Scan barcode
metalandteacups's review against another edition
1.0
I found the premise of the comic interesting, which is why I initially picked it up. What I was not expecting was the vague artwork and scattered story line, the combination of these element made it difficult to read. In a story that would otherwise have been quite gripping, was one of the worst things I have ever had to read.
This is sad because Grant Morrison is a great writer, but I feel that with comics you need more the just a great writer for them to be enjoyable.
This is sad because Grant Morrison is a great writer, but I feel that with comics you need more the just a great writer for them to be enjoyable.
longlostlillian's review against another edition
2.0
This comic was published in 1989 right before Warner Brother's came out with their Batman, and they asked that this comic be censored to a point. I think because of this a lot was lost in the story.
I read a review/summary on it after I read it through and it mentioned things like Batman dealing with his sexuality and a cannibalistic scene with Abraham Arkham that I totally missed.
I went back and read it through again and had to stretch my imagination on though scenes.
The artwork was beautiful in the book, but it didn't portray motion well. I don't think Dave Mckean wanted it to he went for an abstract approach. I think that it was to focus on the emotional and psychological issues that were supposed to be happening.
However I sort of lost that in the writing. A lot of scenes turned out to be Batman wandering the halls of Arkham Asylum occasionally peeking in to see old rivals and getting his ass kicked by the Croc.
WHAT?
What kind of conclusion was that?
The comic was supposedly exploring a different side of Batman which it did, however it did it weakly.
Arkham's story was better and clearer.
If they had removed the almost random Batman side story I think they could have made it an interesting look in Arkham's history instead it turned into a vague exploration of the Batman that didn't quite go anywhere.
I read a review/summary on it after I read it through and it mentioned things like Batman dealing with his sexuality and a cannibalistic scene with Abraham Arkham that I totally missed.
I went back and read it through again and had to stretch my imagination on though scenes.
The artwork was beautiful in the book, but it didn't portray motion well. I don't think Dave Mckean wanted it to he went for an abstract approach. I think that it was to focus on the emotional and psychological issues that were supposed to be happening.
However I sort of lost that in the writing. A lot of scenes turned out to be Batman wandering the halls of Arkham Asylum occasionally peeking in to see old rivals and getting his ass kicked by the Croc.
Spoiler
At that point I wondered why he came. He's Batman and he was doing what he was told by the Joker? What? and the only point I saw any psychological struggle was when he remembered his parent's murdered and whispered "Mommy?" Then he just lets all the villains go...WHAT?
What kind of conclusion was that?
The comic was supposedly exploring a different side of Batman which it did, however it did it weakly.
Arkham's story was better and clearer.
If they had removed the almost random Batman side story I think they could have made it an interesting look in Arkham's history instead it turned into a vague exploration of the Batman that didn't quite go anywhere.
frvncesco's review against another edition
3.0
vibess up there with killing joke and black mirror as my top Batman’s rn
aliraebanz's review against another edition
5.0
I completely understand why this comic got horrible reviews. I think part of it is because of the stream of conscious narrative and the art work. It's definitely NOT for everyone. However, I loved it. It was wild and unlike anything I've ever read. It was creepy, which is how ANYTHING involving the Joker should be. It Was difficult to read at times, but that didn't make a different to read. I thought it was easy to follow and theoretically brilliant. I highly recommend it.
ldickol's review against another edition
3.0
There is controversy around this book and its depiction of mental illness. Although I think it is an important conversation to have, and I'm not nearly well versed enough in Batman lore to have it, I still found the artistry in this book fascinating. It felt like a descent into a fever dream that some may love and some may hate.
filuipa's review against another edition
5.0
When the person nexts to you brings this to class and all you do on it it's reading
swagmansnake's review against another edition
3.0
vibess up there with killing joke and black mirror as my top Batman’s rn
ewg109's review against another edition
5.0
I was a much younger woman when I first read this. My experience with comic books extended to Archie, the X-Men, and Lum. This book blew my mind. And today when I reread it, despite being much older and better-read, it did it all over again.
kaboomcju's review against another edition
5.0
Wow, talk about symbolism and metaphors! A very intense story--both the artwork and the story itself bring the madness to light. Plenty of mythological symbolism throughout. The Joker acts more as the trickster guide rather than the antagonist in this one. It's Batman's own mind that creates the real conflict here.
philster666's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
sad
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0