Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Batman '66 meets The Green Hornet!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
    Because one of the things DeMatteis does is redemption stories.



    Ah, but that is where we must disagree--the whole idea, indeed, of redemption (especially in the transcendent way DeMatteis tends to approach it) is that even what one might consider "garbage" is worth redeeming--that, indeed, there is nothing which is not worth redeeming. I recommend his excellent graphic novel Mercy for a good example...
    But first you must care about something -- the characters, the universe, the plot... something, for redemption to have any meaning or context. And I didn't. Even talented people don't hit a homer every time they swing. It happens. The situation at DC now is not particularly conducive to creativity. Kevin Maguire, for example, was unceremoniously dismissed from Justice League 3000 just prior to the first issue's original ship date, resulting in the book being delayed for 2 months. Just another in an increasingly-common string of complaints from creators leaving DC because of editorial shenanigans. I don't expect this title to last very long, to be honest.

    Comment


    • #32
      Oh, starting with awful people and then showing them redeemed does not bother me. (I mean, look at Christmas Carol--we got tons of Scrooge Being Awful before the end, right?) We'll see what happens of course.

      The Kevin Maguire thing... if it were not for DeMatteis, that would have put me off the book entirely. But on the plus side I am actively getting everything he is doing for Marvel now, even the stuff written by (gulp) Bendis, whom I normally avoid.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by pulphero View Post
        . . . Wouldn't it be cool to see something like a 1939 Batman/Hornet encounter written and drawn by Matt Wagner? . . .
        I would have loved that. But DC doesn't have a popular Batman '39 series at present.

        I've read a couple of (print) issues of Batman '66, but I really am not thrilled with that title. Jeff Parker does too good a job of mimicking the old Adam West-starring show, including capturing aspects I grew to hate when I was older. Still, I might buy the print issue of this when it's in the store on Wednesday.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by MajorHoy View Post
          I would have loved that. But DC doesn't have a popular Batman '39 series at present.
          Ah, those little niggling details of "which version" don't even apply to Batman. People have been so exposed to so many different versions of Batman that DC can just pull whatever version is fashionable for the occasion out of the closet, like dressing up for a special event.

          Originally posted by MajorHoy View Post
          I've read a couple of (print) issues of Batman '66, but I really am not thrilled with that title. Jeff Parker does too good a job of mimicking the old Adam West-starring show, including capturing aspects I grew to hate when I was older. Still, I might buy the print issue of this when it's in the store on Wednesday.
          Batman '66 Meets the Green Hornet isn't the same creative team as the regular Batman '66. It's written by Kevin Smith (who's no stranger to writing either character) and TV/radio personality Ralph Garman, and drawn by Ty Templeton.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by pulphero View Post
            Originally posted by MajorHoy View Post
            I would have loved that. But DC doesn't have a popular Batman '39 series at present.
            Ah, those little niggling details of "which version" don't even apply to Batman. People have been so exposed to so many different versions of Batman that DC can just pull whatever version is fashionable for the occasion out of the closet, like dressing up for a special event.
            They can, but they're not likely to unless they feel it's good for the corporate bottom line.

            DC has a Batman '66 book that's tied in to the TV series (which is also going to be released on DVD . . . more $s there), so doing a crossover that also has ties to Batman '66 is probably in their $ interest.

            Recalling their rich history of comic books doesn't seem to be something wants to dredge up in the New 52 beyond stating it's the 75th anniversary of Batman, which is a good excuse to make more merchandise and more $s.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by MajorHoy View Post
              They can, but they're not likely to unless they feel it's good for the corporate bottom line.

              DC has a Batman '66 book that's tied in to the TV series (which is also going to be released on DVD . . . more $s there), so doing a crossover that also has ties to Batman '66 is probably in their $ interest.

              Recalling their rich history of comic books doesn't seem to be something wants to dredge up in the New 52 beyond stating it's the 75th anniversary of Batman, which is a good excuse to make more merchandise and more $s.
              Oh, they've done much more than just state it, and slap "75 Years" labels on their Batman comic books. They very recently had a Batman 75th Anniversary short by Bruce Timm, "Strange Days", entirely devoted to the 1939 Batman. A short flash-animated trailer was released last year, based on the retro Batman Black and White story from 2013, "Silent Knight... Unholy Knight!" by Michael Uslan and Dave Bullock. The 1939 "First Appearance" DC Direct Batman action figure is being re-released this year as part of a boxed set, too. Then there was 2012's Batman: Death by Design hardcover graphic novel by Chip Kidd and Dave Taylor featuring a retro-1939ish Batman. Clearly, the New DC isn't making 1939 Batman a merchandising pariah, and that was even BEFORE the 75th Anniversary promotion started (but AFTER September 2011). So I'm gonna say Batman pretty much breaks any of DC's self-imposed rules about never promoting anything but the New 52 versions of its characters. Why? Because he's Batman, and that trumps all the rules. Oh, and make sure you pick up your free 1939 Batman mask (might as well get the 1966, 1986, and modern versions too, since they're free) on "Batman Day", July 23rd, 2014!

              A comic book featuring a 1939 version of Batman is no less a piece of merchandise than a 1939 Batman action figure, statue, or a reprint collection. It's an object generated by DC to make a profit, and in that sense is no different than them publishing a comic book about the 1966 Batman (regardless of other tie-in merchandise) or a future Batman Beyond comic book (which doesn't have ANY current tie-in merchandise). It's just another way of selling people MORE Batman, or of selling Batman to MORE people beyond just the ones buying New 52 Batman. If a 1939 Batman can appear in a story in 2013's Batman Black and White, he can just as well appear in a crossover miniseries story with a 1939 Green Hornet.

