PDA

View Full Version : So, what's the deal with Gotham City?



stoobytoons
18th Aug 2009, 07:57
Okay. So, I'm thinking there should be a grass-roots movement from Batman fans in regard to Batman's hometown.

Here's the deal - Batman started out in New York City, but then the city's name was changed to Gotham for some reason. Now, one of NYC's many nicknames IS, in fact, "Gotham City." So, I wonder what the deal is with taking Batman and completely removing him from reality.

I ask you, dear friends and fans, why is it that characters that are furthest removed from reality taking over the "real world?" How is it that Spider-Man has taken over New York City when it makes infinitely more sense -- by lineage, location, crime census, and believability - that Batman would be the protector of a real-life city?

What do you guys think? Don't you think it's time move beyond the fantasy world of Gotham and start drawing more real-world parallels for the Dark Knight to move toward reality? He is the most realistic superhero out there anyway. Lemme hear your thoughts!

Kai Rei
18th Aug 2009, 08:00
...What? WHAT is the question your asking here?

Old_BenKenobi
18th Aug 2009, 08:06
By making up their own city they are allowed to make it as much as a character as any of the humans. **** realism. Realism is boring. Batman may be the most realistic superhero, but that isn't saying much at all. Batman is still a ridiculous concept. Trying to make Batman as realistic as possible just sucks the charm out of him, IMO.

I'll take a 30 year old vigilante wearing tights and underpants who beats up criminals and clown over a ninja wearing swat armour who beats on terrorists any day.

Leather Wings
18th Aug 2009, 08:06
Typically Marvel Comics are entrenched in the "real world" ie. real cities. DC on the other hand, relies on fictional cities like Metropolis, Central City, Gotham City, etc.

I don't know why, but these days it serves as a dividing line of sorts between the companies.

stoobytoons
18th Aug 2009, 08:08
...What? WHAT is the question your asking here?

hehe. My QUESTION is: WHY is Batman so hardened to "Gotham City?"

I mean, there is no specific geographic location. There is no "state." Heck. For all we know, it could be a British city. I'm saying, in an effort to establish exactly where this city is, perhaps fans should start talking about where it's location should actually be!

New York makes sense, since that's actually where the character started. But what do you kids think? Agree? Disagree? Make any difference?

Stan Lee liked having Spider-Man be set in areas that he knew since he lived in that area. But Batman is, for all intents and purposes, the most realistic hero. So, why not put him in a more "realistic" location? How about mirroring architectural locations from reality into the comics as opposed to shoe-horning in these fake cities on top of real-estate that simply isn't their.

Kai Rei
18th Aug 2009, 08:09
Typically Marvel Comics are entrenched in the "real world" ie. real cities. DC on the other hand, relies on fictional cities like Metropolis, Central City, Gotham City, etc.

I don't know why, but these days it serves as a dividing line of sorts between the companies.

It amazes me how non of those cities have the death sentence. Especially NYC in Spider-Man, and Gotham City.

Kai Rei
18th Aug 2009, 08:12
hehe. My QUESTION is: WHY is Batman so hardened to "Gotham City?"

I mean, there is no specific geographic location. There is no "state." Heck. For all we know, it could be a British city. I'm saying, in an effort to establish exactly where this city is, perhaps fans should start talking about where it's location should actually be!

New York makes sense, since that's actually where the character started. But what do you kids think? Agree? Disagree? Make any difference?

Stan Lee liked having Spider-Man be set in areas that he knew since he lived in that area. But Batman is, for all intents and purposes, the most realistic hero. So, why not put him in a more "realistic" location? How about mirroring architectural locations from reality into the comics as opposed to shoe-horning in these fake cities on top of real-estate that simply isn't their.

Ahh, thank you.

I imagine Gotham to be somewhere in 19th Century England/London to be honest. I'm not too sure why, it just seems to stick for me.

