Rating:  -
Very unique art style, and it features so many villains - even some of the lesser-known ones. Honestly, that's the main reason I read it. I can't get enough of those Batman villains. If the Rogues Gallery is your favorite part of the Batman Universe, you appreciate mixed-media art, and enjoy exploring psychological allegories, you should check it out.
Rating:  -
I've attempted an appropriately serious reading session of the comic for a long time - normally I make it about six pages into its labyrinthine construction before childishly admitting that it makes no sense and ooooooh, aren't the pictures pretty!
On this Saturday, I came prepared with the ball of twine that is the Anniversary Edition - script and footnotes included. Incidentally, this marks the first time I've ever achieved any value from the bonus content in a graphic novel.
Happily, after this enlightened final reading, I can conclude that Arkham Asylum was never intended to make any sense.
So, I'm now clear that the random gibberings of the Mad Hatter on page 22 were actually song lyrics/time travel/Morrison's own words - and the vignette with Killer Croc was meant to represent St. George/the Hanged Man/a giant beetle - but all of these things - these layers upon layers of symbolism don't actually add up to anything. There are parts a-plenty, but never a sum. Grant Morrison and Dave McKean were intending to be Grant Morrison and Dave McKean (respectively), and that's the full extent of that.
It isn't without merit - far from it - it is just that the frustrating quest to add "higher meaning" bars the reader from simply enjoying
an otherwise very good comic.
Overall, enjoy Arkham Asylum for the trees and not the forest. It is a beautiful book with a surprising and unique portrayal of one of the most complicated superheroes on the market. Just don't, for the sake of your sanity and your Saturday, try to decipher the higher meaning.
Rating:  -
From the moment I heard a basic description of what Arkham Asylum was about, I was immediately intrigued. I'm really into Psychology (it IS my major, after all), particularly Abnormal and Criminal Psychology, and have always been fascinated with the concept of madness. So when I heard there was a Batman story that explored this very theme, I couldn't resist. But when I read it...well, I wanted SO badly to like it, but really, I was underwhelmed.
I went in the book knowing in advance that it was not a typical Batman story, and I was prepared to accept that. Innovation and unique perspectives are good for any creative endeavors, after all. That was why I was prepared for Dave McKean's art. It is surreal, it is unusual, sometimes it's really hard to figure out exactly what in the blue heck is going on. But really, I didn't have much problem with it; it is NOT going to be everyone's cup of tea, and some will find it outright hideous, but even though it won't be my favorite artistic approach, I can respect McKean's deviations from graphic novel norms.
However, in this review, I want to focus on the story, as that, really, is what I came for, and what dissapointed me the most. Like I said in the intro, I wanted REALLY badly to like it, given its themes and premise. The story starts of promising enough: a riot has broken out at the Arkham Asylum for the Criminally Insane. Led by the king of Batman's gallery of crazies, The Joker, they have made one final demand: that the Dark Knight come to Arkham, permanently, joining the ranks of the insane. A very attractive setup...until it ends with Batman's dialogue toward Commissioner Gordan.
"Batman's not afraid of anything. It's me. I'm afraid. I'm afraid that The Joker may be right about me. Sometimes I...question the rationality of my actions. And I'm afraid that when I walk through those asylum gates...when I walk into Arkham and the doors close behind me...it'll be just like coming home."
So much for subtlety. It's too melodramatic. It hits you over the head with the book's themes that any reader with half a brain could discern by looking at the story as a whole. It's a promising intro that gets derailed by melodrama and hitting the reader over the head with the story's themes and ideas. Sadly, this is an appropriate metaphor for the book as a whole.
And boy, does this idea of derailed potential ring true throughout. The next part contains such fascinating scenes as the flashbacks of Dr. Amadeus Arkham's descent into madness (which are shown intermitantly throughout the story, and are all very good and help the story), and the psychoanalysis of Two-Face, The Joker, and even, to an extent, Batman himself. I ate those parts up hungrily, because they were right up my alley.
Sadly, these were the best parts, despite the fact that there's still quite a few pages left. Let me put it to you this way: if you were to strip away all of the books heavy symbolism, all of its atmosphere, and all of the themes it conveys, the entire course of events in the plot are: "Batman goes to stop a riot at Arkham Asylum. He walks around for a while, meets a bunch of his villains, sees them acting crazy, beats up a few of them, then leaves." That's it. Yes, the artwork is good, and I appreciate the message it was trying to convey (is Batman just as insane as his enemies?), but the actual plot just seemed so pointless and uneventful. Because of that, it seems to me that Morrison had abandoned the premise of writing an actual story long before he finished "Arkham Asylum," and instead decided that the story would be primarily his display of how much he knows about psychology and horror and everything else that comes up in the story. It all comes off as really gratuitous, with the themes drilled relentlessly into your head. I found myself thinking "YES!! I get it already! Insanity! Batman might be just as crazy! He's confronting his inner demons! Now can something actually HAPPEN in this story!!??"
I don't know. Maybe it's because I bought this primarily because I'm on a Batman graphic novel-spree, and I had just come off of reading two very excellent Batman stories that have amazingly coherent, well-written, and page-turningly addictive plots (Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale's "The Long Halloween" and its sequel "Dark Victory"). But honestly, "Arkham's" story really didn't live up to the hype for me, mostly because it's not even really a story. It's more like a collection of surrealist art and heavy psychological/Gothic literary themes, with a semblance of a plot thrown in as an afterthought. It doesn't do it for me.
"Arkham Asylum" has, as is obvious from the other reviews, intense supporters and intense detractors. I don't count myself among either. I applaud Morrison and McKean's efforts for offering an originally presented take on Batman and attempting to incorporate some very heavy, intellectual ideas along with it. But it seems that in their zeal to do so, they forgot to focus on that most essential of storytelling elements: the quality of the plot. I'll still keep the story on my bookshelf, and I will reread it from time to time, but I can't honestly count it among my favorites.
Rating: -
this is the first batman graphic novel i ever read, and i have to say that it is very very good. it's one of my favorites of all time. i especially liked the script in the back which really helped me understand the symbolism.
really good
Rating: -
When this came out in 1989 it was greeted with much fanfare; the darker DC titles like Sandman were starting and becoming very popular and Grant Morrison's run on Doom Patrol, also from 1989, was received very well. Arkham Asylum had (and still has) a very different feel from most comics as Dave McKean's art is a schizophrenic line drawing experience, enhanced with oil paints - it is very meticulously detailed art work whether you like it or not and should be appreciated. At the end of the day though, this is not one of Morrison's best written works.
It just feels like a style over substance exercise; many villains from the Batman mythos are stumbled upon for a few panels and then are discarded for the next encounter. This all parallels the story of Amadeus Arkham, the architect and first administrator of the asylum.
It's a decent read, but don't believe the hype. I hate to say it, but it's kind of a pedestrian read compared to Morrison's best work. The art is remarkable and is what lead to all of the fanfare.
|
