Warner Brothers has found it’s Batgirl under the name of Leslie Grace most famously known for her role in a Musical Drama called “In the Heights” who will play Barbara Gordon. The movie will release exclusively on HBO Max
So i have been reading "Joker: Death of the Family" from the new 52 and i have a question in mind. In the end of part four Batgirl was prisoned by joker and the part ended like this:
And then in the next part "Red Hood and Red Robin" we see batgirl again pretty much normal ..
So is it because the timeline isn't going part by part or am i gonna learn how did she escape ?
154 Votes in Poll
We all know the relationship between Dick Grayson and Barbara Gordon, the OG and the most known Robin and Batgirl.
But there was also a couple consisting of Tim Drake (Robin) and Stephanie Brown (Robin who was also a Batgirl).
I found it interesting that Robins and Batgirls were in relationship with each other. But do you think that's a good idea to make Robin date Batgirl? Could this work with Damien Wayne and Cassandra Cain or, for example, Jason Todd and Huntress (Wayne or Bertinelli, doesn't matter) or Batwoman?
Brief History since she's obscure
Mary Elizabeth "Betty" Kane was the niece of Kathy Kane (the Silver Age Batwoman). Betty decided to become a crimefighter in 1961 as Bat-Girl. She wanted to impress Robin. In 1965ish Julius Schwartz got rid of the Batfamily concept so Betty, Kathy, and other silly characters like Bat-Mite got the boot. Then in 1967, the Batman '66 producers asked for a female character so Barbara Gordon was created. Betty reappeared in the 1970s Teen Titans as Bat-Girl. She acknowledged Barbara was around. Then Crisis happened and Betty's time on the Titans West as Bat-Girl was retconned into her being Flamebird while on the team and now going by Bette Kane. Crisis also got rid of the Bat-Girl identity. She tried reuniting the Titans West but it never took off. Then Infinite Crisis showed Flamebird was the Earth-2 Bat-Girl. Post-Flashpoint, she is Kate Kane's cousin and has never been a hero. She was serving as Kate's sidekick using the name "Hawkfire" until she got brutally injured by the Hook, then she disappears. According to Tynion's Detective Comics, she's at West Point. In Grant Morrison's 2011 Batman Incorporated series, "Bat-Girl appears with Kathy Kane in a flashback."
So I've been reading Batgirl titles. A lot of people online express hate of hime even though he is Barbara Gordon's original love interest since the Bronze Age.
But some people seem to have a massive hate no matter what he does. Many cite his behavior in Batman Eternal but that was long ago and he already relented from that path after helpung wage a war on Batman and all vigilantes out of revenge.
Seems to me that people hate him because of Dickbabs preference. That's how I feel anyway. I mean come on already that relationship only came into existence later and Bard was the serious one while Jason was too young for Babs originally. I'd like to know opinion of others, especially those who hate him, not to argue endlessly but to get perspective.
Alright so I've seen a lot of people hate on Batgirl-Batman relationship in Batman The Animated Series (plus the Batman Beyond comic). And also their sex in The Killing Joke movie. People feel it wrong because they think they have a father-daughter relationship. I've never felt it so, she was attracted to him early on in comics. I've always seen him as a often mentor but Batgirl unlike Robin wasn't a real sidekick or a ward at least post-Crisis.
But anyway, is their any real proof that they have been in a father-daughter like relationship? Her Post-Crisis origin (Secret Origin 20) actually showed that she was attracted to Batman even though she flirted with Robin, but Robin was far younger for her.
Pre-Crsis she was shown as playfully flirting and even being attracted at times. I don't remember him treating her as a daughter or as a father. Just as a mentor at most. But nowadays they've made it serious with Dick.
Batgirl and Batman to me anyway represents starting out as a crush of a teenage girl on a mysterious amazing mentor and partner. but eventually it can blossom into something more. To be honest I'm not against it and I don't see a reason against it.
And I mean stuff like who belongs to what generation, and how old is each age group.
Personally I think the "DC is about legacy" slogan was mostly 90's marketing propaganda, fueled by the success of Mark Waid's Flash. Definitely DC wasn't kind to their legacy heroes before or after that decade. The different Supergirls, Batgirls, Robins and Titans have often been fridged and served as mega-event cannon fodder. But I digress.
Regardless, I think DC has messed up their legacy characters, and -unsurprisingly to those who know me- I think the roots of that mess can be traced back to the Crisis on Infinite Earths.
Personally, should DC approach me and task me with the unenviable chore of straightening their universe up, this is what their generations would look like.
Earth-Two First Generation: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, JSA... In their fifties or sixties.
Earth-Two Second Generation: Power Girl, Huntress, Fury, Silver Scarab, Infinity Inc. In their mid twenties.
Main Earth First Generation: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Justice League, Green Lantern Corps, Vixen, Batwoman, Black Lightning, Steel... Mid-thirties. Superman, Batman, Hal Jordan or Barry Allen should be in his early forties at most.
Main Earth Second Generation: Supergirl, Batgirl, original Titans and New Teen Titans... In their early twenties. Babs should be a little older than Kara and Dick.
Main Earth Third Generation: Kon-El, Cassandra Cain, Cassandra Sandsmark, Stephanie Brown, Stargirl, Bart Allen, Jaime Reyes, younger Titans and Young Justice... In their mid to late teens. Jon Kent and Damian Wayne should be in their early teens, at most.