Leather Wings
18th Aug 2009, 08:12
It amazes me how non of those cities have the death sentence. Especially NYC in Spider-Man, and Gotham City.

Superman/Captain America's influence, I tell ya. Lucky we've got a Punisher and Vigilante in each company.

Old_BenKenobi
18th Aug 2009, 08:14
Thanks to TAS I only see Gotham as being in the 30s.

Leather Wings
18th Aug 2009, 08:14
Fairly certain Gotham's in New Jersey (Atantic City), while Metropolis is where NYC is. Pretty sure I read that in Greg Rucka's No Man's Land novel.

stoobytoons
18th Aug 2009, 08:15
Typically Marvel Comics are entrenched in the "real world" ie. real cities. DC on the other hand, relies on fictional cities like Metropolis, Central City, Gotham City, etc.

I don't know why, but these days it serves as a dividing line of sorts between the companies.

Maybe so. But Batman came long before Marvel was even a glimmer in the eye of it's creator.
I agree, it's sort of an unofficial dividing line. But there's no copyright on NYC. I'm not saying take AWAY the Gotham City moniker, but to begin to blend it in with it's real world counter part. NYC already has the nickname. Why not illustrate in the comics a city that looks like the name that it would apparently suggest it is adapting?

Old_BenKenobi
18th Aug 2009, 08:16
There are loads of theories. One is that Gotham and Metropolis are on opposite ends of a huge lake.

Sir Legendhead
18th Aug 2009, 08:16
Gotham City is a fictional city...The rest of the wiki page can be found here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_City).

edit: personally, I think of Nashville as Gotham. Partially because we have this:

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s173/sirlegendhead/batmanbuilding-1.jpg

Kai Rei
18th Aug 2009, 08:17
Fairly certain Gotham's in New Jersey (Atantic City), while Metropolis is where NYC is. Pretty sure I read that in Greg Rucka's No Man's Land novel.

I seem to remember this aswell, except is it canon?

Anyway, if I was to make a Batman novel, it would take place in 19th century London. [for the most part].

stoobytoons
18th Aug 2009, 08:18
Ahh, thank you.

I imagine Gotham to be somewhere in 19th Century England/London to be honest. I'm not too sure why, it just seems to stick for me.

:) I see that. I don't see the city's inhabitants speaking with an English accent (perhaps because no movies or comics use that sort of jargon) but the architecture seems more like 19th century London. Then again, I think Chicago is more fitting as far as architecture and early century organized crime syndicate.

SolidSnake_123
18th Aug 2009, 08:18
I'm sorry, but I'm not a big fan of this question..:nut: I mean creating a make-believe city, opens writes up to making it as gritty and as harsh as they want, but if they use a real life city, they have to stick to the limitations, of the real world, it would become boring and stale, and before ya know it, the writers run out of stories to tell, because of geometrical limitations, like in the comics they keep adding areas into gotham city, metropolis, etc. Which makes it more exciting and takes away these limitations away... ;)

stoobytoons
18th Aug 2009, 08:19
The rest of the wiki page can be found here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_City).

edit: personally, I think of Nashville as Gotham. Partially because we have this:

http://www.hungryphotographer.org/pixelpost/images/2005092301364623_20050916_6.jpg

Bah! You're missing the point of the thread.

*Edit - er. Sorry! I think I mis-quoted. Perhaps you have the right idea. :)

Leather Wings
18th Aug 2009, 08:27
I seem to remember this aswell, except is it canon?

Anyway, if I was to make a Batman novel, it would take place in 19th century London. [for the most part].

No Man's Land was the novelization of the huge NML arc aross all titles, so I guess it could be considered canon... Beats me.

Have you ever read Gotham By Gaslight? Batman on the trail of Jack The Ripper. One of my all time favorites, and it's set in 19th century London. The setting really lends it's self well to The Bat. :)

Kai Rei
18th Aug 2009, 08:35
No Man's Land was the novelization of the huge NML arc aross all titles, so I guess it could be considered canon... Beats me.

