How can a Catwoman movie have nothing to do with Batman?? Why call it Catwoman. Why not make a movie about...I dunno...Mistress Meow.

Call me (I'm on the right).... Mistress Meow!

How can a Catwoman movie have nothing to do with Batman?? Why call it Catwoman. Why not make a movie about...I dunno...Mistress Meow.

Because the executives have been digging into the monkey crack again?

The only thing I can see is that because they are doing a new Batman movie they want to avoid any confusion/link between the two.

That, or Halle demanded it for some reason.

I rarely ever like comic book novels.

I get a kick out of Elliot S! Maggin's stuff. His Superman books Last Son of Krypton and Miracle Monday are good cheesy fun. And his novelization of Kingdom Come was good as well.

It is -- sadly -- but isn't it bound to be better than the movie? I mean, it couldn't possibly be worse, right?

You've never read any of Alan Dean Foster's novellizations, have you?

You've never read any of Alan Dean Foster's novellizations, have you?

Damn you for those flashbacks, Sean! Damn you to the Hell of A Billion Hack Writers!

Hey, I had to live through those same flashbacks just to type up that post.

Okay, newbie questions:

• I keep seeing references to Gotham Knights. Are earlier issues of these collected anywhere?
1. Is there a good place for actual Bverse comics analysis out there? So far this thread has been a bit scattered -- more reaction than theory, which is fine, it dragged me into this despite my great reluctance and a prejudiced conviction that superhero comics are inherently silly unless Alan Moore is writing them. But you all know I'm a theory geek.

   I looked at Usenet, but the signal-to-noise ratio and the indignant fanboy reactions got to me.

At some point, I need to post about coming to the Bverse family this late and from a set of books which focus on minor characters, so that Batman/Bruce is an absent center, sometimes invisible and apparently irrelevant, and sometimes suddenly dominating the characters' head space. It's interesting, not least because without a firmer grip on Batman, I have no idea how much of the characters' reaction to him is projection and how much is observation. Yeah, yeah, character interpretation is always subjective, but ... more of an idea of how Batman sees himself may turn out useful. We'll see.

So far I've been surprised at some of the issues that have been dealt with, which I'd expected to be swept under the rug as story-telling precepts: the privacy issues in Oracle's powers, however lightly touched on, and the moral and practical questioning of the effects of vigilantism on law enforcement. The last is foregrounded in the first Gotham Central trade, and I think it's an interesting undercurrent in the current Nightwing arc.

But looking at the Nightwing commentary out there while having only read Devin Grayson's run on the character makes me feel like I'm going to be stepping into a mine field like a new Spike fan who started watching BtVS with "Bargaining."

actual Bverse comics analysis out there?

Here's my analysis -- the Batman: fucked-up, yo; the Joker: his worldview actually makes sense; Jim Gordon: tough as nails.

t /me = smart-ass

the Joker: his worldview actually makes sense

Really? What worldview?