The recent rumors regarding DC replacing five or six of their biggest guns at once, which can negatively affect characters like Jon Kent, have made me ponder about why some characters are successfully replaced whereas other legacy characters fail and are forgotten.
Of course, there're many reasons why a character succeeds, fails, or succeeds for a while before failing. Maybe they had potential but they weren't given enough chances. Maybe they were put through a string of terrible runs. Maybe the revolving door of creative teams with little to no interest on building on foundations set by former writers makes almost impossible flesh their world out. Maybe editorial didn't know what to do with them. O maybe -and this is a possibility which hardly anybody wants to face- they aren't good enough of a character.
Keep in mind, though, Morth Weisinger used to say (or at least I think he said) there're no bad characters. There're bad writers and worse editors. Whatever else you think of the man, I think he was right. Batman was nearly cancelled once (Maybe twice?). X-Men was cancelled.
So, why some replacements are widely accepted whereas others fall by the wayside? Why some fans feel Superman cannot be replaced whereas Flash fans bicker over who the real Flash is (Jay Garrick, obviously)?
After much pondering, I think I have narrowed it down. Leaving aside creative reasons -and obvious exceptions to the rule-, I think legacy characters are more liable to be regarded as the real deal when they have been born in early ages when the mythos were being expanded; they have been around for more than ten years; and they have headlined her own title or backup strip.
Why? Well, when you've been born in the formative early years/decades, people will usually respect your seniority, at the very least, since you have been around since almost the beginning. If you've been around for decades since your creation, fans usually come to regard you as a permanent fixture (Have you noticed how Marvel's "super-heroes shouldn't be married" creatives leave Reed and Sue alone most of the time?)
And it's easier earning a lot of fans if you have been born during those times when comics were read by hundreds of thousands of kids. Especially if you have been around for several decades headlining your own adventures, which means you'll be not forgotten for the next generation of readers.
Moreover, being born early means more chances to show up in other media. Increased exposure often results in increased number of fans, increased sales of merchandise, and editorial favoring you over other options.
Let's examine some examples:
* Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman have been around since the late thirties/early fourties, headlining their own books. Even though they've been replaced every so often, their substitutes (Mon-El, Azrael, Donna) have been very short-lived. Hence, most of fans think Clark, Bruce and Diana are the real SM, BM and WW, and replacing them is non-negotiable.
* Alan Scott, Jay Garrick, Al Pratt... Either they had no solo books or they were cancelled within nine years. The original JSers were limboed for a while during which their original fanbase -which wasn't enough to sustain them- moved on. They are generally well-liked but not considered the REAL GL or Flash.
* Barry Allen was created in 1956 and headlined his own book for twenty-six years. Wally West was created in 1960, and headlined the Flash book for... a long while, too (I'm not sure how long since if I'm not wrong Wally was missing or replaced several times before Barry's return). This is because there's a Flash Fanbase War. Both characters have been around for long that every one is THE Flash to many, many readers. Barry fans were told "Shut up and get over it" by Wally fans during twenty-three years, and Wally fans aren't happy that their positions have been swapped.
* Green Lantern. Again, Alan's book was cancelled because of low sales after nine years and he was limboed in a time when the audience moved on. So, his fanbase wasn't a threat to Hal Jordan when he was created ten years later. Hal was the main GL during thirty-five years, which is because his fanbase was large, loud and wouldn't be silenced. Kyle Rainer had the deck stacked against him because of the circumstances leading to his becoming the newest -and only- GL, his book lasted only ten years before being cancelled, and he lost importance as soon as he stopped being the sole GL in the cosmic neighborhood.
* Supergirl. Lucy of Borgonia was limboed after one issue. Super-Girl was limboed after one issue. Kara Zor-El was created in 1959, and until her death twenty-six years later she headlined her own backup strip and even her own books (short-lived, but bear with me). Neither of her replacements lasted so long. Seven or eight years, at best. Kara was -grudgingly- brought back fifteen years ago, and during that time she has starred in her own book(s) as well as series, cartoons, movies and her own show (and even during the eighteen years she was The-One-Shall-Be-Never-Mentioned she made several cameo appearances). The fact that DC's new timeline appears to ignore the existence of other Supergirls sounds like DC thinks they can dismiss their fans safely.
* Batgirl is a more complicated case. Bette Kane was created in 1961 and dismissed shortly after. Barbara Gordon was created in 1967 and completely eclipsed Bette. Babs' adventures were Detective Comics' backup strip until 1982, and she was also a regular in two immensely popular media, the Adam West's show and Batman: TAS. Because of all this, Barbara had gained a sizable fanbase among comic and non-comic fans who regarded her as THE Batgirl and didn't care for her Oracle identity. However, her successors became popular enough on their own right in a relatively short time (well, Cass did. Steph was created seventeen years before becoming Batgirl) than DC finally got to acknowledge their stints wearing the Batgirl cowl.
* Green Arrow is in the same place as Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman. Olliver Queen was created in 1941. Did someone truly believe back in 1994 Connor Hawke would be able to replace him permanently?
There're more instances worth of looking over (like, you know, the original sidekick Robin whom I've completely skipped over), but I think it's enough for now.
So, what do you think?