Have you ever read Gotham By Gaslight? Batman on the trail of Jack The Ripper. One of my all time favorites, and it's set in 19th century London. The setting really lends it's self well to The Bat. :)

I haven't. Sounds fun. :D

Truth be told, I'm not big on comics at ALL, which is why I don't collect, but thanks anyway, bud.


PS: Does Batman catch him? lol

Leather Wings
18th Aug 2009, 08:51
All I'll say is.. He's The Batman! :D

Sir Legendhead
18th Aug 2009, 08:56
Bah! You're missing the point of the thread.

*Edit - er. Sorry! I think I mis-quoted. Perhaps you have the right idea. :)Heh, yeah, I switched pics because I found one better. That's my Gotham (you know which one).

stoobytoons
18th Aug 2009, 09:03
Actually, I seem to remember Bludhaven being the equivalent of Jersey.

See? I guess this is the confusion I'm talking about. WHERE is Gotham if it's not New York? WHERE is Metropolis, for that matter? Why bother making up all these fictitious cities?

Sir Legendhead
18th Aug 2009, 09:05
Actually, I seem to remember Bludhaven being the equivalent of Jersey.

See? I guess this is the confusion I'm talking about. WHERE is Gotham if it's not New York? WHERE is Metropolis, for that matter? Why bother making up all these fictitious cities?I wanna know what city The Never Ending Story took place in.

http://cultureking.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/image0991.jpg

:D

SolidSnake_123
18th Aug 2009, 09:06
Actually, I seem to remember Bludhaven being the equivalent of Jersey.

See? I guess this is the confusion I'm talking about. WHERE is Gotham if it's not New York? WHERE is Metropolis, for that matter? Why bother making up all these fictitious cities?

Because its a Fictitious world, if i made up a world, I wouldn't bother telling what country, state etc. its in, because its my own world, a fiction one.. :mad2:

Talvrae
18th Aug 2009, 09:10
I'm sorry, but I'm not a big fan of this question..:nut: I mean creating a make-believe city, opens writes up to making it as gritty and as harsh as they want, but if they use a real life city, they have to stick to the limitations, of the real world, it would become boring and stale, and before ya know it, the writers run out of stories to tell, because of geometrical limitations, like in the comics they keep adding areas into gotham city, metropolis, etc. Which makes it more exciting and takes away these limitations away... ;)

Not a fan of the question.... but still Marvel use real life location on theyr comic books
Spider-Man is in New-York
The X-Man was in the state of New York too, but the last time the manor was destroyed they moved to San Francisco
Pretty sure the Punisher is also in New-York
Well in fact most of the Heroes of Marvel are from New-York

stoobytoons
18th Aug 2009, 09:10
Well, as I posted above, I find it strange that a character who is, for the most part, quite realistic, and who exists in a city that shares the nickname of the country's most well-known city yields to the Marvel superheroes who came 30 years later and have no realistic abilities. (All philosophic-sci-talk aside, of course. :D)

SolidSnake_123
18th Aug 2009, 09:12
Not a fan of the question.... but still Marvel use real life location on theyr comic books
Spider-Man is in New-York
The X-Man was in the state of New York too, but the last time the manor was destroyed they moved to San Francisco
Pretty sure the Punisher is also in New-York
Well in fact most of the Heroes of Marvel are from New-York

Yeah

Sir Legendhead
18th Aug 2009, 09:12
Not a fan of the question.... but still Marvel use real life location on theyr comic books
Spider-Man is in New-York
The X-Man was in the state of New York too, but the last time the manor was destroyed they moved to San Francisco
Pretty sure the Punisher is also in New-York
Well in fact most of the Heroes of Marvel are from New-YorkWe all know how realistic Marvel is. "ZOMG I'm Spider-man and I'ma give my wife to the devil!"

Yeah. True to life, that.

