Customer Reviews

Batman Year Two (Fear the Reaper)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

"Batman: Year Two; Fear the Reaper" consists of issues #575-578 of "Detective Comics," which originally appear in 1987. The story follows "Batman: Year One" by Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli, but is not really a sequel although it is consistent with the spirit of revisionist continuity inspired by Miller's "The Dark Night Returns." The four issues are written by Mike W. Barr with different combinations of pencillers and inkers (Alan Davis and Paul Neary on the first issue, Todd McFarlane and Alfredo Alcala on the middle pair, with McFarlane inking his own pencils on the last one), which makes for quite a change from star to finish on the artwork.

Barr's goal in this story line is try and make sense of the early years of Batman, guided by the modern version of the character. Specifically Barr was interested in exploring Batman's relationship with the new Gotham City police commissioner James Gordon and answer the big question as to why Batman does not carry a gun. Barr also revisits the fate of Joe Chill, the murderer of Thomas and Martha Wayne, who was originally killed by other criminals when he admits he is the one who inspired the Batman (they also shoot him before he can tell them Batman's secret identity). Clearly that is too impersonal a finale for Chill and Barr takes care of that in these stories. Barr also goes back to the beginning and works in Leslie Thompkins into the Batman mythos.

The other significant development is that Barr takes the DC Golden Age villain the Grim Reaper and makes him not only Batman's predecessor as Gotham City's resident vigilante, but also the representation of the road not taken with regards to how Batman fights criminals. The Reaper's genesis parallels that of Batman, with the key difference that it might have been what Thomas Wayne would have done under slightly different circumstances (which, of course, creates a whole father-son paradigm for the Reaper and Batman, which is totally reinforced by who the Reaper turns out to be).

"Batman: Year Two" does indeed revisit the death of Joe Chill and provide a different context for essentially the same fate, but I have to admit that I was a bit disappointed because with our modern perspectives on the Batman as a comic book superhero I was convinced Barr was going to have Batman step over the line. However, that was not the payoff for this story. Still, the revisionist continuity offered serves its purpose and makes this worth reading for fans of the Dark Knight.

While the Batman: Year Two storyline from 1987 is not tied to Batman: Year One in any way other than chronologically, it is hard not to compare it to Year One. Released earlier that year, Frank Miller and David Mazzuchelli's Year One storyline was nothing short of a masterpiece, and redefined the origin of the Batman. Following in those footsteps could not have been easy for the folks behind Year Two.

Writer Mike Barr crafts a tale in which a young Batman encounters the Reaper, a vigilante killer who terrorized Gotham's criminals decades earlier. Meanwhile Bruce Wayne begins a romantic relationship with a woman who turns out to be the Reaper's daughter. In his quest to end the Reaper's comeback, Batman chooses to work with the mafia, who assign one of their top hitmen to work with Batman. The man is none other than Joe Chill, the mugger who killed Bruce Wayne's parents!

There's enough going for the story that it could have been a real winner. Unfortunately the handling is a bit sloppy. The dialogue is over the top at times, even by comic book standards, and coming so soon after Year One, Batman fans couldn't help but expect better. There are also some plot points that defy logic. Batman resorting to using the very gun that killed his parents is perhaps believable, but to do so after a single loss to the Reaper? Is Batman that much of a quitter? Since when does a single loss make the most driven character in all of comics take the easy way out? Bruce Wayne's sudden willingness to abandon his war on crime in favor of marriage to a woman he just met also stretches belief.

The artwork is better than average, and helps redeem Year Two somewhat. The first part was drawn by Alan Davis, who would go on to successful runs on Excalibur and Uncanny X-Men. The final three issues feature artwork from a young Todd McFarlane. Remember way back when he used to draw comic books? His work here isn't as good as his later Spider-Man work, but it is still pretty dynamic, particularly when it comes to Batman and the Reaper's huge flowing capes. Unfortunately his pencils were hampered by sub-par inking until the final issue, when he inked his own work. Still, when compared to David Mazzuchelli's unique take on Batman and Gotham City, both artists fall short.

In 1991, Barr and Davis revisited the Year Two storyline in a prestige format one-shot called Full Circle, which is also included in this trade paperback. The story took a look at the legacy left by the events of Year Two. It suffered from many of the same weaknesses as the original story, but Alan Davis's more mature artwork was a big improvement.

