Batman-Online.com

After reading DocLathropBrown's 75th anniversary feature, I figured it was about time this story got its own thread.


Surely every Batman fan has read it at some point. I first read it back in primary school, not long after the first trade paperback edition was published. More recent editions have included the Vengeance of Bane one-shot at the beginning, but the copy I first read didn't. It does help if you've read the relevant prelude materials before embarking on the main story. And by 'relevant prelude materials' I mean:

•   Batman: Venom (1991)
•   Batman: Vengeance of Bane (1993)
•   Batman: Sword of Azrael (1993)

A couple of other significant stories which aren't included in the collected editions:

'Killer's Bane' (Batman #489, February 1993): The fateful encounter between Bane and Killer Croc, during which the former breaks the latter's arms. Also the issue in which Jean-Paul Valley first dons the batsuit, only to be dismissed by Bane as an imposter. This is why Jean-Paul is so keen to prove himself against Bane later in the saga.


'Who Riddled the Riddler?' (Batman #490, March 1993): Bane injects the Riddler with Venom, giving Batman an early taste of what the super steroid can do. The issue ends with Bane and his gang planning the Arkham breakout. If you ever wondered why the Riddler has his arm in a sling after he breaks out of Arkham, it's because he got shot in this issue.

While it helps to have read these stories, they're by no means essential. I always think of Knightfall as being the Batman equivalent of the 'Death of Superman' storyline. Partly because they were published within a year of each other, but mainly because they both show the hero meeting their match against an insurmountable physical adversary. That said, I definitely rate Knightfall a lot higher than the Death of Superman.

What does everyone else think about this one?

The first volume particularly - the Arkham breakout right up to Batman's defeat, is magical. One of the best Batman tales out there. A nice pace that sustains interest, and coated in doom. When Bane is portrayed closely to this comic, he's one of the best Batman villains. That's why the Arkham Origins Bane is probably the second best, after this one. Knightfall is indeed the 'Death of Superman' equivalent, but for my money, much better. The villain is strong, but smart and calculating. Not just punching everything in sight, ala Doomsday. Knightfall exemplifies the never give up, defiant go-it alone nature of Batman. He won't stop until the job is done. And that's why he's destined to die in combat.

I have Vengeance of Bane 1 & 2. I love Venom and always meant to get a copy for myself (my friends brother had all the issues and TPB before I got into collecting).

I know guys that really don't rate Bane as a villain, but I think that when done right (like in the stories mentioned and Bane of the Demon) he is better than the 1trick pony everyone thinks of.

Agreed, Paul. I like Bane to be his own man with men at his disposal, and with elements of military weapons and vehicles. In Knightfall this is the rocket launchers used to penetrate Arkham. Bane uses a rocket launcher in Origins too. It is bizarre the character is so readily betrayed with the dumb, hulking brute characterisation when the original intention was the exact opposite. Mind and muscle in tandem, being an extremely well read guy. Patient, strong and wise from living life in prison. TDK Rises wasn't really a good advertisement of the character - I found it to be a confused translation of what should be his strengths. It is clear the writers aren't sure what to do with Bane post back breaking Batman - but getting the characterisation right is a start.

That's the problem. When you have a character as strong and intelligent as Bane, how can the hero repeatedly overcome them? In many ways Bane represents Batman's supreme challenge. Perhaps even more so than the Joker. But from a dramatic standpoint, the challenge can seem lessened if it's overcome too many times. I think that's what happened with Bane. Initially he was this terrifying adversary that left Bruce broken and traumatised. But over the years he seems to have lost his drive. He's become a more passive player in Gotham. And that makes me wonder if maybe they should have killed him off after the Bane of the Demon storyline?

One of the things I love about the first half of Knightfall is the way Bruce is worn down in the run up to the big fight. He's already exhausted and recovering from an illness at the beginning, and from there things just get worse. In his weakened state he has to take on Mad Hatter, Amygdala, Zsasz, Joker and a bunch of other villains. And then he has to confront Bane, his toughest opponent. You feel exhausted just reading it. I watched The Dark Knight Rises again last week, and I found myself wishing the Blackgate breakout had occurred before the Batman-Bane fight. I'd have liked to have seen some of that exhaustion in the movie, with Batman wearing himself out tackling minor enemies before going up against Bane.

I always think of it as being the Batman equivalent of Rocky III (1982), with Bane representing Clubber Lang. In both stories the hero is broken, physically and mentally. But that makes it all the more satisfying when they return, stronger and wiser, to settle the score with their enemy.

