|
Monaghan posted:I liking Batman and the Red hood, but it has the dumbest justification for batman not kiling the joker so it bugs me every time. I think it has trouble articulating its point, but I do understand the point it is trying to make, I think. I believe Batman is saying he doesn't kill the Joker or people like him because it would quickly become his go to method for dealing with problems like that. It wouldn't stop at Joker, or Penguin, or Two Face, or Black Mask. I think the implication is that he is already kind of addicted to crossing legal lines and using violence to deal with criminals, if he normalizes the idea of killing them for himself, he's going to become addicted to that too, and it would be very, very easy for him to do it. Probably much easier than what he is doing now. It's an interesting idea that a lot of comic stuff seem to dance around, but I have never seen any one story really commit to exploring the idea deeply. Basically Batman knows that there is something wrong with him, and if he crosses the line and starts killing people, he knows that it will never end and he is going to leave a trail of bodies where ever he goes.
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:31 |
|
|
I will say that Under the Red Hood probably has my favourite look into the breaking point of an ex-Robin (as much as I love Return of the Joker it's treatment of Tim Drake was kind of lovely and easily the biggest flaw with that movie).
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
haitfais posted:It was just Jack Nicholson playing Jack Nicholson in face paint. It worked because Nicholson's normal demeanour is that of a potentially dangerous lunatic, but it's really nothing special. You could get the same performance just by having a casual conversation with him. I don't think that's true or fair of Jack Nicholson. It just started with One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest and from there on out it was a type of performance he got known for, casted for, and he leaned into it. By the time of Batman '89 it was just an almost obvious choice and it lended some respectability to what was a big budget comic book movie in a time when that wasn't really respected at all. ToastyPotato posted:I think it has trouble articulating its point, but I do understand the point it is trying to make, I think. I believe Batman is saying he doesn't kill the Joker or people like him because it would quickly become his go to method for dealing with problems like that. It wouldn't stop at Joker, or Penguin, or Two Face, or Black Mask. I think the implication is that he is already kind of addicted to crossing legal lines and using violence to deal with criminals, if he normalizes the idea of killing them for himself, he's going to become addicted to that too, and it would be very, very easy for him to do it. Probably much easier than what he is doing now. It's an interesting idea that a lot of comic stuff seem to dance around, but I have never seen any one story really commit to exploring the idea deeply. This. This is a good post.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:I think it has trouble articulating its point, but I do understand the point it is trying to make, I think. I believe Batman is saying he doesn't kill the Joker or people like him because it would quickly become his go to method for dealing with problems like that. It wouldn't stop at Joker, or Penguin, or Two Face, or Black Mask. I think the implication is that he is already kind of addicted to crossing legal lines and using violence to deal with criminals, if he normalizes the idea of killing them for himself, he's going to become addicted to that too, and it would be very, very easy for him to do it. Probably much easier than what he is doing now. It's an interesting idea that a lot of comic stuff seem to dance around, but I have never seen any one story really commit to exploring the idea deeply. Yep. I was talking with some people accusing Batman of being a Libertarian ideal. The fundamental flaw with that argument is the idea that Batman is anyone's ideal anything.I have a lot of comics to read I know but at least in the animated series, I felt like there was a very obvious relation between Batman and his villains. As in, he's hardly any different from them. The only thing keeping him from becoming as bad as they are is his no kill rule. I was told this idea that Batman is a deranged madman on the edge is a product of Miller and before him Batman was a true ideal but I have no proof eitehr way on that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:I felt like there was a very obvious relation between Batman and his villains. As in, he's hardly any different from them. The only thing keeping him from becoming as bad as they are is his no kill rule. There's also the escalation idea that keeps popping up in more modern stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Yep. I was talking with some people accusing Batman of being a Libertarian ideal. The fundamental flaw with that argument is the idea that Batman is anyone's ideal anything.I have a lot of comics to read I know but at least in the animated series, I felt like there was a very obvious relation between Batman and his villains. As in, he's hardly any different from them. The only thing keeping him from becoming as bad as they are is his no kill rule. Batman is a child's power fantasy and the Miller version is Miller's childish power fantasy. EDIT: 30s-70s Batman, I mean. I AM GRANDO fucked around with this message at 12:20 on Apr 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
I liked the X-Men Evolution episode with X-23 in it. I remember that show had Spyke and I remember really not liking him, but I do not know why.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
X-23 was created specifically for X-Men Evolution. I remember absolutely hating that decision and letting the character's creator know about it on an old animation message board I briefly moderated. Spyke was the worst character. He was basically Poochie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
SonicRulez posted:I liked the X-Men Evolution episode with X-23 in it. I remember that show had Spyke and I remember really not liking him, but I do not know why. X-23 had one of my favorite fights in the series against Wolverine in her intro episode. https://youtu.be/C48AQQRo_8s?t=16m12s Other standout fights were: Scarlet Witch destroying the entire X-Men team with ease, the X-Men vs. Juggernaut at the start of Season 3, and Magneto vs. Apocalypse where Apocalypse annihilates Mags with a wave of his hand and then Pyro watches Magneto die on replay over and over again while laughing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
So X-23 is Marvel's Harley Quinn? I had no idea. She is so intertwined with stuff in recent years that I had no idea she debuted in such a modestly popular cartoon. I guess she is a bit different from Quinn because she has completely overshadowed her origins and Harley, while being massively popular now, hasn't really overshadowed BTAS, since that is such a juggernaut on its own. Are these the only two characters to successfully cross over from another medium?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
Didn't Firestar start in Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends? She was created because they didn't have the rights to the Human Torch for whatever reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Jimmy Olsen first appeared on the Superman radio show. And Renee Montoya was a B:TAS original too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
