The Batman - 2022

[hungrycrow]

Yeah, but that wasn’t the point the comic was trying to make. It was a response to The Authority specifically, the idea that superheroes could make the world do what they wanted through superior power. Showing that that was actually a bad thing.

The way to respond to that if you don’t like it isn’t to show that it’s scary to people it is used against but it works, because everyone will imagine it being used against “the right people” it’s to show that it doesn’t work.

Everyone would imagine that unrestrained force would only be used against "the right people" which is why Superman makes the fight so scary: he's shattering that misconception by showing that he could be using unrestrained force to settle petty grudges.

Ultimately the story doesn't care whether killing supervillains or other brutal methods actually work, it's only point is that Superman and other superheroes shouldn't be making that call. If they ever did, they would essentially become the Elites: a bunch of entitled ubermensches using their power however they saw fit. The only thing making superheroes moral paragons is that they leave that kind of moral choice up to legitimate authorities.

[GloatingSwine]

Everyone would imagine that unrestrained force would only be used against "the right people" which is why Superman makes the fight so scary: he's shattering that misconception by showing that he could be using unrestrained force to settle petty grudges.

Ultimately the story doesn't care whether killing supervillains or other brutal methods actually work, it's only point is that Superman and other superheroes shouldn't be making that call. If they ever did, they would essentially become the Elites: a bunch of entitled ubermensches using their power however they saw fit. The only thing making superheroes moral paragons is that they leave that kind of moral choice up to legitimate authorities.

Yeah, that’s also why you need to structure the story so that the method is shown to be ineffective not just show that your chosen hero can do it even better.

Like show some Authority type behaviour from The Elite, toppling a dictatorship or two, doing righteous violence to the deserving for the catharsis of the audience etc, show Superman being a humanitarian, then throw them into conflict because he “doesn’t do enough” then have him drag Manchester Black to all the places he has been and show that they haven’t actually changed anything. They haven’t addressed the causes in the way Superman does.

Show the ideological weakness of the thing being criticised not the physical weakness.

[Lord Raziere]

Yet somehow......the comic worked. It did mark the end of the Iron age of comic books. People were inspired to think of superheroes to be better than a bunch of killers from it, and its held up as one of the better superman stories you could read, and the Authority is.....some random obscure comic book no one has ever heard of while DC and Marvel continue to be the big cheeses. It was effective enough. you may not like the method, but that doesn't mean it didn't work.

[Anteros]

Superman just defeats The Elite by being more super than them, not by being more human. In his best stories his humanity is his greatest strength.

You've missed the point. Superman's intent in that fight isn't to show that their methods are ineffective.
His intent is to showcase how much their brutal methods suck for their victims. He shows them how terrifying and traumatizing their methods are when compared to his usual methods that don't traumatize people.

Is he wrong? Of course he is. He's a comic book character using comic book logic. It doesn't stand up to real world scrutiny any more than the Batman allowing Joker to go free and murder thousands every other week. Like with most traditional comics, you have to be willing to suspend your disbelief at how naïve his world view is in order to enjoy the story.

[GloatingSwine]

Yet somehow......the comic worked. It did mark the end of the Iron age of comic books. People were inspired to think of superheroes to be better than a bunch of killers from it, and its held up as one of the better superman stories you could read, and the Authority is.....some random obscure comic book no one has ever heard of while DC and Marvel continue to be the big cheeses. It was effective enough. you may not like the method, but that doesn't mean it didn't work.

If that were true, Superman would have been kept as far from the hands of Zack Snyder as was possible within the confines of this earth.

What's So Funny About.... showed exactly what a certain audience wanted, righteous violence done to the deserving, it only redefined who was deserving. It was exactly the same as the book it set out to criticise, but possibly even more naive because it failed to examine the failure modes of what it railed against before it did so. A Better World it was not.

You've missed the point. Superman's intent in that fight isn't to show that their methods are ineffective.
His intent is to showcase how much their brutal methods suck for their victims. He shows them how terrifying and traumatizing their methods are when compared to his usual methods that don't traumatize people.

Is he wrong? Of course he is. He's a comic book character using comic book logic. It doesn't stand up to real world scrutiny any more than the Batman allowing Joker to go free and murder thousands every other week. Like with most traditional comics, you have to be willing to suspend your disbelief at how naïve his world view is in order to enjoy the story.