On its own merits, Batman: Year Two is a decent Batman story. The problem is that it brings to mind Batman: Year One, which is superior in every possible way.

NOTE: While Year Two was something of a disappointment, some of the better elements of the story were incorporated into the excellent animated movie Batman - Mask of the Phantasm (Keepcase).

I won't spend too much time discussing the quality of Batman: Year Two, save to say that while it doesn't have the charm or quality of Year One(a tough act to follow), it is well-written and has fantastic art. It also provides the Batman mythology with an intriguing villain culled from the Golden Age of DC Comics: The Reaper.

While The Batman has always had one of the best rogues galleries in comics, there's always room for one more, and I'm disappointed that The Reaper hasn't been revived somehow since this tale. FYI, The Reaper inspired the Phantasm character from the excellent "Batman: Mask of the Phantasm" animated film, as did the overall Year Two storyline.

There are also rumors now that the new Batman film may also be inspired by Year Two, with a young Batman going up against The Reaper. If this is the case, "Batman Year Two: Fear the Reaper" may become a hot item. Whether this proves true or not, I highly recommend this story.

The main problem with 'Batman: Year Two', it was clear to me from the start, is its title. Once a book is defined as a sequel, it demands a comparison to the original, and if anything is to be compared to 'Batman: Year One', there's no chance it won't disappoint.

The fact of the matter is, other than the events depicted being more or less a chronological follower, 'Fear The Reaper' has absolutely nothing to do with Frank Miller's masterpiece. Quite frankly, there's no reason it should be expected to. The 'artistic revolution' DC Comics were having during the late 80s has become so famous, that it's easy to forget that most comics released by mainstream publishers at the time was not in the level of Frank Miller, Alan Moore or Grant Morrison; they were extremely exceptional individuals within the field at the time.

It's important to remember that 'Year Two', unlike classics like 'The Dark Knight Returns', 'Year One', 'The Killing Joke' and even Barr's own 'Son of the Demon', was released not as an individual publication but as part of the regular monthly run of 'Detective Comics'. Bear in mind that the monthly publications were much more limited than a one-time release; first and foremost, those publications were still under the constraints of the Comic Book Code, gradually losing its grip though it was. Compare 'Year Two' to 'Son of the Demon', written by the same writer in the very same year; it's easy to see how much more restrained he had to be for 'Year Two'.

That's not the only clear difference you can find in comparing the two: with no computers, the art in the monthly issues in that time couldn't have possibly looked as good as a graphic novel like 'Son of the Demon', which was months at work. Making that comparison would be like comparing 'The Killing Joke' to its chronological follow-up, 'A Death in the Family'. Instead, 'Year Two' should be compared to monthly Batman comics published in the same period of time, by writers like Danny O'Neil and Jim Starlin. In that light, you can get a whole different perspective on it.

This means, if you're only looking for truly deep quality comics, you won't find it here; in fact, you won't find it in any monthly publication by DC Comics and Marvel up to the early 90s, and even then it's rare. 'Year One' is a classic and a masterpiece; 'Year Two' is far from it. If, however, you're a fan of the superhero genre by its own right, and of Batman in particular, 'Year Two' is well worth picking up. It's a classic Batman adventure, with good writing, some excellent action scenes, and well-written villains, and it also fills some important holes in the Batman history, which makes it important for anyone truly interested in the Dark Knight (the conclusion for the Joe Chill story suggests a somewhat different outcome then the one given in Batman #47 - 'The Origin of the Batman' - but it's close enough in principle). For the true comics buff, it might also be interesting to see early samples of artwork by Todd McFarlane - creator of Spawn and one of the originators of Image Comics - some years before he achieved fame and fortune.

'Year Two', as said before, is certainly not an essential on any shelf, but it's a worthy addition to any respectable collection of Batman comics, and a fun bit of action and adventure. Check it out.

I give one star for Todd's artwork, but this comic stinks. Maybe it's unfair to compare this with Frank Miller's brilliant Year One. So I won't. All things being equal, this is just a bad comic. For some reason they seek to answer the question: why doesn't Batman use guns? The answer: who cares? This is just a series of bad ideas wrapping up with an ending that makes you wonder why you bothered with this in the first place. One of the worst Batman books I've read.

