're "some of us know better" IS just being slightly rude to those who DO like his work on RIP


Icon's right. You're free to be as hard on Morrison as you like; it's your opinion. But not everyone who likes something done by Morrison, likes it simply because it was done by Morrison and they are a "booster". And neither does everyone who hates something done by Morrison do so simply because it was done by Morrison and they are a "hater". Some of us judge stories on their own merits and don't particularly care who wrote it, and thus have the ability to like or dislike stories (or even different aspects of one story) done by the exact same person.

That may sound weird to you, but it's a fact and one you should try to remember when you're writing posts like the one above.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.4 on Windows Vista
Gawain




> in that interview talking about hurt/black gloves identity being biggest reveal of year/decade or whatever (I cant find it), did he specifically say "been there since the beginning of Batman' or just the more vague `beginning'. Because, while all the blogosphere was guessing about early Batman characters being BlackGlove/Hurt (alfred, thomas wayne, thomas wayne junior, batman himself, joe chill) maybe Morrison did really mean `the beginning of time' and was letting us know the reveal- that Hurt is the Devil in disguise- it a criptic manner. I wouldn't put it past him.
>
> Thoughts?

Yeah, that's always been part of the evidence supporting the idea of Hurt as the Devil. I still don't like the idea, but it's at least better in my view than having Thomas Wayne suddenly show up alive, crazy and evil. But my big beef is that we need to have this discussion at all. We still don't know who, and we still don't know why, and until we do those are some big gaping holes in the story.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.4 on Windows Vista
stupid baby




> in that interview talking about hurt/black gloves identity being biggest reveal of year/decade or whatever (I cant find it), did he specifically say "been there since the beginning of Batman' or just the more vague `beginning'. Because, while all the blogosphere was guessing about early Batman characters being BlackGlove/Hurt (alfred, thomas wayne, thomas wayne junior, batman himself, joe chill) maybe Morrison did really mean `the beginning of time' and was letting us know the reveal- that Hurt is the Devil in disguise- it a criptic manner. I wouldn't put it past him.
>
> Thoughts?

I actually took it as beginning of time,

by the way I was reading a Sherlock Holmes book last night, and I really was seeing how much Batman has in common with Holmes , Especially in the story of RIP ( you think Morrison is / was a Arthur Conan Doyle fan? )both men being the worlds greatest detectives just at diffrent points in history.


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP
matt mash




> > > having him be the devil is just the kind of boring "twist" morrison loves to write. he probably thinks it's genius, and his boosters will agree, but some of us know better.
> > >
> > > sorry if i sound like i'm hard on morrison.
> >
> > No, but you're "some of us know better" IS just being slightly rude to those who DO like his work on RIP
>
>
> Icon's right. You're free to be as hard on Morrison as you like; it's your opinion. But not everyone who likes something done by Morrison, likes it simply because it was done by Morrison and they are a "booster". And neither does everyone who hates something done by Morrison do so simply because it was done by Morrison and they are a "hater". Some of us judge stories on their own merits and don't particularly care who wrote it, and thus have the ability to like or dislike stories (or even different aspects of one story) done by the exact same person.
>
> That may sound weird to you, but it's a fact and one you should try to remember when you're writing posts like the one above.



Posted with Apple Safari 3.1.2 on MacOS X
Gawain





It's not at all about leaving Morrison alone, or about changing anyone's minds. It's about understanding that people who feel differently than you don't need to have their minds changed, anymore than you do for feeling differently from them. It's about being able to state your opinion without feeling the need to insert an "anyone who disagrees with me is obviously a [blank]" clause to preemptively dismiss any opposing points of view.

It's not just you, and it's not just people who are against Morrison. I've seen it a lot here ever since Morrison came on board, on both sides of the fence. It does nothing to raise the level of discussion or debate, it just drags everything down to a shrieking cacophony of "I'm right, you're wrong!". Which doesn't make for a very interesting message board.

And neither does this, so that's it for my soapbox rant. Back to Batman.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.4 on Windows XP
matt mash




...morrison just frustrates me. for all the talk about how it's a good thing as long as people are discussing one's work, i don't recall ever reading any constructive debates about him. it's always one person insisting that it's genius and another saying it's crap.

i haven't been around these boards to see what the texture of the discussion is like, but i get the feeling from past history and from the frustration i'm sensing from you that it's no different.

when i see people discussing things morrison wrote that i consider lazy and uncreative, my instinct is to write something snarky about him, because i can't think of a single writer who gets more credit than he does for work that i find entirely unremarkable and sloppy (not that i hate everything he's done; i like a very, very small portion of his output just fine), and every time i've tried to constructively criticize his work, it gets me nowhere. so it's a lose-lose for me.

saying that "i know better," is merely my equivalent to the responses i'm used to getting from morrison's fans, because there's almost always a perceived implication that people who enjoy his work do so because they are smarter than the rest of us. that's why i tend towards snarkiness on the issue. i just wanted to voice my opinion.