At least Batman can be trusted to make good decisions.

Talvrae
18th Aug 2009, 09:14
Well, as I posted above, I find it strange that a character who is, for the most part, quite realistic, and who exists in a city that shares the nickname of the country's most well-known city yields to the Marvel superheroes who came 30 years later and have no realistic abilities. (All philosophic-sci-talk aside, of course. :D)

Maybe Batman is realist, but most of is rogue gallery is not...
But well i guess it give them more liberty to work with the city, he can give it the look, the ambiance and the feeling he want from a fictional city, and can forget about what is New York, it get rid of some limitation...

Kai Rei
18th Aug 2009, 09:14
Not a fan of the question.... but still Marvel use real life location on theyr comic books
Spider-Man is in New-York
The X-Man was in the state of New York too, but the last time the manor was destroyed they moved to San Francisco
Pretty sure the Punisher is also in New-York
Well in fact most of the Heroes of Marvel are from New-York

In other words, Marvel aren't very creative with where they locate their characters.

SolidSnake_123
18th Aug 2009, 09:15
In other words, Marvel aren't very creative with where they locate their characters.

I agree completely

Leather Wings
18th Aug 2009, 09:15
Look at it like this... Gotham exists in a fictional world so that anyone can envision it as their nearest big city, or even the city they live in. Having no absolute fixed location allows us to view it wherever we want it to be. If it was Grounded in NYC, that's where it is, point blank.

Gotham's wherever you want it to be.

Talvrae
18th Aug 2009, 09:16
We all know how realistic Marvel is. "ZOMG I'm Spider-man and I'ma give my wife to the devil!"

Yeah. True to life, that.

At least Batman can be trusted to make good decisions.

Never said that Marvel is realistic... And damn don't say me DC do better... with Super Man and Green Lantern... -_-
They both have theyr realistic things, and not realistic at all... the Punisher is as belivable a character as Batman is...

Kai Rei
18th Aug 2009, 09:20
Never said that Marvel is realistic... And damn don't say me DC do better... with Super Man and Green Lantern... -_-
They both have theyr realistic things, and not realistic at all... the Punisher is as belivable a character as Batman is...

Not really. :\

Punisher isn't all that far-fetched of a character to me, as far as the actual character origin is concerned.

Fairly realistic. Man's wife gets murdered in a drive-by, by the Mob. The man snaps, and vows to put an end to the mob by becoming a vigilante.

But as usual, Marvel crosses the line and ruins the character by making him/her too far-fetched.

Spider-Mans Lizard, anyone?

Talvrae
18th Aug 2009, 09:40
Not really. :\


But as usual, Marvel crosses the line and ruins the character by making him/her too far-fetched.

Spider-Mans Lizard, anyone?

Oh right... -_- dont think i have mentioned lizard-man...
What about Bane, Poison Ivy then? Or even Clayface??? Oh if we take a turn outside of Batman rogue gallery to take a look to other realistic DC characters, Super-Man, Green Lantern, Flash or Wonder Woman...
I did not want to turn it into a Marvel vs DC things, i was simply tryng to figure out the things on the city things and answered to someone who mentioned that real city could make the setting stale, and pointed out that Marvel didnt use that and as far i know they didnt stale...
But really, i take Marvel over DC anytime, except Batman and is Rogue gallerie i dont like the characters of DC... It's just my personal opinion

Kai Rei
18th Aug 2009, 09:43
Oh right... -_- dont think i have mentioned lizard-man...
What about Bane, Poison Ivy then? Or even Clayface??? Oh if we take a turn outside of Batman rogue gallery to take a look to other realistic DC characters, Super-Man, Green Lantern, Flash or Wonder Woman...
I did not want to turn it into a Marvel vs DC things, i was simply tryng to figure out the things on the city things and answered to someone who mentioned that real city could make the setting stale, and pointed out that Marvel didnt use that and as far i know they didnt stale...
But really, i take Marvel over DC anytime, except Batman and is Rogue gallerie i dont like the characters of DC... It's just my personal opinion

I agree, to an extent both companies have characters that cross the line, it's just that Marvel almost always crosses the line with their characters.

