Customer Reviews

Batman: Fortunate Son

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(9)

 

 

Batman: Fortunate Son, written by Gerard Jones and illustrated by Gene Ha, was originally published as a one-shot in 1999. The story concerns a rock and roll superstar who gets visited by a quasi-Elvis, then goes across the country committing crimes and fomenting rebellion.

Jones plays on the generation gap between Batman and Robin - Batman hates rock music, Robin is a brainless fanboy. Both characters come across as thoroughly one-dimensional. The dialogue throughout is terrible. It's unbelievably bad. Corny, too.

Ha's art is decent, although he runs into trouble communicating what's actually going on during some action scenes.

Batman: Fortunate Son is a silly, ridiculous hodge-podge of a story, riddled with clichés and puns. It cannot be taken seriously on any level, and it must rank with the worst Batman stories ever written.

Some Batman graphic novels are little more than entertaining, but this book lacks even the thinnest shred of fun, excitement, or creativity. Yes, the illustrations in the book are unique, and in some panels quite impressive. But this is still my least favorite Batman graphic novel ever. The dialogue is poor and the lyrics (which occur all too frequently) are horrible. But beyond poor writing, this story does worse things. It violates Batman/Bruce Wayne's history (and intelligence) by adding a ridiculous back-story about when he was sucked into the world of rock. It attempts to create tension between Batman and Robin that just makes them both look like morons. It insults rock fans. And it plays with mock versions of rock icons such as Elvis and Jimi Hendrix who deserve way more in terms of character and who should have been (out of respect) not included in this absolute waste of graphic literature. Awful.

This really has to be the worst Batman book I've read. It's just plaing boring. The entire premise is ridiculous and there's a total lack of what makes Batman, Batman. The whole idea that Batman needs to learn about rock music to defeat evil is just plain stupid. Plus, Robin is going to leave Batman because they disagree on whether a rocker who blew up a music video studio did it of his own free will or not. The entire premise of the story is so unlike any Batman story that's come before it in a very bad way. The only intriguing part of this book is the artwork. Most of it is normal fair. What really caught my attention was the way the artist drew the eyes of the characters. The artwork on the masks of Batman and Robin really humanizes the characters as you can actually see their eyes, as opposed to the usual white slits. If you like pretty pictures get the book. If you're looking for a good story with a well thought out plot, character development, and a story that belongs in a Batman book, look somewhere else.

God forbid,you bought this sucker new when it was released.It's a waste of paper,pen,binding,and brain cells.The writing is ludicrous.The art is disappointing.Coloring is jarring.Read,or rather purchase,at your own risk.

I won't say much for this story, so I will keep it simple. Of all of my Batman Trade Paperbacks, Batman: Fortunate Son is definitely my least favorite. The story is mainly about whether or not Rock & Roll is a bad influence, in this story, we see Batman and adults criticizing Rock & Roll, and Robin (Dick Grayson) and young teenagers loving the music. Though, I actually did not see much of a debate in this story, I felt more like the story was Only bashing the Rock & Roll genre of music, and their artists and bands. Such as Elvis Presley, who they constantly portray as being some sort of drunk devil. I found it to be very disrespectful and absolutely hate the Story, the only reason I had picked it up was to fill in my Batman Collection, because I love Batman, but this story will never be picked up and read by me, again. Or, at least, no where in the near future.

If you're looking for a good Batman story to pick up and read, please, please, Please, do not pick this story up. I would not recommend it to anyone! If you're a die-hard Batman fan and need this for your collection like I did, than fine, pick it up, BUT I would not recommend paying over $10 for it! I purchased my hardcover edition which was in great condition for only $3. So don't rush into buying this, unless you find yourself a deal.

Seriously?!!? How on earth did this get past the drunken brainstorming stage? Here's the plot, Batman and Robin seriously argue over a "Rock 'N Roll" singer and whether he's bad for society while his evil manager manipulates him into craziness. We get a flashback to Bruce's early pre-Batman days and see why he hates punk music. And spoiler.......the manager is Elvis Pressley's (or the DC version) twin brother!! I can't believed I just typed that. Ridiculous stuff that would have been hilarious if it wasn't meant to be serious. The art by Gene Ha was decent despite Batman super pointy ears. Overall, there is no reason to read this unless you just don't believe that it actually exists.

If for some reason you've already purchased this book and haven't read it yet, let me urge you to just flip through and look at the art without so much as glancing at the text. Otherwise, the artwork alone can't justify the one.

I've read a lot of graphic novels (both Batman and otherwise) from the sublime to the silly, and this was without a doubt the absolute worst I've ever read.

Just to give you a sense of how inane this one is, the main "antagonist" is a rock musician famous for a song about not getting what he ordered a fast-food restaurant, and features a scene in which Batman researches the history of rock music in order to get inside the guitarist's head -- all played straight-faced so you can't even enjoy it for camp value.

Gerard Jones has written decent stuff before, but this ain't it. (I just read Green Lantern: The Road Back last night. Although not the best GL I've ever read by a long shot, it was quite enjoyable. I was shocked to see that it was written by the guy behind Fortunate Son.) This is the only time I ever seriously considered just throwing a comic away when I was done with it rather than re-shelving it or trying to sell it.