This trade paperback collects two related storylines: BATMAN YEAR TWO, from DETECTIVE COMICS #575 - 578, and the one-shot BATMAN: FULL CIRCLE. While it may seem natural to combine these into one book, they don't go together very well in terms of story quality.

The unfortunately named BATMAN YEAR TWO immediately invites comparisons with Miller and Mazuchelli's BATMAN YEAR ONE, and in this regard, it doesn't hold up; however, it is a fairly engaging story. In the second year of Bruce Wayne's war on crime, he is confronted with the return of The Reaper, a crime fighter from Gotham's past. The problem is, this Reaper is little different from the criminal element in Gotham City, and so Batman works both with and without the police department to bring him in. The quest to bring down the Reaper causes no small share of problems in the life of Bruce Wayne, and by the end of the story, Batman has been put through the ringer. While Mike Barr is not my favorite Batman writer, he does a good job of keeping the plot focused. The art chores for BATMAN YEAR TWO begin with Alan Davis, one of the best in the biz, doing only one issue, with justly-maligned Todd McFarlane picking up parts 2 - 4. Artwise, the first two parts of McFarlane's work are actually pretty good, but this is due more to the skilled inking of Alfredo Alcala than to any talent of Mr. McFarlane. This can be clearly seen in part 4, where McFarlane flies solo - trust me, it shows. If I have any complaint story-wise, I'd say that Batman seems far too capable and confident. Even after a year on the job, I wouldn't expect him to be this resourceful.

Next is BATMAN: FULL CIRCLE, a completely unworthy follow-up prestige format tale by Barr & Davis. In this story, the Reaper has again returned, spreading fear throughout Gotham and playing with Batman Batman must confront the secrets of his parents' murders once again - at the risk of his own sanity (yawn!). This story was by no means up to par with Year Two; in fact, it was very trite and boring, with all kinds of inexplicable developments that were conveniently explained as having happened either during or as a result of YEAR TWO.

So, this trade collection starts with a bang and ends with a whimper. You may be better off if you can find the original trade collection of BATMAN YEAR TWO, which omits the FULL CIRCLE story. It certainly works better that way.

This graphic novel is supposed to be the sequel to the famous batman year one but it is just not as gripping. It is way more gruesome and violent and the story is ok. The art can be a little hard to get and the story may have to be read a few times over to be understood.

This tale of Batman's second year on the job has the unfortunate title of Batman: Year Two. This, of course is a take off of Frank Miller seminal Year One storyline. Sadly for the creators here, there will be comparisons. Miller's story is remembered as one of the best while this story likely won't be remembered. If so, not for good reasons. The biggest problem here is characters acting completely unlike themselves. Batman falling for a woman in two panels and professing his love is insane. The villain wasn't out of the ordinary yet Batman thought he would somehow have no choice but to work with Joe Chill, the man who killed his parents. This doesn't make sense on so many different levels. Wow! Then the zaniness continues in weird familial ways that I can't type without fits of laughter and that isn't what Barr was going for. The art was pretty good for the time especially given what they had to work with. Neither Davis nor McFarlane are known for their Batman work but this is good. Overall, this is just an implausibly bad story with pretty good art. Skip it.

Not a bad Batman story. I am not quite sure if it follows in the continuity placed by the comics anymore because of the zero hour storyline but it is a good read nonetheless.

As the title suggests, this story takes place during the second year of Batman's crimefighting career. At the start of the story, Jim Gordon has recently been elected Commissioner and the mobs that had such a large foothold in Year One and Long Halloween are ancient history. Batman's adversary this time around is the ghostly masked vigilante called the Reaper. He started out with motives similar to Batman, but he has now become a psychotic killer. The guy that killed Batman's parents is also back, the mob has hired him to take Reaper out. This answers two questions common asked by freshman Bat-fans: Why doesn't Batman use a gun, and why has he taken an oath to never kill anyone. And it sort of answers the question, why does he seem to avoid serious relationships with women. As a special bonus, we have artwork by Spawn creator Todd McFarlane. My only gripe is that NONE of the traditional enemies appear. Two-Face or Catwoman could've easily have made a supporting appearance. All in all, a good read, and when combined with Y1 and TLH, fits into the larger tapestry of Batman's earlier years, taking place after TLH but before it's forthcoming followup, Dark Victory.