Is he a good batman writer? is his rebirth run worth reading? how would you rank it against Snyder's New 52?

is he a good batman writer? is his rebirth run worth reading? how would you rank it against Snyder's New 52?

He's a terrible batman writer, his run is not worth reading, it's worse than Snyder's which until then ranks as one of the worst runs on the character in the PC era.

King is pretty much the only reason why I’m currently pulling Batman, Snyder back in New 52 was so awful by the end of CoO that I dropped all Bat related titles

>is he a good batman writer?
He's got a boner for gimping the fuck out of characters that have been established to be powerful, such as deathstroke, bane, flash etc. Sometimes it's nice, and sometimes there are ridiculous leaps in logic in how events progress. This is especially apparent in I am bane, and the war of jokes and riddles.
There are some good issues here and there though.
>is his rebirth run worth reading?
It's worth reading for the pretty art alone.
>how would you rank it against Snyder's New 52?
Way shittier

>how would you rank it against Snyder's New 52?
>bored while on a long train journey with nothing else to do
Snyder
>bored while on a long coach journey with nothing else to do
King
Their stuff is strictly room temperature, fit for a third or fourth Batman book not Batman, not Detective Comics.

I like him.

>It's worth reading for the pretty art alone.
after the IAM trilogy the art is largely shit. Finch killed it on the first three arcs and Joelle Jones was nice but Janin is a complete fucking eyesore.

>>how would you rank it against Snyder's New 52?
>Way shittier
well we agree on that.

this, they wouldn't be as poorly regarded if they weren't "canon". They'd simply be poo-pooed as alt-u garbage like SGMurphy's garbage batbook.

Both runs are pretty bad, Snyder's storyarch were always excessively wordy and had at least one character be a mouthpiece for the theme or gimmick he was going for.
Kings run just has a lot of nonsensical moments, exarcerbated by some really bad art from Janin. The scene with Batman reseting his back in I Am Suicide comes to mind.
That being said, King's work actually does have some shining lights, like the Swamp Thing issues and the stories that focus specifically on Batman and Catwoman. The double date issues for example.
So overall I gotta give it to King, personally, even if a lot of it is stupid. Snyder's work was even stupider to me.

He's cool. Sup Forums hates him, but they hated Morrison's run when that was ongoing.

I liked the first year's arc but this year's not so much

it's arguably the worst Batman run of all-time

No. He writes Batman like an autistic Robot. I have no idea how Omega Men, Visions and Mister Miracle were so good and this so bad. I just don't think he has the right voice for Batman. Oh and this whole Bat Cat shit needs to stop

I like the BatCat angle they're doing now, but the rest of it's not very interesting. So far Snyder's run was better, even if he always did flub the endings.

He's got some great parts like the Elmer Fudd crossover, and some lame parts here and there. Sure, it's not as good as his Vision run, but calling it the worst Batman run is retarded. Take him over Snyder anyday.

I agree with this.

The Elmer Fudd Crossover was good because of Fudd. Batman was weak in it. He just can't write Batman

No. He had some interesting premises but he's really an awful writer. 3 flashes yesterday and the war of the jokes and the riddles that I waited for a long while

Omega Men and Vision have a lot of problems and Mister Miracle is straight ass crap.

He's not a good writer period. He's always been vastly overrated, and it's taken 50 issues of non stop shit for people to realize this.

Snyder is better, anyone that says otherwise is sick in the head.

Yet Batman is noticeably so much worse

And what problems are they?

>Omega Men, Visions and Mister Miracle
they aren't you just don't care about those properties. much like people who don't care about batman, or flat out normally depsise him, seem to take to TK's batman.

he writes too cynically and with too much contempt for the characters to be enjoyed by fans. only those who want to "read comics" but never wanted to read comics like him.

Snyder was better, he wasn't perfect but King bad, seriously bad.

out of character writing, obsessing about menial slice life shit in dire situations to show how "cool and totally normal they" are. pacing based on way too many "beat panels". It's a good technique once in a while not once or twice an issue.

there are many more but I'm sure you already disagree with most of what I said if not all of it.

