Thelogan Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Link to the essay Secondly, Batman could make it such that The Joker’s death appears to be an accident. This means The Dark Knight can retain his image as a nonlethal superhero, but still have the chaotic force of The Joker forever gone. Yup, this guy only has the vaguest idea of what Batman is all about. I stopped even entertaining his ideas right there. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Unrelated: I bet Batman has considered what an awesome partner a rehabilitated (or brainwashed) Joker would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted February 26, 2012 Author Share Posted February 26, 2012 yeah, what's the point of going halfway? so the cops still quietly play ball? i bet if you put joker's head on a fucking spike (where it belongs) outside of wayne manor, cops wouldn't say shit and the crime would go down a bit too. this is why daredevil is cooler; he killed his joker and then took over a ninja army. batman could do both of these things but would rather longingly look at pics of adventures with superman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Leave it to Nick to bring a lame DD comparison to a Batman thread. That's like bringing a knife to a gun fight. Link to the essay Yup, this guy only has the vaguest idea of what Batman is all about. I stopped even entertaining his ideas right there. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Unrelated: I bet Batman has considered what an awesome partner a rehabilitated (or brainwashed) Joker would be. Agreed about the stopping point, Logan, but I read the whole thing anyway. Why he feels the need to kill the Joker rather than just lobotomize him is never addressed though. Frankly, I think that'd be a solution a "real world" Batman would get behind. Of course the Batman in the comics could never do this b/c then there'd be no more Joker stories. The author also updated the end of the blog w/ links to articles, including the one Ly posted, that mentioned his blog. He was basically dismissive of any opposing view and just seemed to gloat in the attention. I think he'd fit right in at Hondo's. I also noticed the article's author is named Tauriq Moosa. *waits for Jza to make inappropriate and likely hilarious racist comment* And as for Logan's unrelated: that idea of rehabiltated Joker working w/ Bats has "possibly epic Elseworld story" written all over it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted February 26, 2012 Author Share Posted February 26, 2012 i knew it. miller/bendis daredevil = too high-brow for this crowd. also: comics-batman would snap joker's neck from a windowsill. go read your classics, alleged bat-fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Typical DD fan, equating the sum of a character to his/her "early issues" or a particular story arc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I really hope NZA isn't referencing DKR, cuz that would mean he missed something. And it sounds like he's equating the sum of the character with his "20 years after appearing" issues, which is exactly what on should do in DD's case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted February 26, 2012 Author Share Posted February 26, 2012 sorry if i didn't follow haku or logans' posts; i don't fluently speak faggot batman once had the stones to do what needed to be done. he remembered it in batman begins. everything in between is some bullshit dichotomy to sell issues - oh no i dont want to use a gun like my father died from until it's darkseid; i don't care enough about the denizens of gotham to compromise my bullshit morals and kill except the times that i do, because joker sells issues. everytime dude comes out of the revolving door that is arkham and batman isn't there to beat him back into a cell, people die - simple logic shows this pattern. bats already disregards the rule of law by being a costumed vigilante, which, anyone who read the year+ arc where dick wore the mantle (it was great) realized that batman's an idiot who never has his criminals even see trial for lack of evidence - nightwing-bats took and left footage to play ball with the criminal justice system; wayne-bats doesn't even bother because he'd rather wait till people die during the day to feel self-important at night and beat another non-brawler into submission, letting the cycle/his purpose continue, knowing full well that the punisher would not only fix all these problems in a single evening, it'd be done decisively and save half a generation of innocents. it's fine in comics i guess, but it's pretty silly if given even a moment's thought. Daredevil publicly broke Bullseye's neck after the guy raped/killed a few of his women and then blew up an entire city block, getting a pardon Osborn (talk about dumb civilian decisions...). The CIA frequently employed Lester as a killer before, and this is why he was allowed to live that long - until someone did what had to be done. Kyle Rayner did this once too, look it up. TL;DR - that article was bullshit, but arguing that "batman's character doesn't kill" blah blah blah is golden age horseshit. captain america killed nazis in WWII; that doenst mean he kills every villain he crosses if there's other options. it's not a strictly binary thing - killer/no killer: every major DC character has killed, most have just had it "fixed" in retconning the events leading to that decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Booze makes you surly as fuck. What the hell are you even responding to? No one said any of the things you're taking imaginary exception to. I bitched because the dude writing the article thinks Batman doesn't kill people because he has to maintain an image for good publicity, and Batman doesn't give a shit about those things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted February 26, 2012 Author Share Posted February 26, 2012 see? it's like a second language for you, m'man back on topic: you're not speaking for the majority of voters on this thread's poll who think batman killing destroys his character. bin laden had killed a fraction of the joker's death count, but i'm supposed to suspend belief that not only would people keep buying property in detroit gotham, they'd tolerate letting that slide, if not encouraging it by bungling due process? you misread me and quoted the scene in DKR where joker ends himself, because even when Miller was pushing boundaries in the day, it was okay to have nazi-titties and supes as reagan's bitch, but not wayne doing the right thing. that's the point here. it's fucking well silly. ps which is exactly what on should do in DD's case. moonspeak. what does this even mean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Oh, ok. You're responding to the general thread topic/poll and not responding to anything that's been said in the last two years. Now I get it. I know you think you're being really coherent, but I promise you aren't. I agree