Yes, it is. He knows Bruce's secret and where he lives. There's only so much you can do with such plots before it becomes repetitive and ineffective. I think there's a way to have him deadly without reducing his effectiveness. In Arkham Origins, he beats Batman down and only lets him off the hook when a police gunship arrives, forcing him to flee. Writing like that perhaps. There's got to be a way.

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Sun,  3 Aug  2014, 19:27
I watched The Dark Knight Rises again last week, and I found myself wishing the Blackgate breakout had occurred before the Batman-Bane fight. I'd have liked to have seen some of that exhaustion in the movie, with Batman wearing himself out tackling minor enemies before going up against Bane.

Agreed. In the movie, Bane hasn't done anything to wear Batman down. The guy is just out of practice . It's the same imagery of the comic, but without the same meaning and context behind it. And it is inferior.

The final Knightfall fight before Bane, Batman completely loses control and beats the guy hard. That was the last few drops of juice he had left, mentally and physically. When he returns to the cave, he's ready to crash in bed. That's all he wants to do. Fighting is the last thing on his mind. I like that, because it works on a variety of levels. Despite exhaustion, Batman suits up for battle one last time. He has no choice. He's afraid but brave and defiant, not suicidal. And the reader can mount the case Batman could beat Bane if fit and healthy. Because as we know, villains never play fair.

Quote from: The Dark Knight on Mon,  4 Aug  2014, 14:37The final Knightfall fight before Bane, Batman completely loses control and beats the guy hard. That was the last few drops of juice he had left, mentally and physically. When he returns to the cave, he's ready to crash in bed. That's all he wants to do. Fighting is the last thing on his mind. I like that, because it works on a variety of levels. Despite exhaustion, Batman suits up for battle one last time. He has no choice. He's afraid but brave and defiant, not suicidal. And the reader can mount the case Batman could beat Bane if fit and healthy. Because as we know, villains never play fair.

That's one of the best cliff-hangers in Batman history – when Bruce steps into Wayne Manor and sees Bane waiting for him. It's the worst possible timing for Bruce. And it's the ultimate violation of his sanctuary. The worlds of Batman and Bruce Wayne have always been separated by the Batcave. To step out of the cave and find Batman's enemies waiting for him on the other side – that's like someone leaving Narnia through the wardrobe and finding the White Witch waiting for them in the real world. It means nowhere's safe. And that's a very frightening concept.

Knightfall, for me, is the most gripping Batman story, and the story that I think best endeared the character to me beyond Michael Keaton as a kid. Knightfall was happening right when I was a 7 year old, the prime age for comic readers, and I was already a fan from the Burton films, the 60s show and TAS. But had it not been for Knightfall, I don't think I might have transitioned into the comics themselves. I was a poor child and couldn't afford many issues, but the few pieces of the story I did have just compelled me.

For Christmas the year later ( I think), I got the Denny O'Neil novelization for Christmas, so I learned the gist of the story there, but when I was finally able to track down the entire unabridged version in the actual comics, it blew my mind. Bruce's superhuman drive to survive the gauntlet Bane puts him through is the kinda thing that gives me the lasting chills.

Interestingly, I think Batman works best as a character with small stories. One-shots or two-parters at most. Truly serialized Batman stories don't tend to 'work' for me, or usually aren't tried often. But the concept of Knightfall was so strong that it's serialized much more tightly than usual Batman comics, and for once it works. The visual of the Bat logo slowly being eclipsed is one of the most iconic concepts in comic pubishing history to me, along with its shattering to reveal the Jean-Paul-designed Bat logo.

I'll never forget the first time I read Batman #497... Bane was so unabashedly wicked, Bruce so far gone... but the moment when Bruce's blood starts to boil and Bane finally draws the line, when Bruce pulls his mask back on with renewed fervor and leaps forward (expecting it to be his final battle), I about cheered, something no other comic has ever done to me. When I see that, to this day, I think "YES! THAT'S my hero!"

The 'fight' that follows is one of the saddest comics I've ever read, and it was so incredibly brave on DC's part to do. To actually have Batman (truly) lose, for the first time ever. Superman went out on his feet at least, giving as good as he got. But Bruce was about as threatening as a mouse. In the film, there's no real reason for it, but in Knightfall, it's a beautiful tragedy. The narration truly makes your eyes wet as Bruce recounts everything he's been through, and the realization that he's finally met his end, not realizing Bane wanted him to live on in crippled exile.

I think Knightfall is the most beautifully and perfectly constructed suspense event in comics. The build to #497 was masterful, with every reader on the edge of their seats. Jean-Paul's thrashing of Bane in the end is one of the most satisfying moments in comics, for him to have been so deservedly whooped. Bruce was truly avenged.