His stuff bored me to tears so I dropped it. Snyder was so much better

writing without a purpose, reacting to what people said online and changing his shit accordingly, bad characterization.
Vision is melodramatic bullshit, the scene where Viv's boyfriend dies is as hacky as anything I've ever seen and he even admits in the letter's paged that he just tried to be shocking for the sake of being shocking.
The backlash to the fakeout Kyle death had King write him overly competent by taking out all the Omega Men at once and then beating Tigorr in hand to hand combat easily in one page. The romance with Kalista was also retarded, especially since he showed Kyle still being madly in love with Carol
These two are still okay reads though, Mr. Miracle is just plain bad.

The best stuff were one shots (the Brave and the Mold, the Elmer Fudd oneshot) and the only ones I'd recommend.

His run is disappointing, I had such high hopes for him. He's not the worst ever (they said the same about Snyder and they'll say the same thing when the next guy takes over). Sup Forums will mostly likely go the "he was always bad" retroactively terrible route.

The common complaints are repetition(I guess Bendis scarred them for life?) the luvy duvy couple using pet names for each other, and Janin's art (Lee Weeks is great I wish he was on Batamn).

I'd like to see him write Suicide Squad. I think he did a decent job writing Bronze Tiger and Punch & Jewelee

the only way to avoid Batwank is to not read books with Batman in them.

It''s had it's ups and downs, but it's alright overall. People who call it "the worst Batman run of all-time" are fucking morons.

name one that's worse, newfag. snyder's aside. name a single one.

Dixon

>you're a newfag for not being a hyper contrarian and shitting on whoever the current Bat writer is

go fuck yourself

That's laughable. Dixon is writing better comics than King now.

The run where Stephanie Brown became Robin for a spell, then got power drilled by Black Mask, and was then killed off because Leslie Thompkins wanted to teach Bruce a lesson for some reason.

That's unfair, the issue was narrated by Fudd. You just have unreasonable expectations.

Honestly who really cares if anyone in Omega Men was out of character? I like Kyle Rayner but I'm fine with him being reinterpreted to suit the story. The story was good and that's what matters to me.

He is suprisingly medicore and uneven, but unlike the other losers Snyder and Tynion, whose work no-one will remember in decade (despite the staggering number of issues), some his issues will be warmly remembered in coming years.

Tony Daniel's Batman is way worse. If you count spin offs as well, Batman the Dark Knight during New 52 was also ass.

I really don't think I do. His Batman just seems incredibly bland to me. His Date Night issue with Superman and Lois was one of the worst Batman comics I've ever read because everyone just felt wrong

>one of the worst Batman comics I've ever read
You haven't read many Batman comics then.

If you think the double date issues are really the worst Batman comics have to offer then you really really do have unreasonable expectations. So thank you for corroborating my claim.

Sounds like you enjoy the taste of shit.

>people who hate King are unable to explain their reasoning and instead go "Y-y-you eat shit! ROFL"

The reasoning are always listed but you morons just choose to ignore them every time.

I've read plenty of Batman comics. Maybe it isn't just Batman King can't write and it's every established character he will twist to fit his own story. Like was said earlier he could do anything with the Omega Men because nobody cared about them.

I bet you are a Snyder apologist. Did you enjoy the shitty taste of all those cop out endings with no consequences? All that exposition about the themes? The stupid Joker gimmicks? Keep eating shit.

>Did you enjoy the shitty taste of all those cop out endings with no consequences?
Let's be fair now. That's all cape comics

Snyder's run isn't good either, it's just not as garbage as King's. Which isn't saying much.

Sometimes it is good to take a character in a different direction. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. Man of Steel was a new direction for Superman and I thought it was bad. O'Neil was a new direction for Batman back in the day and it turned out to be good, with a more mature direction that other writers expanded on later.
With the Omega Men case, if they were to appear in Justice League or Green Lantern for example, would you really want them to return to the characters they were before King?

Johns writes a better Batman than King. Just look at the Button. Johns has Reverse Flash rush in and kick the shit out of him because Johns knows Bartman's strength is in preparation and controlling encounters before they even begin. If King wrote that story Batman would clap his hands and the floor of the Batcave would become a gravity well and Batman proceed to knock Zoom out with one punch.