Right, but when the writer sets out to criticise another story, as Joe Kelly did, they can't afford that laziness. It doesn't mean a damn thing to show how traumatising the methods are if you show them being effective because the audience will always find an excuse for them to be acceptable. A target they can be used on, a good cause for righteous violence.

The Superman of "What's So Funny About..." is no different from the Superman of Dark Knight Returns, or Kingdom Come, or the Justice Lords, or Injustice. He's a Superman who decided it is good to force others to behave the way he thinks is right no matter what.

[Anteros]

I mean, that's always what he does. Punch people until they stop doing things he doesn't like. I don't know why people like to pretend Superman is some high brow literature about human nature. It's not and it never has been. The writers have to write stories for the characters as they're defined. They don't have the freedom to write a Superman story where he's not an idiot who lets murderers run free. Weak justifications are all they can do.

Aside from that though, his goal isn't to force them into line. Again, it's to show how brutal their methods are. That's why the whole fight is televised, and he gives a big dramatic speech to the world at the end. He's more than powerful enough to have taken them down without pretending to kill them and then immediately going "just kidding." His show of pretending to kill them had literally no effect on the outcome of that fight.

[hungrycrow]

Is he wrong? Of course he is. He's a comic book character using comic book logic. It doesn't stand up to real world scrutiny any more than the Batman allowing Joker to go free and murder thousands every other week. Like with most traditional comics, you have to be willing to suspend your disbelief at how naïve his world view is in order to enjoy the story.

The real answer to why batman doesn't kill the joker or why superman doesn't kill atomic skull is that DCverse citizens should be changing the laws and having the court system kill the Joker or Atomic Skull. Of course discussing that would get too bureaucratic and pull people out of their immersion in comic book logic. So they just leave it at saying Batman and Superman shouldn't be executioners.

[Anteros]

The real answer to why batman doesn't kill the joker or why superman doesn't kill atomic skull is that DCverse citizens should be changing the laws and having the court system kill the Joker or Atomic Skull. Of course discussing that would get too bureaucratic and pull people out of their immersion in comic book logic. So they just leave it at saying Batman and Superman shouldn't be executioners.

I would say that the real reason is that characters like the Joker are massive cash cows, and they like their Scrooge Mcduck piles of money. Plus the characters originating from a time when the no killing in comics rule was a thing.

Plus, it's probably hard to write 60 years of stories with new antagonists every time because you keep killing them off.

[Lord Raziere]

If that were true, Superman would have been kept as far from the hands of Zack Snyder as was possible within the confines of this earth.

And thanks to internet rage likes yours, I've never actually seen those movies. I barely remember the internet parodies of them. aside from maybe a couple jokes about things like "Martha" or Wonder Woman's theme being used a lot. But I still remember what Superman stands for and what he should be.

[Manga Shoggoth]

I wonder what Zack Snyder would make of Stardust the Super Wizard...

[Trafalgar]

Just watched Dune and saw the Batman trailer again.

One thing I don't like is Batman is treating his armor like its 100% impervious to bullets. He is walking into automatic weapons fire like he is Superman or Ironman.

I normally think of Batman's armor being light enough to move around in but strong enough to deflect a bullet if he doesn't dodge in time. In the trailer there are two scenes where he makes no attempt at dodging and just takes the gunshots. Even though the lower half of his face is exposed.

[Talakeal]

Just watched Dune and saw the Batman trailer again.

One thing I don't like is Batman is treating his armor like its 100% impervious to bullets. He is walking into automatic weapons fire like he is Superman or Ironman.

I normally think of Batman's armor being light enough to move around in but strong enough to deflect a bullet if he doesn't dodge in time. In the trailer there are two scenes where he makes no attempt at dodging and just takes the gunshots. Even though the lower half of his face is exposed.

Yeah, Batman shouldn't be immune to bullets.

The idea is for Batman to let his enemies THINK he is invincible, not to actually be the Terminator.

Still, it could make a great "Darth Vader in Rogue One" style scene if it is explicitly done from the criminal's perspective.

Yet somehow......the comic worked. It did mark the end of the Iron age of comic books. People were inspired to think of superheroes to be better than a bunch of killers from it, and its held up as one of the better superman stories you could read, and the Authority is.....some random obscure comic book no one has ever heard of while DC and Marvel continue to be the big cheeses. It was effective enough. you may not like the method, but that doesn't mean it didn't work.