Posted with Apple Safari 3.1.2 on MacOS X
CensusTaker




> ...morrison just frustrates me. for all the talk about how it's a good thing as long as people are discussing one's work, i don't recall ever reading any constructive debates about him. it's always one person insisting that it's genius and another saying it's crap.
>
> i haven't been around these boards to see what the texture of the discussion is like, but i get the feeling from past history and from the frustration i'm sensing from you that it's no different.
>
> when i see people discussing things morrison wrote that i consider lazy and uncreative, my instinct is to write something snarky about him, because i can't think of a single writer who gets more credit than he does for work that i find entirely unremarkable and sloppy (not that i hate everything he's done; i like a very, very small portion of his output just fine), and every time i've tried to constructively criticize his work, it gets me nowhere. so it's a lose-lose for me.
>
> saying that "i know better," is merely my equivalent to the responses i'm used to getting from morrison's fans, because there's almost always a perceived implication that people who enjoy his work do so because they are smarter than the rest of us. that's why i tend towards snarkiness on the issue. i just wanted to voice my opinion.



Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
CensusTaker




> > in that interview talking about hurt/black gloves identity being biggest reveal of year/decade or whatever (I cant find it), did he specifically say "been there since the beginning of Batman' or just the more vague `beginning'. Because, while all the blogosphere was guessing about early Batman characters being BlackGlove/Hurt (alfred, thomas wayne, thomas wayne junior, batman himself, joe chill) maybe Morrison did really mean `the beginning of time' and was letting us know the reveal- that Hurt is the Devil in disguise- it a criptic manner. I wouldn't put it past him.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> I actually took it as beginning of time,
>
> by the way I was reading a Sherlock Holmes book last night, and I really was seeing how much Batman has in common with Holmes , Especially in the story of RIP ( you think Morrison is / was a Arthur Conan Doyle fan? )both men being the worlds greatest detectives just at diffrent points in history.

Well they certainly are that, and they do have more in common besides but the things they have in common (obsessive, observant, logical & lateral thinkers, multi-tallented/pollimathic/well-read) are traits they also share with most other literary detectives; as these are the necessary traits for a great detective to have! But no, I do think Morrison is a Holmes reader though, then again alot of writers (even those not as good as GM) tend to be broud readers, and I'd hazzard a guess that nearly all those who've attempted to write some detective fiction have read a Holmes story or two!


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
CensusTaker




> > in that interview talking about hurt/black gloves identity being biggest reveal of year/decade or whatever (I cant find it), did he specifically say "been there since the beginning of Batman' or just the more vague `beginning'. Because, while all the blogosphere was guessing about early Batman characters being BlackGlove/Hurt (alfred, thomas wayne, thomas wayne junior, batman himself, joe chill) maybe Morrison did really mean `the beginning of time' and was letting us know the reveal- that Hurt is the Devil in disguise- it a criptic manner. I wouldn't put it past him.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> Yeah, that's always been part of the evidence supporting the idea of Hurt as the Devil. I still don't like the idea, but it's at least better in my view than having Thomas Wayne suddenly show up alive, crazy and evil. But my big beef is that we need to have this discussion at all. We still don't know who, and we still don't know why, and until we do those are some big gaping holes in the story.

Then again, looking back at other Batman villians we didn't necessarily learn all about them within their first few appearances (Ra's appeared a half dozen times before the 1st mention of a lazarus pit didnt he? We didnt get a Joker origin for 40 years after his debut, Penguin, Riddler & Mr. Freeze's backstory's and motivations have all been changed retroactively. I think other reoccuring batvillains haven't had their origins explained at all, but I'd have to enter reasearch mode to be sure) so I don't really have a problem with the open ended nature of this mystery. Heck, we still don't know who Doctor Claw is 20 years after the Inspector Gadget show finished, doesn't stop it being a good cartoon.


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
matt mash




textless


Posted with Apple Safari 3.1.2 on MacOS X
CensusTaker




> textless



Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
Gawain




> > > in that interview talking about hurt/black gloves identity being biggest reveal of year/decade or whatever (I cant find it), did he specifically say "been there since the beginning of Batman' or just the more vague `beginning'. Because, while all the blogosphere was guessing about early Batman characters being BlackGlove/Hurt (alfred, thomas wayne, thomas wayne junior, batman himself, joe chill) maybe Morrison did really mean `the beginning of time' and was letting us know the reveal- that Hurt is the Devil in disguise- it a criptic manner. I wouldn't put it past him.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> >
> > Yeah, that's always been part of the evidence supporting the idea of Hurt as the Devil. I still don't like the idea, but it's at least better in my view than having Thomas Wayne suddenly show up alive, crazy and evil. But my big beef is that we need to have this discussion at all. We still don't know who, and we still don't know why, and until we do those are some big gaping holes in the story.
>
> Then again, looking back at other Batman villians we didn't necessarily learn all about them within their first few appearances (Ra's appeared a half dozen times before the 1st mention of a lazarus pit didnt he? We didnt get a Joker origin for 40 years after his debut, Penguin, Riddler & Mr. Freeze's backstory's and motivations have all been changed retroactively. I think other reoccuring batvillains haven't had their origins explained at all, but I'd have to enter reasearch mode to be sure) so I don't really have a problem with the open ended nature of this mystery. Heck, we still don't know who Doctor Claw is 20 years after the Inspector Gadget show finished, doesn't stop it being a good cartoon.