I feel like you could swap out King for Snyder and the criticism would still fit

>He's a terrible batman writer, his run is not worth reading, it's worse than Snyder's which until then ranks as one of the worst runs on the character in the PC era

Sup Forums says this about the current and previous writer for every main Batman book.

I've heard the same fucking line about King, Snyder, Morrison, Dini, Azzarello, Winick, etc.

What the fuck are you even talking about?
Also, stop pretending like King writes an overly competent Batman, his Bat gets beaten, broken, stabbed, outsmarted and humiliated at every turn. Now if you want to talk about his Catwank and how she's always in control and dishing it out without ever getting any in return, then sure.

No I wouldn't. I don't hate King and I like what he's done with other characters but I can't pretend to enjoys his Batman work just because it's different. I don't think Snyder was any better for different reasons but I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this. All In know is I don't look forward to reading Batman anymore

This. Every current Batman writer is always the worst until the next one comes out. If Sup Forums existed back in the 70s, you'd hear people say that O'Neil is the worst Batman writer.

Frank Miller's Daredevil actually progressed the character. Born Again feels satisfying to read even when you know Matt will rebound. Nothing in Snyder's run really progressed Batman even though Snyder thought he was really putting him through the ringer. And he was, but there was no development. He just explored some really shallow themes and tried to write some scary stories that weren't scary at all.

>Dini
You lie

You sound like a pretty casual reader

But King did write a story where Reverse Flash just beat the shit out of Bruce?

>Johns writes a better Batman than King. Just look at the Button.

King and Williamson wrote The Button. Johns didn't.

I was gonna see how long I could get away with that. I should have been called out straight away

I don't always look forward to reading his Batman but I do appreciate that he is actually taking some risks and has a fucking direction in mind for the caharcter. At least it isn't fluff. I do agree that a lot of the execution is not up to par. In fact I think most of the arcs with Janin are poorly executed. But to act like it is all bad is disingenuous. And it really pains me to see anons flock to Snyder's mediocrity or be historical revisionists about either writer's works.

>You lie
When Dini was doing his series of one-shot stories in Detective, people were complaining that it was a waste of time and wasn't building to anything. When he actually wrote a damn good Hush story, people complained that they Dini couldn't come up with new characters anymore.

There are some noisy fucking contrarians in Batman threads. King is getting the standard reaction.

You.lie.

That's an empty criticism that is hard to defend against. What do you want me to say, "no, I'm not a casual?" I'm just not afraid of new interpretations. Sometimes it suits the character and sometimes it does not. A lot of it depends on the execution. I'm not as autistic about every detail, especially because this genre in this medium is full of contradictions. The contradictions and difference in interpretations make it fun for me.

What risks motherfucker? This retarded marriage?

Is it contrarians or just people with opposing views? You have to remember that Batman has had a lot of different interpretations and takes so it's only natural people would like one take over another

What risks would those be? It seems like standard Batman stories. There was the story arc with Gotham girl that sort of just fizzled out and the War of Jokes and prequels. The only thing I've really enjoyed was the Saga of Kite man but even then I feel more should have been done with it

Yeah. Unlike Snyder the marriage is a throughline in the arcs, whether you like it or not. Snyder's arcs had no cohesion, he just kept trying to top himself with bigger and bigger gimmicks in and effort to make his stories epic that he kept having to cop out of by the end. Alfred even got his fucking hand back. With this it at least seems like there is something going on over the course of the run.

Snyder and Azzarello were great, only man-children hated either of them.

I don't get it, you criticize Snyder for trying to make his shit epic but then you praise King for trying to make his shit epic? This is just dumb shipping trash. One of the reasons why Snyder's run sucked was because he kept trying to be definitive and it's fine to just tell goods stories sometimes. King is doing the same here.
I just don't understand how this marriage bullshit is supposed to be "taking risks", marriage issues are always heavily advertised and known to sell well because of retard collectors. If it doesn't stick after his run then your criticism for Snyder applies entirely to King's run and if it does it's dumb because it's forcing other writers to follow his garbage ideas, shackling them.

It was an observation. I don't want you to deny it, why would I? I'd rather you be honest and say you don't care about characterization.

Other people have spent a lot more time and money on it so they might be more invested. Casuals NEED to start to grasp that. Just because you don't care doesn't mean others aren't entitled to.