that he should kill him. It would be, in my eyes, the truly good thing to do. Now, the reason he doesn't is because he's fucked up in the head, and if he crossed that line he would have to ask himself some uncomfortable questions which he'd rather ignore. So, at the end of the day, he doesn't do it because he's selfish. The noble thing to do at this point, after all the carnage Joker has created, would be to get it done and save countless lives. He doesn't do it because it would make him feel bad afterwards. That's the only thing I can think of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycaon Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 What might have made an interesting story (at least before Fight Club and/or Identity) would be if the Joker were killed and it looks like Batman did it. He looks all over for the real killer, only to eventually find that the years of dealing with the Joker and the like have truly driven him batshit crazy, and that he had actually formed an extra personality or something to do the deed himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 He's already batshit crazy. Surprised it hasn't been done, really. At least in an out of continuity one shot. He has some alternate personalities stashed away for a rainy day/psychic attack (Zur-En-Arrh is what comes to mind). moonspeak. what does this even mean I forgot a vowel. Put your detective hat on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted February 26, 2012 Author Share Posted February 26, 2012 ...the sentence still doesn't make sense, in the light of day. is it me or does no one understand a fuckin' thing when logan talks?!!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Choke on a dick. Rewrite: NZA isn't talking about early DD, the earliest he's talking about is 80's DD, which is the correct thing to do. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted March 15, 2012 Share Posted March 15, 2012 (edited) Article on why Joker, and not Batman, is the savior of Gotham This is an interesting article, but The Tragedy of the Commons is only 1 of 7 Nash Equilibrium possible. It was cherry picked for a funny thought experiment where Joker is the good guy. Now let's try the Volunteer's Dilemma.In the Volunteer's Dilemma a group is faced with an inevitable negative, and the only way prevent it is for one member to assume the negative unto himself. The classic example is jumping on the grenade. Nobody wants to do it, but somebody has to or everyone dies. 1) Assume Cooperators and Defectors only. Cooperators will eventually volunteer, Defectors never will. There can be a balance where Cooperators significantly outnumber Defectors, but if this balance is disturbed the population will eventually end. 2) Add Jokers. Jokers in this case would be like Defectors and never volunteer. Worse, however, is that Jokers would probably be so interested in the destruction that they would actively prevent volunteering. There can be no balance in a group with even one Joker still alive, and the population will end. 3) Add Batmen. Batmen neutralize the Jokers' ability to prevent volunteers, and are willing to volunteer themselves. The balance is restored as long as there are enough of these individuals to restore moral and put the group first. So now, Jokers are harbingers of the end while Batmen are necessary for survival. Edited March 15, 2012 by Thelogan sup quote tags Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panch Posted March 15, 2012 Share Posted March 15, 2012 I believe Jokers would push others onto the grenade. And in some cases pick the grenade up and throw it at the largest concentration of people. I believe that over not wanting anyone to with hopes of maximum deaths. Jokers do wish to live, believe it or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted March 15, 2012 Share Posted March 15, 2012 In the scenario arguing against the link, I think you have a point. They wouldn't necessarily prevent volunteers: they would force them out of self preservation. No Batmen required. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrizzle Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I'm just gonna leave this here. No, you don't get a spoiler warning this far out. Also, it turns out Bruce Willis was dead the whole time. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panch Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 DAMMIT I CANT SEE ANYTHING!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted August 16, 2013 Author Share Posted August 16, 2013 "Alan Moore secretly wrote the last batman story" aka how DKR # 3 should've ended, especially with miller's all-star bullshit later on for real though i like this take, but smith is right; they'd just elseworlds this and butfuck their own continuity a bit more (currently the trend), which is such a cop-out but after death of the family that's clearly in season as well...pretty mind blowing take though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrizzle Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 It makes a lot of sense to me, in hindsight. Everything from the imagery in the puddle to the name of the fucking book. Literally the only thing that doesn't jive is that it doesn't look like he's grabbing him by the neck (I always thought he was giving him a playful punch in the arm or something), BUT that doesn't really matter because of the moment-in-time nature of a comic book panel. Sneaky bearded motherfucker made it subtle, making DC not realize that they needed to keep this out of continuity. I guess it doesn't really matter now, did this even happen anymore post New 52? Or did Babs just "get better"? I thought I remembered the one issue of Batgirl I read alluding to paralysis in some way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted August 16, 2013 Author Share Posted August 16, 2013 yeah, even without those problems, i wanna say bishop or someone was saying the bit of her being raped had been retconned or something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Fuuuuuuck! How did we not get that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted August 16, 2013 Author Share Posted August 16, 2013 because it was both subtle & unbelievable, the latter of which is the key here...even though you just read a book where joker does horrible, unheard of things (at that point in regular DCU) the thought of bats finally doing it - even then - just doesn't cross your mind. that's what's great about it. inversely, i was so certain he snapped joker's neck back in DKR 3 as a kid, refused to believe "joker snapped his own neck" for years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panch Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Thanks for changing the video if it was changed. This was one of the first comics I've ever read and was so confused by the ending. Even as a kid I thought "did he just kill him? Nah." Fucking amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.