Friday, March 1, 2013

Batman, Incorporated #8!

This past Wednesday, DC Comics released Batman, Incorporated #8  - a game changing issue!  The issue was heavily spoiled all over the Internet and "Mainstream Media" on Monday morning, two days before the comic was even released!

Batman, Inc #8 variant cover
Regardless, I decided to hold onto spoilers until today, just to give everyone a fair shake at reading this book without any if you don't want spoilers, well...DON'T join me after the JUMP

In Batman, Incorporated #8, Batman's only begotten son, Damian "Robin" Wayne, DIES!!!

As Batman might say, Damian was a good soldier.  In the end, he was also a great son!  Check out this official preview from the heart-breaking issue:

So true...and particularly poignant for fans of the Dick and Damian series, (also penned by Grant Morrison) Batman and Robin Volume 1!  It was the series that really made people love the little aristocratic brat!

Here's one of many "reaction" covers set to be released in March:

Poor Batman...and poor, poor Damian...

For a more "expansive" tribute to the late, great Damian Wayne, join me at Stryder's Dementia, where I pay tribute to the fallen Boy Wonder. 


  1. Man, that preview has some amateurish art... That's what you get for a milestone issue?!

  2. Really not a Chris Burnham fan eh? Well, his style is not for everyone, I guess. Admittedly it took me a while to get used to it, but now I really dig it. He's awesome with movement and arranging panels creatively...

  3. He doesn't know basic anatomy. You have to know the rules before you can break them. His Damien I'll pass - it looks like a stylistic choice. But his Robin is god awful. There's no construction under that head. Look at that bloated jaw. There's no working skull under that. That's not a stylistic choice - it's an amateur fudging the details. And I'm not surprised if fans enjoy him because fans have always loved pros who produce work that looks attainable by amateur fans. Look at any deviant art page and you'll see huge praise for amateur crap. Pro comics have always been hit and miss writing wise, but they used to look GREAT.

  4. Wow, harsh criticism. Well, to each their own. He's in my top 3 favourites right at the moment, because he tells an excellent story, visually and conveys emotion extremely well. He does draw a very cartoonish Batman, Inc. but on the other hand, it's refreshing to see an artist that isn't just trying to be one of the Kuberts or Jim Lee, too.

    I know I probably won't convince you cause everyone's aesthetic is different, but before you pan him completely, check out some of his other work...lots of samples at his website,

  5. PS: for the record, my current other two favourites are Greg Capullo on Batman and Francis Manapul on The Flash. Both also have more catoonish than realistic portrayals. Maybe it's just a phase I'm in since I've seen SOOO much "typical" comic art...lots of which I love, too, but the above three artists just feel really distinct and interesting to me these days

  6. I like the style of the work on his site much better, but he has some serious anatomy issues. Looking solely at that Batman at the top, I have a ton of questions.

    1) What is going on with his foot? It's so bizarrely positioned... fitting in with neither the floor or his leg.
    2) What is going on with his left arm? It's super short, especially from the shoulder to the elbow.
    3) What is going on with his hands? They are massive and his left hand looks like it should have 6-7 fingers instead of five. His left pinky starts somewhere around his wrist.

    I've seen the same issues on artwork on his site. Mostly weird, massive hands and body parts pivoted into odd positions. I could never imagine drawing anything close to this quality, but at the same time I would think that a DC comic Batman artist would be held to a higher standard. Or even edited to the point where the cringe-inducing poses are minimized... not placed on the cover.

  7. Stryder - I think the other two artists you reference are fine. I've read and enjoyed their work. They know what they are doing. Burnham by comparison looks like a talented fan. I have zero issue with cartoony, but woukd argue that cartoony is usually incredibly constructed. Burnham doesn't just have issues wuth anatomy - his design decisions are bizarre. Why would Robin have a massive Jay Leno chin in the first place? Surely you eant to convey some sort of youthful essence there, especially when compared to Batman, but instead he makes Robin look like he's in his thirties. He's not even thinking about these characters!

  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

  9. OH hey I felt bad last night I totally forgot my #1 artist Ken Rocafort! They delay Superman #17 one little week :D

    Anyway you guys both clearly have excellent points that my grade 10 art class education can't argue with. I still love Chris Burnham though...his faces look amazing to's all in the expressions. Although I admit (I think you mean) Nightwing's chin in profile is a little too Leno-like for me. Other than that, though, your complaints are meaningless to me. I don't care about the anatomy in his artwork any more than I would while watching the Simpsons or I don't know, Adventure Time or something...because that super-accurate style isn't what he's aiming for! Whether he's CAPABLE of it or not, I don't need someone with more training I guess to know that...but to the layman who just reads a lot of comics (aka ME) it looks great!

  10. I do think that is the mistake that fans often make though. And why many young artists aren't critical of their own work. It's exactly because they see things like Simpsons and Adventure Time and go - "well they're not worried about anatomy so why should I be?" But the thing is, shows like Simpsons and Adventure Time are very much interested in anatomy. Those cartoon styles are very constructed and designed not only to create a character with an appropriate look and feel, but also ensuring that they function in the world around them. They do a lot of construction work underneath the characters to keep them feeling consistent and only exaggerate or break convention for a reason. They know the rules before they break them so when they deviant from human form it looks like a stylistic choice rather than an error.

    I'll give you a different example. Charlie Brown should be the easiest character to draw right? I mean look at his face, it's just a blob with a few dots and lines. And yet he's incredibly difficult to draw properly - not only will you struggle to get the proportions but you will have trouble getting that simple face to emote and you will never capture the fragile, effortless line work of Schulz. To dismiss it as "oh well that's just cartoony so there's no rules" misses the point for me. I think cartoonists are very disciplined and skilled and the good ones can convey very complex ideas with a couple of lines.

    I respect that this criticism of Burnham is meaningless to you, but as a comics enthusiast myself I find it sad that this kind of fan art getting published contributes to why comics are meaningless to 99% of the population.