>Snyder and Azzarello were awful, only man-children liked either of them.
ftfy

Dini understands characterization, plot structure, and compelling dialogue in his excellent Batman run. King does not.

>I'd rather you be honest and say you don't care about characterization.
If characterization is consistent internally then it really and truly does not matter what other stories or writers have to say. If it works it works.

Dini was good, but nothing extraordinary during his run. He was just the traditional Batman writer for people who were scared by Morrison's radical take.

Where in the world does it say I'm praising King for being epic? A run having a B plot that builds is a writer trying hard to be epic? Fucking learn to read.

It doesn't really build, is my point. And yes, your point is that because it "matters" then it's better.

It outclasses Snyder and King by a degree of about a thousand times, and is squarely in one of the best runs on the character, especially for modern times.

You observed incorrectly. Was the characterization in Omega Men bad in the context of the story?
Or in the case of Batman, would you really try to argue that Catwoman has a consistent characterization across her history? Which characterization should King go with, or should he just try to do his own thing? Were Cooke and Brubaker wrong for interpreting Catwoman differently from when she debuted?
Was Frank Miller wrong for rejecting the swashbuckler interpretation of Daredevil? Was Mark Waid wrong for reembracing the swashbuckling Matt Murdock?
The best part about the characters is that even though the status quo on all of them is often reset there is still room for alternatives to be explored and the characters to evolve.

Not really? It was good, but nothing out of the ordinary.

Sup Forums hates any Batman not written by their overrated boyfriend, Grant Morrison.

Agreed. It was good, something Snyder's run and especially King's run, are not.

How in the world does a story mattering and a story being epic constitute the same thing? You are actually retarded, I'm sorry.

I like Batman written by Grant Morrison, Denny O'Neil, Peter Milligan, Alan Grant, Paul Dini.
I do not like Batman written by Tom King, Scott Snyder, Chuck Dixon, James Tynion.

What? Moron, "comics that matter" is a meme. You got tricked.

What are you even talking about anymore?

It's a better cape comic than 98% of DC's output post Flashpoint.

That you're a fucking idiot tricked by bullshit gimmicks like "BATMAN IS GETTING MARRIED TO CATWOMAN THIS IS IMPORTANT".

>post Rebirth
fixed and it becomes true.

It's not about being important, it's about having some actual direction and something happening in your story. Over the course of Snyder's run, what really happened? Did he really explore Batman at all? Is Bruce changed by the end? The only argument you can possibly make is that the stories were fun. But they weren't, they were tedious and bogged down by exposition about false themes.
That is the difference. It's not about a run being important or epic you absolute autist.

>Internally
More casual talk. That's not how it works to people who've followed characters and storylines for years and decades.

user it's okay to say you don't care. I'm not saying you or other casuals have to. But you're deciding others shouldn't. Eventually it will happen to you that the way you prefer a character is going to be discarded.

Since you're a casual it hasn't happened yet. But invest some time and money on and ongoing for a year or two and even by then you'll feel it.

>in the context of the story
More casual shit

>is bruce changed in the end
The point is quite literally that he shouldn't be. Only casuals want writers to "make their mark."

Also while I hate Snyder he absolutely has multiple plotlines running. While I think it's an asspull retcon to do the metal shit he claims it was planned.

Beyond that Bruce wasn't Bats for a bit and he "explored" too (like his predecessors). I didn't like the storylines but you're praising King for things Snyder did just as poorly.

It doesn't have any fucking direction though. Remember Gotham Girl? Tom sure as fuck doesn't. Last few arcs are just "villain of the week" style stories with Batman and Catwoman meeting and battling someone new and Catwoman kicking their ass while we're told her and Batman's love is like, so strong dude. Fuck, it reads like Hush except stretched out. The guy unironically copied a shitty Superman story from several years back. And don't even get me started on War of Jokes and Riddles, King himself uses his wife self insert to say that shit didn't matter at the end.

Not even close.

Kill yourself. In the context of Frank Miller's Daredevil, him fighting ninja's is fine. In the context of Waid's, Matt being in latveria makes sense. If you can't reconcile that then you are just too autistic.

It's the damn truth.

Just because you started reading comics in 2011 doesn't mean they were good.