SPOILERS follow for Batman #50

Comic book fans often argue that the movies should simply mimic the original comics, but Tom King’s Batman run has demonstrated just why that’s not the case. King’s current run is becoming the stuff of legends; he has a deep understanding of Batman’s personality and identity, and as such has dug into the Dark Knight’s tortured mind like few writers before him. This week’s Batman #50 brings to a close a long-running storyline in which Batman and Catwoman were engaged to be married.

The issue ends in tragedy, with Catwoman bowing to the inevitable and jilting Batman at the rooftop. Her argument is a heartbreakingly simple one; if Bruce Wayne ever truly becomes happy, then he will cease to be Batman. In marrying him, Selina would risk actually destroying everything Batman is, and everything he stands for. It’s the same logic the Joker presented to Catwoman last issue, but this time it’s propounded by a friend - albeit one with dark designs of her own. Selina recognizes the truth of it, and chooses to go her own way.

There’s more than a kernel of truth in it. But the most fascinating part of this story is that it speaks to the very nature of the comic book medium - and to one thing that will inevitably mean the films will outgrow the comics.

  • This Page: Weddings Prove Marvel’s ‘Illusion of Change’ Page 2: Why The Movies Have To Abandon That Old Thinking

Marvel’s Famous ‘Illusion of Change’

Back in the ’60s, Marvel’s Stan Lee came up with the concept known as “the Illusion of Change.” Lee realized that every successful comic book superhero works because the writer has carefully worked out their character, has built a strong secondary cast, and has created a consistent world in which they operate. Naturally, superhero stories will pose risks to this; they may threaten to break the hero’s character, they may threaten his secondary cast, or they may change the entire world in which she lives. But making these changes too dramatic would damage the brand. It would risk damaging the core ideas that make the hero a success. Writer Peter David illustrated it on his blog using the example of Peter Parker:

In 1987, Marvel Comics married Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson. They then spent the next decade trying to break them up again, convinced they’d changed Spider-Man’s brand too much by allowing his character to grow. This ultimately led to the (in)famous “One More Day” plot, in which Peter made a deal with Mephisto that wiped his marriage out of continuity.

“Over the years, Stan and Steve (and later John) put him through changes. But when you get down to it, they satisfied the concept of illusionary change. Peter went from high school to college… but he was still a student. Betty Brant and Liz Allen gave way to Gwen Stacy and Mary Jane Watson, and nemesis Flash Thompson stepped aside for nemesis Harry Osborn. Otherwise, though, he was pretty much the same guy. Sure, he got a motorcycle, which was the ultimate in cool… but he wound up having to sell it, thereby bringing the money problems back to the forefront. It was evolution, but 360 degrees’ worth. Same old Spider-Man, same old Peter Parker, same old problems at the core.”

Catwoman’s entire chain of logic really rests upon the nature of comics. Were Batman to ever find happiness, he would be changed as a character - and changed forever. Short of an absurd plot twist (say, an absurd deal with DC’s equivalent of Mephisto), there’d be no going back on this. The Batman comic book franchise would be changed utterly. And that’s something DC Comics, as a publisher, would be extremely wary of.

As a result, to astute comic book fans the heartbreaking end of Batman’s engagement is no real surprise. No doubt the Dark Knight will now turn inwards once again, becoming a haunted, brooding figure. It’s the perfectly on-brand way to end this story.

Page 2 of 2: Why The Movies Have To Abandon Old Thinking

The Movies Have to Abandon This

But here’s the catch; the “Illusion of Change” only works in the comics. It can’t possibly work in the movies - at least not while both Marvel and DC are focused on shared cinematic universes. Because the nature of these universes is, quite simply, change. Take the example of Tom Holland; Marvel initially toyed with the idea of basing the solo Spider-Man movies on the Harry Potter model, with each film set in a different year of Peter Parker’s life. That would allow the studio to keep Spider-Man in school for as long as possible, avoiding changing the brand too much. But it couldn’t possibly work, because it would lock down the timeline of the entire MCU.

Next year’s Avengers 4 will be another moment of change. It’s generally believed at least two of the major Avengers are finally bowing out of the MCU; Robert Downey Jr.’s Iron Man and Chris Evans’s Captain America. The departure of Tony Stark and Steve Rogers completely changes the shape of the MCU. In truth, it’s all happening for a simple, out-of-universe reason; the actors know that it’s time to move on. In comics, a new artist just picks up where the old one left off, and the stories continue. In the movies, recasting popular characters like these two headline Avengers is a dangerous game.

The point of all this is that change is actually baked into the very idea of a shared cinematic universe. If Spider-Man didn’t exist as part of the wider MCU, then Marvel would be free to follow the Harry Potter model. If Ben Affleck’s Batman wasn’t part of a wider shared universe, he could be recast with ease, and DC could simply reboot the franchise and tell another story in which the Dark Knight dueled the Joker. But because these films exist in a shared universe, the studios are actually restricted; they can’t easily reboot franchises, and they can’t ignore continuity altogether.

Characters will inevitably change and grow, actors will age and depart, and continuity established in one film will set the timeline of another. The “Illusion of Change” - an idea that’s so crucial to most modern comics - simply cannot be a long-lasting part of a shared cinematic universe.

What Comes Next For Batman & Catwoman

But where does this leave Batman? Is Tom King’s run destined to only bring heartbreak to the Dark Knight, or will DC actually allow the character to change and grow? It’s really too soon to say; it’s no coincidence Catwoman’s logic speaks to the heart of the comic book medium. Rather, that’s testimony to King’s genius as a writer, and it suggests he’s still working on a long-term narrative that will turn this entire principle on its head.

The boldest comic book writers, the ones who truly leave a mark on the entire genre, are those who choose to ignore Stan Lee’s “Illusion of Change.” They’re writers like Grant Morrison and Gerry Conway, who dare to kill off major characters, to launch new relationships, and to abandon the safe and comfortable status quo. King has taken to Twitter to promise that his story isn’t over. “Batman 50 is not the end,” he wrote. “This is a 100 issue story documenting and celebrating the love of Batman and Catwoman.” That comment means we’re only at the halfway mark in King’s story, and the end is yet to be told.

Perhaps it’s time for the comic book medium to grow up and become more like the films. Perhaps it really is time for Batman to be happy.

More: 15 Superheroes And Villains You Didn’t Know Were Married

Batman #50 is available now from DC Comics and ComiXology.