I could go on and on...

Great post, Doc. You've eloquently articulated why this is such a special story to those of us who started reading comics back in the 90s.

I find Batman fans tend to divide into two camps when it comes to Batman's level of vulnerability. There are those, like Kevin Smith, who like the invincible godlike version of Batman. Then there are those who prefer a more human and fallible interpretation. I'm definitely a fan of the second type. It's the battles which expose Batman's weaknesses that pack the most powerful dramatic punches. Be it the Knightfall battle against Bane, his failure to save Jason in A Death in the Family, or the scene in the 1989 film where he's badly injured and has to climb the cathedral to save Vicki. That's where we see his true heroism, his perseverance in the face of his own mortality and the very real possibility that he could die.

It always bothers me when people criticise Superman for being too invincible, then confidently assert that Batman could definitely beat Superman in a fight. If Superman's near-invulnerability renders his adventures boring, then how does Batman's alleged superiority to Superman affect his stories? I think we need tales like Knightfall to remind us that even the most outwardly perfect heroes can fail. And it's in those moments of failure that they best demonstrate the heroic virtue of humility.

Exactly. I love the calculated precision of Batman as much as the next guy, but when it gets to the point that Batman never loses, not even to beings far beyond him... it's as rediculous to me as Batman dancing in the 1966 series. Batman works best in his own world. I don't like him on the Justice League because he has no place there beyond a minor support role. DC has kept him there because he was there since the beginning, but they need to rethink it.

Of course, DC couldn't shake that up even if they wanted to. These are a group of fans who wrote angry protest letters when Wonder Woman cut her hair for a short story arc.  ???

Personally I like Batman to be part of a wider universe. I've never thought his lack of superpowers made him redundant amongst the Justice League. I've always liked Denny O'Neil's Iliad analogy: that Superman is Achilles, the near-invincible hero of unsurpassed physical prowess; while Batman is Odysseus/Ulysses, the strategist who relies on his wits and intellect. And ultimately it was thanks to Odysseus'/Ulysses' cunning, not Achilles' strength, that the Greeks won the Trojan War.

Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Tue,  5 Aug  2014, 22:01
I find Batman fans tend to divide into two camps when it comes to Batman's level of vulnerability. There are those, like Kevin Smith, who like the invincible godlike version of Batman. Then there are those who prefer a more human and fallible interpretation. I'm definitely a fan of the second type. It's the battles which expose Batman's weaknesses that pack the most powerful dramatic punches. Be it the Knightfall battle against Bane, his failure to save Jason in A Death in the Family, or the scene in the 1989 film where he's badly injured and has to climb the cathedral to save Vicki. That's where we see his true heroism, his perseverance in the face of his own mortality and the very real possibility that he could die.

Agreed. My favourite Batman tales tend to be the ones where he's up against it. He's a human being who encounters big challenges, but muscles through them. Or sometimes, he doesn't. He loses. But he comes back. That's why he's a hero. These stories include The Cult - captured and mentally broken. Knightfall - worn down physically by Bane. Venom - going nuts after seeking superhuman strength via convenient pills and Court of Owls - going through their labyrinth and being worn down, this time finding extra reserves to fight his way out, but barely. I like it when Batman fails at something, or when he gets something taken from him. Because he's a dark character, he will brood about it for long periods of time. He always strives to be better, and we only learn through loss.

Lately, I had been catching up with finishing my reading of Knightfall, Knightquest, KnightsEnd and I'm finishing up Prodigal. Now I want to add my two cents.

As brutalising the beatdown was, Bane's cunning plan to exhaust Batman was definitely more psychological than physical. A dirty tactical game where Batman was too distracted to think because he had to go after all of the prison escapees terrorising Gotham City. Bane forced Batman to exhaust all of his superhuman-like willpower till he was completely spent. And to add further insult to injury, Bane used his Venom to punish Batman further, and not even give him any time to think of a strategy to stop him. Despite the fact Batman was completely exhausted. On the surface, Bane was a real cheat (although then again its rare to see villains having any honour), but it showed how cruel and uncompromising he was to "break" the Bat spiritually.

Which brings to Bruce's decision to ask the unstable Jean-Paul Valley (Azrael) to become Batman. It was certainly an unwise choice by Bruce, but he was forced at hand after the ordeal Bane had put him through. I guess one could say Bruce thought Jean-Paul earned his trust by asking him that favour.

But as triumphant as Bane was, it came at a cost: he met his match in Bat-Azrael. Bat-Azrael was brutal, not one for mind games and intellect, and improved his armour to best Bane's intensity.  But the cost didn't only affect Bane, in fact, it affected Gotham City a lot more.