Don't turn this into an arguement. I'm only making a point here.

Old_BenKenobi
18th Aug 2009, 10:03
Again, why put him in a real setting? Putting him in a real setting just limits everything. Marvel is in New York because to them it's just a setting. Gotham is a very distinct character of its own, with a lot of flesh, blood and details put in to make it that setting. Same goes for Metropolis. Gotham is supposedly New York at night, Metropolis is New York in the day. But that's a rough analog. The way I see it, all the DC cities are in the same, fictional state.

I don't see why Batman being a more realistic character (despite not being realistic at all) means they should stick him in a real city, and why Marvel using NYC as their sort of home base is a bad thing because of the unrealistic characters. To Marvel, NYC is just a convenient setting that can fit all of the action, To DC, Gotham is an integral part of the story, with it's own personal history, landmarks and politics.

SolidSnake_123
18th Aug 2009, 10:05
Again, why put him in a real setting? Putting him in a real setting just limits everything. Marvel is in New York because to them it's just a setting. Gotham is a very distinct character of its own, with a lot of flesh, blood and details put in to make it that setting. Same goes for Metropolis. Gotham is supposedly New York at night, Metropolis is New York in the day. But that's a rough analog. The way I see it, all the DC cities are in the same, fictional state.

I don't see why Batman being a more realistic character (despite not being realistic at all) means they should stick him in a real city, and why Marvel using NYC as their sort of home base is a bad thing because of the unrealistic characters. To Marvel, NYC is just a convenient setting that can fit all of the action, To DC, Gotham is an integral part of the story, with it's own personal history, landmarks and politics.
Agreed ;)

Talvrae
18th Aug 2009, 10:15
Again, why put him in a real setting? Putting him in a real setting just limits everything. Marvel is in New York because to them it's just a setting. Gotham is a very distinct character of its own, with a lot of flesh, blood and details put in to make it that setting. Same goes for Metropolis. Gotham is supposedly New York at night, Metropolis is New York in the day. But that's a rough analog. The way I see it, all the DC cities are in the same, fictional state.

I don't see why Batman being a more realistic character (despite not being realistic at all) means they should stick him in a real city, and why Marvel using NYC as their sort of home base is a bad thing because of the unrealistic characters. To Marvel, NYC is just a convenient setting that can fit all of the action, To DC, Gotham is an integral part of the story, with it's own personal history, landmarks and politics.

There that's a clear answer... hope it please the OP

The New Blueguy
18th Aug 2009, 12:24
I always figured more or less that Gotham City, Gotham (yes, it is canon that the state is named Gotham) was basically a combination of Manhattan and Detroit. Showcasing that big city atmosphere with an industrialist core. Bludhaven, Gotham is upstate and from the maps in seen in the comics is based on Albany. I have no concrete evidence on this next one , however, but I've always seen Metropolis as Boston, MA for some reason. The relationship between the two cities just seems to make sense. Especially considering I doubt Bruce would fly into Metropolis if they were pretty much a large lake a part.

Talvrae
18th Aug 2009, 12:28
lol just looking at wikipedia here a small bit
Gotham City is based on many large cities, especially New York City, but also Baltimore, Newark, Chicago, London, Boston and Montreal. The longstanding nickname "Gotham" was first attached to New York in 1807 by Washington Irving in his magazine Salmagundi.