There's also Firestar, from Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends back in the 80s. Originally they planned to use the Human Torch, but couldn't for reasons, so they made a new character and eventually brought her into the comic continuity. They gave her a much darker backstory, because that was what comics were like at the time. I don't think any writers really liked to use her though, so she alternates between being a joke and being part of the background. Herbie from the Fantastic Four cartoon also got picked up by the comics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
Does Coulson count?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
The Music Meister just made an appearance on The Flash/Supergirl crossover episode a few weeks back, and he debuted on Batman: The Brave and The Bold. (If you wanna get pedantic he acted more like Mxyptlk, but he was billed as the Music Meister and it was a musical)
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
Livewire and Mercy from Superman TAS. Chloe from Smallville. Batman Beyond. Bebop and Rocksteady. The list is pretty long, but there aren't many as big as X-23 or Harley.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Diggle also got brought over from Arrow into the comics. Felicity was already there but as a totally different character. Firestorm's stepmother or something?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Does Diggle have the worst helmets in the world in the comics too?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Reinanigans posted:X-23 was created specifically for X-Men Evolution. I remember absolutely hating that decision and letting the character's creator know about it on an old animation message board I briefly moderated. The first time I saw X-23 was on a VS System card, and I remember wondering who the gently caress the girl Wolverine was. Then someone told me they gave Wolverine a daughter, and I was vindicated in my knowledge that DC remained superior to Marvel.  Of course, that was almost 15 years ago. AlternateNu fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Apr 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:Does Coulson count? Please don't discuss Cheese in BSS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:There's also Firestar, from Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends back in the 80s. Originally they planned to use the Human Torch, but couldn't for reasons, so they made a new character and eventually brought her into the comic continuity. They gave her a much darker backstory, because that was what comics were like at the time. I don't think any writers really liked to use her though, so she alternates between being a joke and being part of the background. She was in the New Warriors for all of the 90s. And was maybe in the xmen or new mutants for a while too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:Does Diggle have the worst helmets in the world in the comics too? No thank God. Aphrodite posted:Diggle also got brought over from Arrow into the comics. It's kind of a reach because it's not really Thea, but Oliver now has a little half-sister who wears red and fights alongside him. For more kinda-sorta crossovers, the new Wasp in Marvel is Hank Pym's daughter Nadia. And people were quick to point out that Nadia means "hope" in many languages but surely that's not related to Hope Pym from the Ant-Man movie. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Batman is a child's power fantasy and the Miller version is Miller's childish power fantasy. A lot of Miller's fantasy is rooted in him being a kid from Vermont who moved to NYC at a rough time and got mugged a bunch. And look, let's be clear, that sucks. But Miller's fantasy isn't a child's fantasy. The fantasy of Batman is rooted in unfairness and a child's ability to see something that adults accept being unfair or illogical. Miller's Batman work, especially TDKR, is more patriarchal. It's about an adult telling these young super-predators the way it is. And I think the ultimate thing that really breaks Miller as a Batman creator is that despite writing about big grimy cities, I think on a fundamental level Frank doesn't have a love for New York or at least doesn't have a love for the parts of it that he doesn't get. A lot of his career has been reconciling that with tough white men who can control New York. And that extends to his Batman. His Batman does not love Gotham. His Gotham is a pretty detestable thing. And I think that's actually something key to the character. Batman has to, on some level, love Gotham. Like Snyder's run or the Nolan films, that love can be a self-destructive thing. But for Miller, Gotham isn't something that Batman saves. It's something that Batman must defeat. It's impossible for it really be a child's fantasy, because Miller's Batman fantasy is one that requires a level of insecurity a child cannot possibly have. Also, I've said this before, but Batman's not killing rule is fine as long as you just don't think the Joker has killed hundreds of people. It's sort of this arbitrary thing that TDKR declared and we all just agreed with. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Apr 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
The perfect death for The Joker to me (which will obviously never happen for many reasons) is some cop just shoots him. I think of like in Batman Arkham Asylum when the doctor is examining him in the beginning and he says "Boo!" Everyone in the room visibly jumps. What if just one guard had itchy trigger finger. He'd be a hero.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
You'd think, at this point, some doctor or nurse or whatever from Arkham would have been like "gently caress it, I'll take the hit". Like, the Joker's body count is huge, not to even mention just the people he's maimed or harmed in other ways over the years. At this point, someone would probably have just decided to kill him in cold blood when he's locked up, and do the time.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
Kurui Reiten posted:You'd think, at this point, some doctor or nurse or whatever from Arkham would have been like "gently caress it, I'll take the hit". Like, the Joker's body count is huge, not to even mention just the people he's maimed or harmed in other ways over the years. At this point, someone would probably have just decided to kill him in cold blood when he's locked up, and do the time. Because then the Joker's boyfriend would immediately swoop in and be all like hh we can't be like him hhhhhh there's due process THAT MAKE THE WORLD MAKE SENSE GRUNT and give him mouth to mouth accompanied by a tender cardiac massage
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:Because then the Joker's boyfriend would immediately swoop in and be all like hh we can't be like him hhhhhh there's due process THAT MAKE THE WORLD MAKE SENSE GRUNT and give him mouth to mouth accompanied by a tender cardiac massage Pretty much why I hate Batman.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 01:50
|
|
SonicRulez posted:The perfect death for The Joker to me (which will obviously never happen for many reasons) is some cop just shoots him. I think of like in Batman Arkham Asylum when the doctor is examining him in the beginning and he says "Boo!" Everyone in the room visibly jumps. What if just one guard had itchy trigger finger. He'd be a hero. 
