Is screwing with Batman a recipe for success, or disaster?

A good Batman story can be told without Batman even appearing in it. I actually quite enjoy those rare stories that focus on Gotham City itself, on the everyday citizens who live there, and on the mythic, ever present effect that Batman has on it and them. Batman’s PRESENCE can suffuse a story whether or not he is there physically or not. Granted if they tried to serve up too many stories like that it wouldn’t work. People buy Batman comics because they want to see Batman. That’s the problem I’m having with Scott Snyder’s new story arc in the main Batman comic.

Here’s the thing: Snyder’s story is good. The idea is good. And it’d be a welcome change of pace. IF. If DC hadn’t ALREADY spent the past several years screwing with their most popular character. Playing switcheroo with the cape and cowl, experimenting just for the sake of experimenting. Either that, or the writers have just been too lazy or not creative enough to come up with some original Batman stories THAT ACTUALLY HAVE BATMAN IN THEM. Snyder was doing that for awhile, and doing it well. Is he out of ideas now, too?

source: www.theverge.com