I always thought it was a bad, hypocritical, Superman comic, and the idea that mutilating someone and keeping them on drugs is somehow morally superior to just killing them always struck me as especially perverse.

That being said, I don't disagree with this.

The Iron Age was all about deconstructing Super Heroes and thinking critically about the lines between good and evil. Examining what type of people would become costumed vigilantes and what the effects would be. Debating whether or not the Punisher is worse than a Batman who keeps letting Joker live to kill again.

This is pretty much a straightforward "Might makes write. Don't question the hypocrisy because I have a giant S on my chest!" Superhero story. That being said, I would postulate that the Iron Age more likely came to an end because the post 9-11 world wasn't really a great time for moral ambiguity in escapist fiction.

[Traab]

I always liked it when we get to experience how the thugs and such see him, and they see Batman as The Bat. This spooky sinister monster in the shadows, not human, a mythological creature. It shows that the underworld in general see him how he portrays himself. A symbol of fear. Not so much the big bads, but the underlings? Yeah, they are pretty terrified of running into him.

[The Glyphstone]

I can't take him as Batman, I keep expecting him to bite someone.)

He was Cedric Diggory first, why can't he whip out a wand and broomstick?

[Traab]

He was Cedric Diggory first, why can't he whip out a wand and broomstick?

/Nolan voice "I put on my robe and wizard hat!"

[Peelee]

/Nolan voice "I put on my robe and wizard hat!"

Now that's a reference I've not heard in a long time... A long time.

[Traab]

Now that's a reference I've not heard in a long time... A long time.

I considered a reference to casting magic missile at the darkness but couldnt think of a good way to link it to batman.

[Peelee]

I considered a reference to casting magic missile at the darkness but couldnt think of a good way to link it to batman.

That's just Cedric Diggory vs Batman.

[Fyraltari]

He was Cedric Diggory first, why can't he whip out a wand and broomstick?

Because Diggory was a supporting character, not a lead.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Look stop blaming Batman for the Jokers continual existence. It’s not his fault Gotham hasn’t executed the Clown. Take away the comic book logic and the Joker would have been executed.’Or the police would have beat him to death after one arrest and blamed it on the Batman.
“The Joker died due to injuries suffered fighting The Batman, given the circumstances of the Joker threatening hundreds of lives the DAs office has concluded his use of force justified.”

The Joker only lives because then Government can’t execute or contain him. It’s not Batman’s job to be Judge Dredd.

DC movies need to stop being ashamed to be comic book movies though. There should be a rule in their production rooms that if the words "grounded" or "realistic" are ever spoken James Gunn gets to walk in and slap whoever said it with a wet starfish.

Unless their name is Christopher Nolan.

[GloatingSwine]

Look stop blaming Batman for the Jokers continual existence. It’s not his fault Gotham hasn’t executed the Clown. Take away the comic book logic and the Joker would have been executed.’Or the police would have beat him to death after one arrest and blamed it on the Batman.
“The Joker died due to injuries suffered fighting The Batman, given the circumstances of the Joker threatening hundreds of lives the DAs office has concluded his use of force justified.”

The Joker only lives because then Government can’t execute or contain him. It’s not Batman’s job to be Judge Dredd.

Pfft, this is the DC universe where death is a mild inconvenience at best.

The Joker lives because when he escapes from Arkham it's in the news and Batman can do something about it, when he came back from the dead he'd have months for shenangians before anyone realised it was him again.

And that’s assuming he doesn’t do something even more inconvenient like hang around as a ghost or something or come back via magic nanotechnology when you’re old.

No, far better to keep him corporeal so you can keep an eye on what he’s up to.

[Peelee]

Look stop blaming Batman for the Jokers continual existence. It’s not his fault Gotham hasn’t executed the Clown. Take away the comic book logic and the Joker would have been executed.’Or the police would have beat him to death after one arrest and blamed it on the Batman.
“The Joker died due to injuries suffered fighting The Batman, given the circumstances of the Joker threatening hundreds of lives the DAs office has concluded his use of force justified.”

The Joker only lives because then Government can’t execute or contain him. It’s not Batman’s job to be Judge Dredd.

I find it odd how your "without comic book logic" argument immediately dives straight into comic book logic.