Stay away.

Everything about this book "says" magizine format, yet, DC rips the reader of with a hardbound. I keep it, and would buy it regardless, because I collect the hardbound graphic novels.

The story is for the 12-14 year old male who loves "rock" music and in some way wants to feel validated about his musical taste. It is mostly a generation gap story where both Batman and Robin understand eachother a little bit more at the end of the book.

The art work is average and the story better suited for a price of two bucks. If it sold at the magazine news stand price, it would be worth. But a hardbound book is like going to the movies after a matinee. You pay full price because it is worth it. This book is more liek the ABC movie of the week. Little investment for a little enjoyment.

If you are buying this book as a gift, get it for a boy 12-14, in to rock music and Batman. He will give it a big "thumbs up." But to everyone else, who is a Batman fan, get something else.

You have bad comic books. You have comic books that some people like that you don't like. And then, you have Batman: Fortunate Son.

This is truly the Worst Comic Book Ever in the History of Ever.

Here's the story, in a nutshell. Drugs are bad. Rock and Roll is even worse. And, it is the root of all evil. Batman (drawn in this book as a laughably-long-earred donkeyman) knows this and must convince Robin (drawn in this book as a 45-year old manbaby).

Honestly, there is so much bad in this book that it would take too long to list it all. 1000000000% zero logic is used by any of the characters in the book. Some of the illogical and just plain bad things that do happen include:
1. Tons of crimes are being committed by the music legend in the story as Robin constantly insists the music legend is "framed" and "innocent."
2. Batman decides the best way to solve a part of the "mystery" is to spend a few hours at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame learning everything there is to learn about the evil Rock and Roll music.
3. Batman uses such witty dialogue as, "Punk is the Beast!"
4. Batman and Robin stop in at Arkham to find out which Rock musician each of the Rogue Gallery liked the best.

Man, I could go on and on listing 5 - infinity reasons why this comic sucks.

But in summary, simply know that this is without a doubt the worst TPB Batman comic I have ever read. Ever. The only reason you should ever read this book is to remind yourself of how truly bad a comic can be.

When I was about eight years old, I wrote a Batman comic with crayons. It was very short, the art was bad, and Batman and Robin simply went after the Joker. That's it.

Batman: Forunate Son is INFINITELY worse than the comic I just described writing when I was eight. The writing is worse, the depictions of Batman and Robin are barely better than what an eight year old would draw....

I'm rambling here. But, I'm really just trying to drive home the point (in as many ways possible) that there is NO Batman book worse than this one. Ever. Period. And, I doubt anyone will ever write one worse.

Ever in the History of Ever.

This reads like the writer(s) took Greil Marcus and a VH-1 documentary, put them in a blender and then connected the dots into a lameass story. I found myself cringing at every page. Elvis is such a hackneyed reference (if Cher uses Elvis as a refernce point that should be a clue to leave it alone) that its hard to do right. Also irritating were the none-to-veiled references. Why the hell not just go ahead and quote? Its part of popular culture, and later on in the story names are named, so the Joycean (while creative) medeley of rock and roll patois/references feels unneccesary. It also goes way beyond suspension of disbelief to throw in Sid Vicious and Nancy Spungeon as 'motivating factors' for Batman. Why not the tragedy of the loss of innocents at Altamont, or at the Cincinati Who fiasco?
The major problems with are the writing and the time it was published. The references are so stereotyped, hackneyed, and lacking in insight that it suggests that the writer(s) may not have been in touch with rock and roll, and therefore makes poor subject material for a story. You can see this is in the omission of various figures of the canon (e.g., there are more punk icons than Mr. Vicious which would have made better characters, figures in the metal and Black Metal scene who would have made striking villianous characters, and even pop and contemporary figures, such as less-veiled references to Cobain, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Jimi, Moon, Bonham, Barrett, etc (note that the list of dead rock and rollers is far from limited, yet it would appear that in Jones' world there were only 6). Even the way the people hold their guitars suggests someone unfamiliar with the art form. And the scene with all the kids singing along to the song in the woods? Very Broadway as opposed to Hammersmith.
Finally, the time this was published, 1999, seems to be 10 years too late. the subtextual themes about the vanishing middle class, the blue-collar lip of the unemployment bubble was a more appropriate theme for the Grunge backdrop of late 80s early 90s. There would have been more fuel for Cobain tie-ins and more of a cultural support in the unifying power of rock and roll as a revolutionary enegery. By 1999 rock and roll was dead but only Marilyn Manson claimed the body (and promptly molested it). Rock had become a plastic boner band with all the revolutionary power of a jiggly dildo. The net result is that, in 1999 when this was published, the very ideas that form the core of the narrative were already passe, given way to posse and the exploitation of the other p that people were down with. The story was dead when it hit the water, and kept sinking.
Bottom line: even the most obsessive Batfans will be thankful to leave this out of the library, leave it on the subway, or better yet, under my wheels.