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
That's one of my favorite/least favorite things about these proposed moral dilemmas about killing villains. Police kill dangerous criminals all the loving time. There isn't even much moral outrage when it happens either. The only time people get upset is when it seem unclear whether the person was actually dangerous. So it is pretty hilarious when these comics and tv shows have characters go off about how killing dangerous super villains is wrong when there are probably dozens of legal reasons why killing them would be perfectly reasonable. The only time it has made sense is basically the Under the Red Hood interpretation I mentioned before, because that isn't about morals and ethics, it's about a sick man knowing that there isn't any coming back from that for him personally.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 02:03
|
|
|
I always thought it was weird in the animated series that Gotham doesn't have capital punishment, but Metropolis definitely does. The politics and morality of the whole thing gets thorny, but the last minute realization that Clark Kent was Superman was neat.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
SonicRulez posted:The perfect death for The Joker to me (which will obviously never happen for many reasons) is some cop just shoots him. I think of like in Batman Arkham Asylum when the doctor is examining him in the beginning and he says "Boo!" Everyone in the room visibly jumps. What if just one guard had itchy trigger finger. He'd be a hero. It's sort of weird when you think about the fact that Batman has been shot at and hit by the police more often than the Joker has.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
I legit want to see a long story where Joker is doing his stupid poo poo taking the city hostage or something, Batman tries to take him down, a GCPD sniper takes the shot, and Joker's just dead. Batman and the rest of the world has to deal with that; obviously the vast, vast majority of the world is happy Joker's dead. The supervillains are happy Joker's dead. People are saying that it should have happened sooner. Almost every single person on the planet is happy Joker is dead. Batman doing his Batman thing, and having to deal with people who are like "Yeah, that's nice, but look at how much better everything is when the mass murdering psychopaths AREN'T around to kill people anymore". Not in like a story saying "Well DUH, Batman should kill the Joker", but a story exploring "in a world where the Joker's been killed by a cop, what happens to Batman and his mission in Gotham".
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
Morrison's Batman opens with the Joker getting shot in the face by a vigilante and he survives. Let's face it, this will never end.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
what they need to do is write more stories where Joker and other supervillains are doing things other than killing people.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Or at least stories where they plan on killing people but Batman actually stops them instead of just looking at corpses and getting upset for 4 issues before finding them.
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Or at least stories where they plan on killing people but Batman actually stops them instead of just looking at corpses and getting upset for 4 issues before finding them. Superheroes stopping villains? Pffh, that poo poo is outdated Lurdiak. Nowdays they only fight each other or fail miserably.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:The only time it has made sense is basically the Under the Red Hood interpretation I mentioned before, because that isn't about morals and ethics, it's about a sick man knowing that there isn't any coming back from that for him personally. Yep, this is why I defend Batman against a lot of his haters. This interpretation of the no kill rule, as a flaw more than anything, is interesting and sensible. The problem is stuff like The Dark Knight wants to make it a sign of how noble he is, when it's really a sign of how hosed up he is. I was recently thinking about Man of Steel and The Dark Knight. How many people wanted Bats to just off The Joker yet then they went on to get their panties in a twist when Supes killed Zod?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
Batman is boring and lame.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
With Superman I guess the reasoning is that he is so godlike that they want the character to hold himself to a higher standard than the average man, so they would prefer Supes use his immense power to find alternatives to seemingly unwinnable situations. For Superman, snapping someone's neck seems like a cheap way out, even if they are somewhat equally matched. For me, I think that would have been the perfect end to a fight with Zod... had it come at the end of a long series between the two, or if this had been the second or third film in the series. What happens when Superman is given no choice? It is an interesting question to ask, but in the film it was like, welp, it's over, now we are smiling at each other in the office THE END. And of course BVS did nothing with it because that movie was just a mess.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 05:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:31 |
|
|
Not everyone is going to have the same perception of something that's gone as long and has as many stories as Batman but this reminds me of how DCAU dealt with this kind of thing, and "what if Superman just did things the easy way" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98-DID68RlY
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 05:55
|
|