Montreal?? really?? Lol now i know why Gotham is so dirty, it's based on Montreal... damn i hate that city

and there is a bit more of interest on the subject:
Creation
Writer Bill Finger is credited with the creation of Gotham City. Finger commented on the naming of the city and reasoning for changing Batman's locale from Manhattan to a fictional city: "Originally I was going to call Gotham City 'Civic City'. Then I tried Capital City, then Coast City. Then I flipped through the phone book and spotted the name 'Gotham Jewelers' and said, 'That's it', Gotham City. We didn't call it New York because we wanted anybody in any city to identify with it."[

Bruce-Wayne
18th Aug 2009, 13:51
Oh right... -_- dont think i have mentioned lizard-man...
What about Bane, Poison Ivy then? Or even Clayface??? Oh if we take a turn outside of Batman rogue gallery to take a look to other realistic DC characters, Super-Man, Green Lantern, Flash or Wonder Woman...


wow trust me i know wat im talking about if a dude took major roids he wud be like bane just less big poisin ivy uses plant based chemicals to influence plants clayface i cant vouch for but wat about scarecrow i dont think drugs are considerd non realistic, riddler hes perfectly realistic and two face if someone burned off half your face and you had a nickname two face you would be crazy too

Drazar
18th Aug 2009, 14:04
By making up their own city they are allowed to make it as much as a character as any of the humans. **** realism. Realism is boring. Batman may be the most realistic superhero, but that isn't saying much at all. Batman is still a ridiculous concept. Trying to make Batman as realistic as possible just sucks the charm out of him, IMO.

I'll take a 30 year old vigilante wearing tights and underpants who beats up criminals and clown over a ninja wearing swat armour who beats on terrorists any day.

This. It's so much easier to have a fictional cities because then you can have fictional buildings. Gotham is the best place on America, it has the best theaters, best cinemas and best restaraunts. This is why people live in Gotham, this is why people do crim as art in Gotham. It's the best city in the world. :D

kazinya91
18th Aug 2009, 14:07
ive always thought of gotham city as Chicago 1920's just the whole underworld and mobs then in Batman Begins with the elevated trains(the L trains) just always had that gritty Chicago style to it.

LoboUDL
18th Aug 2009, 14:51
Gotham is in New York while you're right, Bludhaven is Jersey. For artists DC will let you be more creative and you can create areas or scenes like in Gotham or Metropolis...while at Marvel, they can actually just walk out their doors and sketch the area and add a big fight. You can go to Central Park where Frank Castle's family was killed and The Punisher was born! Each has it's pros and cons. In Gotham by Gaslight it starts out with him being overseas just about to come home from his training (it's a great book, everyone should own it!). Speeding Bullets could've been great...but they mixed the Joker and Lex Lurther and that was a totally mental decision by the writer imo.

Rukh
18th Aug 2009, 19:52
the level of ignorance in this thread is astounding. that's not to mention you could answer many of these questions with about ten seconds spent on google, but alas, i'll save many of you the trouble.

in the dc comics universe (DCU), the population of the earth is many times that of the "real world" as there are significantly more major cities. New York exists, but so do Gotham and Metropolis. Seattle exists, yet so does Star City. Kansas City exists, yet so do Central City and Keystone City.

many talk about how Metropolis is sort of a fantasy of New York during the day, while Gotham is "inspired by" New York at night. truth be told Metropolis' origins are much more closely linked to Toronto.

take a gander at this site: http://www.karridian.net/dcusa_ne.html

and you'll get the idea.

Mr_Scarecrow_Goes_To_Town
18th Aug 2009, 19:58
I'm sorry, but I'm not a big fan of this question..:nut: I mean creating a make-believe city, opens writes up to making it as gritty and as harsh as they want, but if they use a real life city, they have to stick to the limitations, of the real world, it would become boring and stale, and before ya know it, the writers run out of stories to tell, because of geometrical limitations, like in the comics they keep adding areas into gotham city, metropolis, etc. Which makes it more exciting and takes away these limitations away... ;)

I must agree. For some strange reason when I read the title I expected some bad Kenny Bania-esque joke.

"What's the deal with Gotham City? You don't see many Goth's walking the street, I mean come on!"

*shudders*