So, if you were to build a time capsule with the definitive collections of Batman, Superman, etc. books, which ones would make the cut? The idea is to be as definitive as possible, so this could mean including tales that you might not particularly enjoy -- for example, The Death & Return of Superman storyline is probably one of the most famous of in his history, so it might merit inclusion.

The other thing is to list actual HCs, TPBs, and printed books instead of just storylines. This would be something a library could actually order for their collection.

So since I'm on a Batman kick, I might as well start with him --

• Batman Archives Vol. 1 (or Batman Chronicles Vol. 1 would suffice)
• Batman: The Dynamic Duo Archives Vol. 1
• The Greatest Batman Stories Ever Told
• Batman: Tales of the Demon
• Batman: Strange Apparitions
• Batman: Son of the Demon
• Batman: Year One
• The Dark Knight Returns
• The Killing Joke
• Batman: Arkham Asylum
• Batman: Venom
• Batman: Ten Nights of the Beast
• Batman: A Death in the Family
• Batman: A Lonely Place of Dying
• Batman: Knightfall
• Batman: Knightsend
• Batman: Mad Love
• Batman: The Long Halloween
• Batman: Hush
• Batman & Son
• Batman Incorporated
• Batman: The Court of Owls*

*Haven't read it yet but the acclaim alone puts it on the list; I think Long Halloween is terrible but it's so popular it must be on there.

I don't think I know enough about comics post-1988 to do this. Great idea, though.

It's hard to go wrong with your list of Batman, really. I'd take off that garbage Arkham Asylum and put on Bruce Wayne: Murderer. Oh, and the Man Who Laughs, one of the best Joker stories ever.

Maybe add the upcoming Len Wein collection, too. Gotta have The Untold Legend Of The Batman in there somewhere.

Two wrongs and a right. You were so close to being right. Or at least, neutral.

No we don't.

Arkham Asylum is a gorgeous painted disaster of incomprehensibility. In other words, it's a fine example of Grant Morrison's worst excesses.

Actually, it is a great example of an artist just not giving a f--k about what the writer asked him to draw.

Is it? I think it's pretty ugly, but well done for the style the artist was going for. I wasn't aware there were difficulties. I bought it on my first trip to what became my LCS for 20 years.

I had that mass market paperback as a kid and absolutely loved it! I remember being amped to get that from Scholastic because I was dying to know Batman's origin after the movie (at that age, I knew the movie origins and the comic origins were different since Superman: The Movie).

If they ever published it to a full size TPB, it would definitely be in there. Alas, it's only available in this tiny mass market paperback (though I did buy the actual issues a few years ago; I should bust that out and read it again)...



http://www.amazon.com/dp/0812503538/?tag=imwan-20

Despite owning it for years, I still have yet to read it! I put it on there because I understand it's a perennial best seller for the Batman trades. It's often listed as one of the best Batman yarns out there.

I can't find this collection on Amazon, not even for a pre-order.

The first time I read, I thought that it was, indeed, a "gorgeous painted disaster of incomprehensibility", then a few years later someone gave me the 20th Anniversary HC that included the script and I was really surprised. Sure, it was still pretentious but McKean practically treated the script as a loose guideline that could be easily ignored.

Roger Stern posted the details. It said December 2014.

Maybe that's why he's now known primarily as a cover artist.

I don't know. A lot of people praised his art in AA, and I don't think Morrison had much influence back then.

But yeah, he should stick to covers.

It's called Tales of the Batman: Len Wein and it includes The Untold Legend of the Batman.

Though it may be a prank on those poor souls who are Len Wein fans.

I thought parts of it looked amazing, even if it didn't work for me as a whole. I disliked the way he painted the Joker and thought it could use some more detail in most places. But I recognize it was the look he was going for, and it was well done.

I thought he failed as a sequential artist, though.

I haven't looked at it in years, but I remember the art being the part of the book I liked.

That's true, in that most pages had no sequential logic to them. The style is more what I was referring to. I just don't care for it, although a lot of people must, given his success as the Sandman cover guy.