you've said all that you need to say, brother! spot on!!

The Bane part of his plan was to emotionally destroy Bruce and make him more willing to stop being Batman and be his son again. Hence the line "You were defeated. Broken. Body and soul. That's behind you. In Gotham. Now, here it is time to rebuild. To show them how strong you really are. Son. My little boy. You don't have to worry anymore. About anything. Your father's got you." Notice he says to rely on his father when he says rebuild himself? He is manipulating Bruce emotionally into

thinking his whole life spent as Batman was a waste and that he could have the chance to make it all good again by having his parents back. A plan I believe Batman would not go along with, without his mental breakdown. At the end Batman says "I remember the blood, the pearls. Knowing I would never see you again. I was too... difficult. I... forsook my life. I surrendered to a vow. And now what was that worth?" And then Thomas encourages that mindset with peptalk.

(Also I still don't entirely buy that it is Thomas. I still can't get over that Hush took his spot in the gang in Batman #72's Flashback.)

But the problem with that is Bruce's craziness is not crazy at all. No one believes him, sure, but he's remained on point about Bane. So that leads me to believe that his judgment, while strained, is still very much there.

Plus, Bruce knows Thomas worked with Bane to help break him. That would further strain the relationship they have. Why not help defeat Bane with his son, reconnecting with him, and then pull the Weekend at Bernie's with Martha's corpse?

Why approach the emotional manipulation from such an antagonistic angle, unlike most emotional manipulators would?

His end goal is to have a family again, he is going about it in the stupidest way possible. So you better be right about the Hush thing or this Thomas Wayne Batman is a chump.

I think everything is quite stupid here. Bruce is a grown up man, so I don’t think emotional manipulation by a mass murderer would work here. King writes Bruce as a fragile personality, but while Bruce has issues, he never is so weak as written here. And point also is: everything Bane did to him is forced& unbelievable.

That’s why you guys are delusional, you only think Batman can be written one way. Humans are irrational in behavior, and Bruce is human it doesn’t matter what someone else thinks when it’s not genuine.

Bruce is that special kind of human that can have their back broken only for it to be healed within a few days.

I don't think he can only be written one way, but by the logic of this series' characterization of him, it still doesn't really work. But the characterization is dependant on the story King wants to tell at that moment, so no wonder it's inconsistent.

Me neither, but he shouldn’t be written out of character& that’s exactly how he’s written in Kings run. There are so many problems with this run.

So much judgment of parts of the story that just haven't been told yet. King tweeted today that an explanation of Flashpoint Batman is coming. I honestly don't get the criticism that an unexplained thing won't be explained because it hasn't been explained YET. Did I miss the news about #73 being the last issue in King's run?

It's not so much a complaint to me. It's an annoyance. It's the only reason I'm interested in this plot line and this issue's focus. So to have to wait almost 25 issues for the answer, if not more, when in the past these answers have almost always been underwhelming and lackluster, is annoying.

Fair enough. For me I tend to wait for the end of a story before judging the story. Totally fair though to turn a story off in the middle. I do that all the time and if I were hating this run that's what I'd do. I actually love the waiting because it builds anticipation and because I've enjoyed every issue so far but everyone's opinion is equally valid.

I'm not sure which answers have been lackluster though. From my perspective really nothing has been answered yet. I get the frustration over having to wait so long for the answers and I'd feel the same if I weren't digging the book but I'm honestly confused as to what's been answered.

Everything about this entire run has been lackluster and that’s being generous.

@Batman Jones. im willing to give writers time usually, but it’s been 73 issues & there are not any answers.

73 issues and we knew from the start to expect over 100. It is probably too late for rewrites as well.

If solicits are any indicator, Tom King has definitely rewrote parts of this run. Also, maybe if the story was actually properly paced then we wouldn't be complaining about how long it is. But it's paced like shit. The Knightmares arc is the epitome of that.

Yes, I for sure didn’t complain about the length of Knightfall or No Mans Land, but those stories were better written.

It's the fact that nothing else has really happened in these 73 issues. It's all one big really lackluster storyline so far. I haven't read Knightfall yet, but I can bet it didn't have fever dream arcs. I can bet there were real fights with villains and sublots that all had their conclusions along the way. And I can bet the writer didn't tell everyone it was going to all be a fight with Bane spread over 100 issues!

Knightfall was also just a big dumb 90s' story not unlike Death of Superman. Tom King's run isn't. It is philosophical, experimental, and literary. Clearly something that divides Batman fans practically down the middle. I would understand the complaints if this were the only Batman book on the shelves, but there are so many to choose from. Why can't one of them break the mold and experiment?

(Also I like Knightfall, sorry for calling it dumb.)

(Also I do get the complaints because that book happens to be called *Batman*, so it is mainly treated as the main Batman storyline, would people care nearly as much if this was being done in a book not DC's flagship title?)

I don’t think they (we) would be as angry if it weren’t the main title.

"philosophical, experimental, and literary" are not the words I'd use to describe this run. I'd go for "pretentious, poorly constructed and sophomoric."

They are the same thing really. All philosophical or literary work gets labeled pretentious by somebody.

It reminds me of something Sam Kieth's friend said in the back of I Before E. How his and Bill Messner Loebs book Epicurus was hailed as

Well-written, philosophical, thought provoking, emotional, but also amateur and sophomoric by others.

Well, I don't know if their book was that bad, but this one definitely is.

Hear, hear, Br'er

I just wanted to start my riot, when you said Knightfall is dumb lol I’ve read works of real philosophers& Kings Batman run is not philosophical. I assure you, rather pseudo philosophical. And can you blame people? Batman is one of the most important comic runs of DC, it’s canon& King clearly doesn’t know how to write these characters. He doesn’t know them, so of course fans are upset, since Batman run defines the characters. If King wanted to experiment he could have done black label.

However he clearly isn’t talented enough for writing an important run like Batman. Maybe he’s Didios lover, I can’t find another explanation, why he has so many freedoms in DC.

i'm definitely in agreement with Darkseid24 here. Batman is DC's biggest cash cow, and they handed it to someone that doesn't understand or respect the character or his mythology. he's too busy breaking the character down, to the point of not being recognizable anymore. and he never shows the slightest inkling that he'll ever build him back up. Batman is supposed to be the ideal. the peak of human performance both physically and mentally. but NOT Tom King's Batman. his Batman is pathetic.

Agreed. And it seems most of modern writers have no respect for the characters.