Whatever state Gotham City is in does not have the death penalty (at least, in DC world), so no, they would not execute Joker because they can't execute Joker. He probably would die at the hands of police, but I'm baffled as to why you think they'd beat him to death - the police have guns, after all. He'd almost certainly be shot, and just as almost certainly be justified under the defense of others justification defense. The police would have no problem taking credit, especially since they would not be working with or exonerating Batman; without comic book logic, cops hate vigilantes and vigilantes usually get arrested and put on trial for their actions. Unless Gotham wants to make Batman an agent of the state, which would come with an enormous host of problems (even assuming Batman agreed, which he would be an absolute fool to do).

[Fyraltari]

Take away the comic book logic and the Joker would have been executed.

Take away the comic book logic and there wouldn't be a Joker to execute. He's not a very realistic criminal.

[Peelee]

Take away the comic book logic and there wouldn't be a Joker to execute. He's not a very realistic criminal.

You made my point but better. Even if he tried to start out doing crime, he'd get killed pretty fast.

[Fyraltari]

Whatever state Gotham City is in does not have the death penalty (at least, in DC world)

Except when they do.

He probably would die at the hands of police, but I'm baffled as to why you think they'd beat him to death - the police have guns, after all.

Because you can't write "abuse of power" without "torture". well, you can, but, it's not as fun.

Unless Gotham wants to make Batman an agent of the state, which would come with an enormous host of problems (even assuming Batman agreed, which he would be an absolute fool to do).

Yeah, they'd have to set up some sort of system to call him, like a huge physics-defying projector or something...
Hey, didn't Batman franchise himself, one time?

[Psyren]

"Bat-signal exists" = "Batman is an agent of the state" feels kinda suspect to me. Yeah the police call him when they need help, and a lot of the time he shows up, but it's not like he answers to them in any meaningful way.

As for Joker - my problem is less about him constantly escaping, and more that he has to have this grimdark writing where he succeeds in killing a whole bunch of innocent people every time he gets out nowadays, which throws Batman's competence (and that of the Gotham judiciary) into question constantly. If you're going to keep him alive, at least let Batman stop him in time. I remember older stories where he would poison a bunch of people or trap them next to a bomb with a long fuse, or maybe blow up the support pillars of a building, something Batman could react to and use his brains and gadgets to get everyone out of safely. Or maybe he'd kill rival gangs or something. But when you have him just going ham on civilians then all the arguments for Batman's philosophy tend to ring a bit hollow to me.

[The Glyphstone]

Because Diggory was a supporting character, not a lead.

But he was the Real Hogwarts Champion...Potter Stinks

[HolyDraconus]

"Bat-signal exists" = "Batman is an agent of the state" feels kinda suspect to me. Yeah the police call him when they need help, and a lot of the time he shows up, but it's not like he answers to them in any meaningful way.

Wasn't Batman being an agent of the state the main argument Joker had in White Knight, and won that case?

[Vahnavoi]

Batman has flip-flopped between being part of the police department or not throughout the years. Sometimes he's a vigilante, hated by the cops and hunted just as well as his rogue's gallery, sometimes he's a deputized detective openly collaborating with the police and called to testify in court.

Stop looking for consistency in a character with dozens of different versions by dozens of different authors. Continuity and canonicity in superhero comics are big, fat lies.

[Phobia]

I hate this common idea of Superman being bland. It's solely due to him being neutered for the modern age. Superman is an immigrant who tries to embody what's best about his chosen country but is still alien to it. His story is more relevant than ever. Especially because his creators were Jewish during WW2 and created Superman to be Jewish originally as a big middle-finger to Hitler's idea of the ubermench but were not allowed to by their publisher. It's a good clap-back whenever I hear someone saying 'wahhh why didn't minorities just make their own characters'. Because they were literally not allowed to. And if the creators of the greatest comic superhero couldn't even do it how they wanted then how was anyone else supposed to. He's the idea of, what if someone with God-like power used that to be good? And not just a little good but all the way good unrestrained by laws. The original Superman didn't stop and say, oh gosh, that would be illegal. No! He was flying straight into billionaires offices, kidnapping them, and forcing them to fight on the front-line of a war they were profiting from all the while laughing at their attempts to not be shot by a gun they sold. Superman forced corrupt bosses to experience the horrible conditions they put their workers through. He was straight up picking up cop cars and rescuing the arrested people inside if he didn't agree with them being arrested. And these aren't even corrupt cops, just regular cops, but Superman doesn't recognize their authority because he is all-powerful and more moral than them, what can they do? Superman is punk as hell.