Bill Finger (1914–1974)

What a chore.

Perhaps I'm being too mean, when I read these issues, it's clear that they were made with a lot of heart. It's just the problem is that they're not very good. The issues feel clunky, with the writing and art feeling stilted and forced (Just saying, the most dynamic pose that Batman does is leaping over a fence).

The first issues truly shine this amateurism, all terrible detective stories with a very non-impressive Batman. But, as the issues went on, they improved. I saw the first issue of "Batman" being their magnum opus, introducing Catwoman and Joker, two staple characters in the series, and marking the start of recognizable villains (before it was mobs and mad scientists, now it's supervillains!) But there's a problem with stating this: while they do make their first appearance in the comic world in-name, they look and act nothing like their modern counterparts. That goes for all the characters; a common joke is to see how many people Batman kills in these early comics. I came to about 24 people although there were probably more. Point is, this comic series is a long way from being what it is today.

While I did enjoy these earlier issues, with the incorporation of Robin since "Detective Comics 38", the comics were clearly veering to a children's demographic. Batman became friendly, the art became bright and inoffensive, the antagonists turned gimmicky, and there were more stories where Dick Grayson was the focal point. After finishing this book, I felt completely disinterested in any more of the Golden-Age of the Batman comics.

That isn't to say I'm ungrateful; I'm amazed with how the series evolved from this and has become the conglomerate it is today. I have to thank its creators, but the golden age doesn't represent what it would become in the slightest.… (plus d'informations)