Scan barcode
oddmara's review against another edition
1.0
I'm not going to lie, this felt like the comic version of what dude-bro film students think they're doing when they create their grim final year project. First of all, Batman felt very out of character, with the way he treated everyone? Doesn't feel right. The fact he stabbed his hand for some reason??? Him agreeing to play Joker's games??? Even if a lot of things would have been in character if the situation was different, with everything that happens in this story these normally usual reactions didn't make any sense.
It was all just angst for the hell of it, with no actual narrative reason. And I'd like to mention that he fully got impaled and then walked away as if he was fine. Because I guess they thought it would be a cool angsty shot to draw. Or something. Again, just doing things for funsies. What they did to Harvey? Fucking evil. Literally no reason to do that. Makes no sense canonically. And didn't he mostly use the coin to force other people to make decisions rather than himself? The mischaracterization here is actually painful, like, that could have very well been some random ass person. Not to mention that he let Bruce walk away at the end, which again, is not how his coin tosses work.
Moving on to the art, I honestly feel like this style, just like this story, don't fit within the batman universe. Like, it's absolutely gorgeous, but it's a bit too dark (literally, and by that I mean that I felt like watching a poorly lit movie while reading this) and too realistic for a comic, in my opinion, as well as too detailed. There's also so many useless shots that again, are just there to look cool. And don't get me started on the headache that was trying to read the font and colour that they used for the Joker's dialogue. Fucking evil.
The Plato's cavern allusion made me giggle, I'll give him that at least. Not sure the Joker knows who Plato is but you know. At least that was cool.
It was all just angst for the hell of it, with no actual narrative reason. And I'd like to mention that he fully got impaled and then walked away as if he was fine. Because I guess they thought it would be a cool angsty shot to draw. Or something. Again, just doing things for funsies. What they did to Harvey? Fucking evil. Literally no reason to do that. Makes no sense canonically. And didn't he mostly use the coin to force other people to make decisions rather than himself? The mischaracterization here is actually painful, like, that could have very well been some random ass person. Not to mention that he let Bruce walk away at the end, which again, is not how his coin tosses work.
Moving on to the art, I honestly feel like this style, just like this story, don't fit within the batman universe. Like, it's absolutely gorgeous, but it's a bit too dark (literally, and by that I mean that I felt like watching a poorly lit movie while reading this) and too realistic for a comic, in my opinion, as well as too detailed. There's also so many useless shots that again, are just there to look cool. And don't get me started on the headache that was trying to read the font and colour that they used for the Joker's dialogue. Fucking evil.
The Plato's cavern allusion made me giggle, I'll give him that at least. Not sure the Joker knows who Plato is but you know. At least that was cool.
bone173's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
brittanyejuneau's review against another edition
challenging
dark
reflective
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
Super powerful story about how Batman might belong with the crazies after all. It dives deep into the lore of the asylum and also how much Batman and his enemies question his sanity.
dynila's review against another edition
2.0
I've never liked McKean's illustration style and it rather ruined what could have been an interesting book for me. The story was hard to follow with the disjointed art.
mazer_nickham's review against another edition
4.0
After reading the graphic novel, being confused but intrigued, going back and reading the script, THEN reading the graphic novel three more times, I finally understand this complex piece of work.
The amount of symbolism Morrison injects is both overwhelming and impressive. I enjoyed doing some minor research on Tarot and the somewhat obscure Batman villains featured to help my understanding of this graphic novel.
Dave McKean also does a great job, there's no way Arkham Asylum would have worked without his direction and style. I contend that his visual interpretation of the Joker is one of the creepiest and best.
I'm the author of a graphic novel blog; for more information on graphic novels including reviews, news and other insights, visit ALD Graphic Novels.
The amount of symbolism Morrison injects is both overwhelming and impressive. I enjoyed doing some minor research on Tarot and the somewhat obscure Batman villains featured to help my understanding of this graphic novel.
Dave McKean also does a great job, there's no way Arkham Asylum would have worked without his direction and style. I contend that his visual interpretation of the Joker is one of the creepiest and best.
I'm the author of a graphic novel blog; for more information on graphic novels including reviews, news and other insights, visit ALD Graphic Novels.
whackboy's review against another edition
3.0
i read this many many years ago. i am revisiting it thanks to a loaned copy from a good friend.
i am moved by grant morrison's ability to convey deeper complexity than one would off-the-cuff ascribe to comic book characters. the artwork by dave mckean is in a similar vein, pushing boundaries of the medium's form firmly into a palimpsestic art. many point to this work as a pivotal moment for comics and they may well be right. the choice to use such iconic and well-established characters as batman and the joker to illustrate the difficulties faced by a life of vigilantism and the nuanced decay that slowly usurps the psyche is a drastic departure from the "OOF!" "BIFF!" and "KAPOW!" title card panels we may have come to expect from a batman story. the form of conflict resolution displayed here is much less cut and dry, much more problematic, and dare i say: unresolved. there is vaguery of vaguery and a challenge present on just about every panel. i often found myself perplexed as to the thrust of story, the continuance of plot, and set adrift on the chaos. i am willing to take this trip. not all are. certainly there is great work here and it is highly conceptual. if you are looking for a dark, bleak, nearly impenetrable immersion in the madness of gotham's insane asylum you could do no better than this.
i am moved by grant morrison's ability to convey deeper complexity than one would off-the-cuff ascribe to comic book characters. the artwork by dave mckean is in a similar vein, pushing boundaries of the medium's form firmly into a palimpsestic art. many point to this work as a pivotal moment for comics and they may well be right. the choice to use such iconic and well-established characters as batman and the joker to illustrate the difficulties faced by a life of vigilantism and the nuanced decay that slowly usurps the psyche is a drastic departure from the "OOF!" "BIFF!" and "KAPOW!" title card panels we may have come to expect from a batman story. the form of conflict resolution displayed here is much less cut and dry, much more problematic, and dare i say: unresolved. there is vaguery of vaguery and a challenge present on just about every panel. i often found myself perplexed as to the thrust of story, the continuance of plot, and set adrift on the chaos. i am willing to take this trip. not all are. certainly there is great work here and it is highly conceptual. if you are looking for a dark, bleak, nearly impenetrable immersion in the madness of gotham's insane asylum you could do no better than this.
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