              If I were to buy your logic here, what would Dynamite's reason be for allowing DC to use (since they have the comic book license) the 1966 version of Green Hornet? Since Dynamite has never done a 1966 version of Green Hornet in a comic book, Batman '66 Meets the Green Hornet doesn't cross-promote any of Dynamite's product, not even its in-print trade paperbacks of the Golden Age or Modern Age Green Hornets. Neither Dynamite nor Green Hornet Inc. has any current merchandising for that version of the character, and STILL no DVD release of the TV series on the horizon (!!!!!) Even if you could argue that there was some spillover to other (classic and modern) versions of the Hornet, Dynamite has nothing but a single issue of Mark Waid's Green Hornet left on its schedule! (Frankly, if Dynamite were using its head, they'd rush a hardcover collection of the three Gold Key TV comics from 1967 into print, and slap a Green Hornet '67 logo on the cover in big letters, to take advantage of the free publicity they're getting from DC providing the new stories.) Who knows, maybe this is one of those "You get to do your version; then we get to do ours" deals as so often seems to be the case with inter-company crossovers, which could mean DYNAMITE gets to choose which version of Batman they want to use in their own Green Hornet crossover. Granted, unlikely in terms of the lack of parity in the characters' popularity...

              Sometimes a comic book is only promoting itself.
              Last edited by pulphero; 06-04-2014, 05:31 AM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Batman '66 Meets the Green Hornet #1 is out!

                SPOILER WARNING!!! DANGER! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON!!!







                This was a lot of fun, more so than one of the regular issues of Batman '66. One thing a little odd here is that neither Batman and Robin, nor the Green Hornet and Kato, appear in costume for quite a while into the story. Green Hornet and Kato finally show up in costume on page 11, Robin appears first on page 13, and Batman and Robin together on page 15. The story prior to that is all plot build-up, with Bruce Wayne taking a train trip to keep an eye on a museum collection of valuable artifacts, while Dick Grayson goes out on a date with Mayor Linseed's niece. Bruce meets Britt Reid on the train, and they engage in a page of verbal sparring about their respective alter egos, which was pretty amusing, and faithful in character to the spirit of the show. Great pains are taken to avoid ever naming the Green Hornet's home city (it was never referred to on his TV show, either), so you never see it named Chicago (as in DE's GH:YO) or Century City (as in Kevin Smith's GH). No, the train is merely travelling from Gotham City to what is called "our counterpart city" to deliver the museum's valuable collection of artifacts, overseen by the museum's board of directors' representative Bruce Wayne (after being tipped off by Commission Gordon, via a Hot Line call to Batman). Britt Reid is ostensibly onboard to get a story for The Daily Sentinel (don't they usually employ reporters for that, rather than sending the publisher?), since he has heard rumors that criminals may target the museum's collection.

                The story is a direct sequel to the Batman TV episode ("A Piece of the Action") where Batman and the Hornet first met, and it's the return of Colonel Gumm, only now he's given himself a battlefield promotion to General Gumm (much more alliterative) after having survived an accident whilst experimenting to create the world's most insoluble glue. He winds up (in classic Batman villain fashion) as a man whose face is disfigured with an unremovable covering of glue (shades of Baron Heinrich Zemo, and his experiments with Adhesive X!) Gumm decides to continue his experiments anyway, and finally invents that super-strong, super-sticky paste that only his special solvent can un-stick, so he designs a pink military uniform and officer's cap, hires a bunch of henchmen, and becomes DC's answer to Paste-Pot Pete, armed with his super glue-guns. Naturally, his first target is to steal that valuable museum collection from the same train that Bruce Wayne and Britt Reid happen to be on. Holy coincidence!! The issue ends with Green Hornet and Kato, and Batman and Robin having Gumm trapped between them on top of the speeding train, until Gumm sticks their feet to the train's roof just as it's approaching a tunnel. (My guess is that they'll all just bend over backwards until they're lying flat on their backs, even though their feet are still stuck to the train.)

                Kevin Smith and Ralph Garman did a good job capturing the voices of Adam West and Van Williams here, and the sort of dialogue that was written for the Batman TV scripts, and the artwork occasionally manages to evoke pretty good likenesses (not always true of the regular Batman '66 comic) as well. It was nice that Smith and Garman tried to scale back the silliness quotient of the original crossover just a little bit, and make Colonel (now General) Gumm at least slightly more of a serious antagonist to the heroes (yes, Marvel's Paste-Pot Pete would actually have been a step UP in this case). Overall, it felt pretty satisfying, even if it took its sweet time getting the costumed alter egos on stage.

                Comment


                • #38
                  I was going to wait and pick this up in TPB but now . . .
                  Always remember, Murphy was an optimist
                  Munchkin 1, 2, 4, 7 Super Munchkin 1&2, Munchkin Bites 1&2, Munchkin Fu, Star Munchkin Deluxe and Star 2
                  http://ghornet.deviantart.com/

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    This was a great, fun read, set up, and characters all felt right, and although at one point the plot seemed a bit stretched, it all played out well, and really delivered like an extended episode of the show.
                    An awesome sequel to the original team-up.
                    The covers are incredible, and the interior art all looked great! Like the story itself, the art was a visual nod to the show too!
                    These are fans who knew and loved the material, and they delivered.
                    Last edited by Guicho; 02-04-2015, 12:12 AM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X