Mayor Krol, who Batman used all of his strength to rescue him from Joker and Scarecrow, became deeply inspired by Batman's bravery and began endorsing him while criticising Gordon and the police for their incompetence. Problem is, not only did the Mayor fail to recognise the armoured Batman was not the same man who saved him, he was completely unaware that Gotham City was becoming under threat by a lawless vigilante.

Commissioner Gordon, for the first time, expressed doubts in Batman. He and Mayor Krol never saw eye to eye, but he was a lot more dismayed over the uncharacteristic nature of Bat-Azrael and disgusted by his brutality. When he realises that this couldn't be the same Batman he had been acquainted with over the years, he was faced with a rude awakening - that he never really knew the man in the first place. We saw the trust beginning to erode, which makes it very hard to believe that's something that could ever be fixed.

Alfred was still willing to help Bruce to track down and rescue Shondra Kinsolving and Tim Drake's dad, but understandably, became fearful that Bruce was still too stubborn to risk his life once again despite his broken body and quits afterwards. Robin is caught in limbo, trying to make sense of Bat-Azrael's insanity while doing the best he can to live normally as he hopes his dad returns to safety. He's completely powerless to do anything.

Once he conquered Bane, Bat-Azrael's methods grew more volatile, anti-social and insane because of his struggles by the hallucinations as created by the System's brainwashing. It reached a breaking point where he threatened Robin out of the Batcave, even sealing him out, and his actions in letting Abattoir die had also made him responsible for failing to save Abbatoir's cousin Graham Etchison from being tortured to death. This was a massive set back after he appeared to beat the System's programming by sparing the Tally Man earlier on. . His armour became more dangerous, the cape was replaced with blade-like scallops that cuts anybody skin if they try to attack, he wears claws instead of gloves, fires bat-shurikens from his wrists that seriously injures anybody caught in the cross-hairs, and he later arms himself with guns - literally. It really does show that he's meant to be a parody of all the "extreme" comic book heroes coming out in the early 1990s. Had Jean-Paul never suffered from insanity, it definitely would've allowed Bruce Wayne to move on with his life without Batman for the first time

Perhaps the most fascinating moment for me came at the end of KnightsEnd, when Batman returns to confront Bat-Azrael at Wayne Manor. Here, Jean-Paul is definitely consumed by the image of Batman to the point he believes he is him, and Bruce is forced to admit that he created Batman, and he doesn't really exist. A shot of Batman's grimaced face after saying the second part of that sentence reveals he had to face an uncomfortable truth: that he knew Batman, on a subconscious level, was never his true face, but an image of his own making that consumed him. And while it never consumed him to the point of insanity, I get the impression that must've been the reason why he wanted Jean-Paul to remove his own mask and stop the image of the monster from destroying him any further.

I'd say more, but those were my first thoughts I wanted to share. The Knightfall saga has its strengths, but there are weaknesses too. The character themes are good, if not always executed successfully. But I definitely can't fault its ambition, it still got me to keep reading after all.

I liked that analysis. I'd nuance it a bit by adding that if Jean Paul was consumed by Batman, it was only after he'd first been consumed by Azrael.

As to Batman and Gordon's relationship, the events of Knightquest make a for a lot of water under the bridge. Gordon would have to be pushed to his breaking point to ever trust Batman again... and I think that Gotham City being ravaged by an earthquake and being cut off from (and then being abandoned by) the outside world might be enough to force Gordon to accept Batman once more. It's easy to believe, I think.

Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sat, 23 Sep  2017, 16:07
I liked that analysis. I'd nuance it a bit by adding that if Jean Paul was consumed by Batman, it was only after he'd first been consumed by Azrael.

That's true. The brainwashing had forged Jean Paul into becoming an assassin, and he did try to reform himself at times, but to no avail. The hallucinations occassionally popping up condemning him failing to fulfill his duty for the Order of St Dumas AND as the Bat certainly didn't help matters either.

Despite the psychological conundrum, Jean Paul could never have been capable of taking the mantle as Batman if he never became Azrael. Perhaps one might say his new role was both a blessing and a curse in the sense that he took Bane down but then went progressively insane from there on in. Then again, maybe Bruce would've been forced to swallow his pride and ask Dick for help instead, and everything would've ended on a much happier note. Who knows?