It's fine having unknown aspects about a character, I never said he need to know all about him. I'd even be happy with a clear explanation of why he wanted to destroy Bruce Wayne without knowing who Hurt is, IF they hadn't hyped the revelation of his identity as being a big deal and part of the mystery. This wasn't a business-as-usual here's-a-new-villain story, this was a major event that they promoted and marketed as such, and which promised a) the end of Bruce Wayne as Batman, and b) the shocking revelation of the identity of the Black Glove/Dr. Hurt. It delivered neither.

They left the fate and future plans of Bruce Wayne completely unknown -- we only assume he's giving up being Batman because that's what they told us was going to happen outside of the story; without that piece of information the ending is almost completely incomprehensible. And they left the identity of the main villain as a multiple choice question including "d) none of the above". In fact, they left it so open-ended that I'm more than half-convinced they haven't yet decided themselves which way they're going to go with it.

Again, that can be fine in a normal story, but not in something that was promoted as a watershed event in the history of the character. Here's what I get out of the ending of RIP:
"Bruce Wayne has stopped being Batman, but we aren't going to tell you why. It was somehow related to this guy who launched an attack on his very sanity, but we aren't going to tell you who he is or why he did that. It's just a mystery. A character with almost 70 years of history is changing drastically, but we don't think the reasons are important. We'll give you a few vague hints that may or may not turn out to be true. Knock yourselves out making up your own endings... at least we don't have to pay you."



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.4 on Windows XP
Tenzel Kim

Moderator

Member Since: Wed Jul 30, 1997
Posts: 223



> this was a major event that they promoted and marketed as such, and which promised a) the end of Bruce Wayne as Batman, and b) the shocking revelation of the identity of the Black Glove/Dr. Hurt. It delivered neither.

Actually we were never promised "the schocking revelation of the identity of the Black Glove". We were promised a shocking revelation at the end of the story. Whether or not we got that can be argued but as far as I recall from all the interviews weren't told that the identity of the Black Glove would be revealed.

Tenz.



Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
Gawain




>
> > this was a major event that they promoted and marketed as such, and which promised a) the end of Bruce Wayne as Batman, and b) the shocking revelation of the identity of the Black Glove/Dr. Hurt. It delivered neither.
>
> Actually we were never promised "the schocking revelation of the identity of the Black Glove". We were promised a shocking revelation at the end of the story. Whether or not we got that can be argued but as far as I recall from all the interviews weren't told that the identity of the Black Glove would be revealed.

Mmmmm... they may not have used those exact words, but the identity of Dr. Hurt/Black Glove (for the distinction was unclear for a long time) was played up both in the story and in interviews as a big part of the mystery. Now the story is over, and it's still a mystery.

From the IGN interview:
"IGN Comics: The last issue suggested that Thomas Wayne is really Doctor Hurt. Should fans expect more twists to this mystery?

Morrison: Well I'm not going to tell you yet. [laughs] We won't know the answer to that one until the very last issue of RIP. But we will find something out that's going to change everything. "

Now, you can parse that so that the last sentence has nothing to do with what came before if you want, but I see no reason to do that. Even if you do, he plainly said we would know the answer at least to whether it was Thomas Wayne in the last issue of RIP, and the fact is we do not. They could release an issue this week that confirms that it is in fact Thomas Wayne (or Mangrove Pierce, or the Devil, or Vandal Savage, or Count Dracula, etc., etc.) and it wouldn't contradict anything in the story except certain characters' claims or denials.

And, as I have said, if you don't know who Hurt is, you can't begin to understand his motives, which leaves the entire story arc shrouded under a giant question mark. A very unsatisfying ending, for me anyway.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.4 on Windows XP
Spider-Man




> And, as I have said, if you don't know who Hurt is, you can't begin to understand his motives, which leaves the entire story arc shrouded under a giant question mark. A very unsatisfying ending, for me anyway.

Question mark you say

maybe its THE RIDDLER


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
QuestionX




Dr. Hurt
now, new gods
here's my theory

Hurt= Desaad

"been there from the beginning" could mean anything
desaad could be tied into final crisis in the same role a devil figure would have taken---- suffering on earth could have been started by desaad to pave the eventual way for darkseid

hurt could actually= both desaad and perceptions of him could be consistent with interpretations of the devil

just an idea
rock of ages was such a great jla arc, the battle between bats and desaad in final crisis seems perfect

and, have i missed it? where IS desaad anyway?




Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP
Alan Wilkinson




> and, have i missed it? where IS desaad anyway?
>
>

In Terror Titans, apparantly (under his own name, no less. That's good hiding, that...).


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software