Erm, the "older, grizzled" Batman has been featured in elseworld stories and has almost always been unanimously acclaimed- case in point Kingdom Come. Hell, even though I hate TDKR myself, everyone else seems to go apesh1t for Miller's older Batman as well. And a revisionist approach isn't flawed at all.

Those older versions of Batman are still usually pretty faithful to the core of what is Bruce Wayne's/ Batman's character. I'm not really a fan of Miller's Batman work for the most part either, but at leas Miller makes an attempt to understand what makes Batman Batman, other than gadgets, a costume, and crime fighting. I wish I could say the same for most writers... Though Marvel has been doing pretty good at such for a while now.

Well, yes. We have no idea if this Batman will be faithful to Batman's core or not yet. Miller's Batman was just stupid IMO. IIRC at one point in TDKR Batman literally mentions that "all he can think of is punching." God. That's not Batman to me. Morrison's paranoia driven Batman is infinitely superior IMO.

I think having Batman being driven by paranoia is just as poor an interpretation as one who obsesses with a self-gratifying hunt for violent justice. The key to keeping the character consistent yet flexible is to treat him as a "person", rather than a one-trick-psychotic-pony, which probably means actually balancing him out psychologically, as was mostly the case of Kevin Conroy's version from the DCAU (for the most part). Yes there was an anger to that version, but there wasn't exactly the obsession with anger. I think Mask Of The Phantasm helped explain that more, what with the scene where he confronts himself before his parents' grave.

I'm not saying that "paranoia" is the answer to Batman. Just that paranoia was a much better reason for Batman's extensive planning and fighting style instead of just being driven by rage. I agree with what you mean by treating him as a person though; I'm not saying he's a "Master Chief" type character, where he has his humanity suppressed in favor of a particular characteristic.

"Paranoia" doesn't just imply a psychological imbalancing used to explain your idea, it defines it. It makes more sense from a logical standpoint compared to rage, but on the whole, it's equally as restrictive to the character. If you want a good "excuse" for his extensive planning (or rather a [i]reason[/i] in place of an excuse), one need only point out his experiences; he's prepared for the types of things that actually happen to him as a direct result of him facing his rogues gallery. I'm inclined to think anyone who regularly finds themselves in a position to where they're constantly being exposed to hallucinatory aerosols on a weekly basis will start bringing a gas mask with them... Now multiply that by every constant threat Bats encounters.

[quote]"Paranoia" doesn't just imply a psychological imbalancing used to explain your idea, it defines it.[/quote] Not necessarily. Paranoia doesn't have to take over Batman's life, nor does it [i]have[/i] to be restrictive to his character (though it can be used as a plot point should the writer actually attempt to use the explanation in that way). Hell, think about what you say later on: [quote]one need only point out his experiences; he's prepared for the types of things that actually happen to him as a direct result of him facing his rogues gallery.[/quote] This is essentially what I mean by paranoia. He's faced so much stuff that he's gonna be plagued with an overflow of variables whenever he looks at a situation. What if event X happens, like it did with enemy Y? He has so much stuff to take into consideration that it'd be unnatural for him to [i]not[/i] be paranoid during a battle.

Hrm. I think our differences in this matter boil down to a choice in vocabulary, where I believe applying terms such as "paranoia" to be a dark reflection of actualities, and you... don't.