I think this saga added a good rationale why Batman shouldn't kill. While KnightsEnd still maintained the belief that Batman shouldn't stoop to the same level as his enemies, it made it more complex that desire for vengeance can indirectly fail to save lives. Bat-Azrael's became so bloodthirsty to stop Abbatoir that it got to the point he brushed off Graham Etchison's death as a worthwhile sacrifice, much to Batman's outrage and dismay. It does pose the question: killing a maniac is well and good...but how virtuous is it if you choose vengeance at the expense of an innocent in dire need of help? I think this should go without saying, but when Batman kills, one prefers he'll go out to put an end to the madness without sacrificing victims caught in between.

Quote
As to Batman and Gordon's relationship, the events of Knightquest make a for a lot of water under the bridge. Gordon would have to be pushed to his breaking point to ever trust Batman again... and I think that Gotham City being ravaged by an earthquake and being cut off from (and then being abandoned by) the outside world might be enough to force Gordon to accept Batman once more. It's easy to believe, I think.

I had just finished reading Prodigal, and the Gordon arc is fascinating because his distrust of Batman is starting to affect his relationship with Sarah Essen, and we see the roles reverse for both of them. Sarah was always Batman's detractor, but she later accepts that Gordon needs his help, although still disapproving him. But Gordon dismisses this and claims it was foolish to ever be associated with Batman, let alone suggesting making contact with him. How ironic that such a statement that Sarah would normally agree with would suddenly result their marriage to be on shaky ground.

Chuck Dixon once explained Bane was created to replace KGBeast, who had become irrelevant due to the end of the Soviet Union.

https://youtu.be/KRgk4iE1EVM?t=732

I believe Bane was always going to exist, no matter if the Soviet Union was still around in 1992.

But for the sake of imagination, I could see Knightfall getting tweaked to have KGBeast as the one who broke the bat. Have it as a sequel to Ten Nights of the Beast and KGBeast becoming vengeful after Batman locked him up to die. Maybe even make KGBeast a rogue agent while the USSR has completely dissolved. IIRC, the point of TNOTB is the USSR was already on the verge of ending and KGBeast was carrying out one more mission, so there wouldn't be any need to revisit that again for Knightfall.

The only downside is the whole Bat-Azarel plot in Knightsquest and Knights End could clash with the original premise of Batman of what did to KGBeast in TNOTB. The morality theme may need to be rewritten here. Otherwise, the whole saga would be pointless. Or maybe not, and it would've conveyed how Bat-Azrael would be the result of how Batman could've become if he took matters too far. Maybe Batman would've realised the justification of essentially burying KGBeast alive led to these strings of disastrous events in the first place.

It's fun to imagine and speculate if a KGBeast Knightfall story would've worked. But I prefer keeping Bane's Knightfall saga as it is.

A couple of weeks ago, Graham Nolan was interviewed for a brief video. The topics range from how he got into comics, how Knightfall's story was intended as a negative response to readers' requests to make Batman as lethal as Wolverine and the Punisher, his relationship with Chuck Dixon, and his disappointment in Dark Knight Rises.

https://youtu.be/QstRGMWm4v0

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Wed,  8 Nov  2023, 08:37Chuck Dixon once explained Bane was created to replace KGBeast, who had become irrelevant due to the end of the Soviet Union.

https://youtu.be/KRgk4iE1EVM?t=732

I believe Bane was always going to exist, no matter if the Soviet Union was still around in 1992.

But for the sake of imagination, I could see Knightfall getting tweaked to have KGBeast as the one who broke the bat. Have it as a sequel to Ten Nights of the Beast and KGBeast becoming vengeful after Batman locked him up to die. Maybe even make KGBeast a rogue agent while the USSR has completely dissolved. IIRC, the point of TNOTB is the USSR was already on the verge of ending and KGBeast was carrying out one more mission, so there wouldn't be any need to revisit that again for Knightfall.

The only downside is the whole Bat-Azarel plot in Knightsquest and Knights End could clash with the original premise of Batman of what did to KGBeast in TNOTB. The morality theme may need to be rewritten here. Otherwise, the whole saga would be pointless. Or maybe not, and it would've conveyed how Bat-Azrael would be the result of how Batman could've become if he took matters too far. Maybe Batman would've realised the justification of essentially burying KGBeast alive led to these strings of disastrous events in the first place.

It's fun to imagine and speculate if a KGBeast Knightfall story would've worked. But I prefer keeping Bane's Knightfall saga as it is.

I noticed a lot of similarities between KGBeast and Bane on my own, interesting that one lead to the other.

I don't think the collapse of the Soviet Union would automatically spell the end of the character, but it did seem to align with the character's downfall in popularity. Though he never really had a sizable role written after to try to revive him properly. Ironically, his appearance in the Robin series (also by Chuck) predates Bane's first appearance.