What does Yea Forums think of Serious House on a Serious Earth?

What does Yea Forums think of Serious House on a Serious Earth?

Attached: 51coRpnvSXL._SX335_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (337x499, 36K)

I was just gonna say the cover looked like sandman until i saw mckean's name.

I honestly can't remember the story, only that Maxie Zeus was getting off on electroshock therapy and eating his own shit

Lol remember that sequel we were promised like 5 years ago?

Attached: Batman Incorporated v2 005.jpg (1280x1968, 781K)

An interesting outlier for Morrison. If you read his script in the deluxe version you see just how much content was obscured or outright cut by McKean's art style. I don't think I would change it though. It would be interesting for a cleaner artist to adapt the script into another version.

It was great at the time but it's kinda incoherent desu desu

This was one of the books I read when I was first really getting into comics.

Reading it after Year One and The Long Halloween left me a little thrown off. I think I enjoyed it but not that much.

As a Grant Morrison fan I think it's pretentious trash.

It's been forever since I've read it. It was also one of the comics I read when I was first getting into Batman comics and comics in general.

I remember liking it and thinking it was well done, while at the same time finding it overrated and finding some of the pseudo-psychology pretentious (like, there's literally a scene where Batman has to sit down to do an inkblot test, which is probably the most hamfisted way possible to explore a character's psychology). Then there was stuff like implying Mad Hatter is a paedophile, and I was like, does this actually make Jervis Tetch more interesting, complex, and well-written, or is Morrison just relying on the edginess of paedophilia to make the reader go, "wow, Batman's villains are so fucked up?"

The art is beautiful, but doesn't always serve the the narrative through clarity. It can be hard to make out what you're looking at, and even the text in some stylized speech bubbles.

But I still gotta love the gothic themes and the very Poe/Lovecraft story of Dr. Arkham's mental descent. I also like the ambiguity of whether everything Batman is dealing with is reducible to natural phenomena like mental illness, or if there is some veracity to character's supernatural visions. It works for Batman, because being this Renaissance human who strives to be the pinnacle of rationality and scientific thinking, the theme of confronting archaic human superstitions and revealing them to be nothing mysterious serves the theme of the character. Alternatively, as Batman is a man who makes himself into a monster, having him go up against real supernatural threats and prove the myth he's fashioned himself into equal to genuine terrors also suits the theme of him being a man who makes himself into more than just a man.

And also, though this version of Batman is without compassion, hyperviolent, and repressed, and not really "my Batman," I like how the comic is a critique of this interpretation of Batman and this brand of protagonist in general, rather than celebrating him as something to emulate.