it's the single most out of character moment in the franchise's history. Not a single Batman fan has ever defended this book. 2003-2005 Batman editorial was fricking evil. There's a reason Morrison's run is considered great, it's because of the nonsense that came before and after it
>it's the single most out of character moment in the franchise's history
Bruce does stuff like this all the time, it’s really not out of character.
Some people just can’t accept Bruce is not perfect and wholesome always, he’s eccentric and violent and weird with how much he wants to save lives. Morrison himself accepted and acknowledged that in Serious House, that craziness is part of Batman’s appeal. Take that away and he’d become boring
You're talking about a character with 80 years of history where the only times he's ever been presented as psychopathic have all occurred within the last 35 years of his publication history.
>Serious House, Datk Knight Returns
mentally ill, not psychopathic. Not devoid of empathy and would never put a child in harm's way. >Batman The Cult, Killing Joke and Death in the Family were all made in the 80s, anon
all took place in 88 or 89, 35 years ago, hence why I specified 35 years. Also two of those stories were done by Jim Starlin, whose Batman run is equally ridiculous.
Batman from 1988-1989 onward is a completely different character.
Jason’s not a damn child in Red Hood lmao. And if you mean Robins, DKR takes Carrie Kelley along with him to fight the most deraved Joker he’d ever fought up to that point
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>under 25
he's a child
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Go back to twitter holy shit lol
Old enough to fight in the army, old enough to frick around and find out from Batman
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
let me make this simple for you.
If you are male and under the age of 25, you are not a man.
>make story where Batman arrests joker >insanity plea doesn’t work and he gets the chair >I know Jesus has forgiven me.jpg >no more joker
There, problem solved.
>No Barbara, Joker didn’t come to your house and rape you because I let you be my sidekick. He doesn’t know who we are. Trust.
*later* >…ok yes, I ADMIT, Joker knows who we all are, and YES, I have always known this. BUT, and I mean BUT, he doesn’t actually care who we are so he didn’t rape you just because of that. >Well, he doesn’t care who I am, I don’t really know about you guys. He definitely cared who you are, Jason. He definitely tortured you because you worked for me. And you, Dick, that’s why he killed everyone in Hailey’s Circus like just yesterday, which we won’t bring up in the main book. Heck I remember this one time he poisoned Lois Lane and told me out loud he knows who Superman’s parents are. But no, definitely not YOU Barbara. Trust.
it's argued whether he raped her or just took her clothes off naked for no reason at all. Bullock was really sickened when he mentioned they found her nude. Book didn't say whether he did and Moore will never answer, so we won't know.
>for no reason at all
To humiliate her and frick with her dad? Or maybe the clothes got in the way of all the shit he was doing to her. Or maybe they got destroyed during these events.
Nothing, anywhere, has ever said he "just" took naked pictures. They only mention the paralysis part in follow up stuff, and have never ever mentioned the pictures.
that says he took pictures, not that he only took pictures and nothing else. She even says she goes into shock when he strips her, so she has no awareness of what happens next
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
so you're saying she got raped but is somehow unaware and the cops didn't tell her? All of the DC writers and editors also just rolled with that and didn't make it a big deal despite when chicks getting raped damn near defines them in cape stories? Your reasons for believing this?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
because the creative team on the original book have said it was left purposefully ambiguous, and Barbara going into shock is there to show she is unconscious for whatever happens next.
But also mostly because stripping her naked doesn't accomplish anything to the torture if he doesn't frick her after that. Oh no, Gordon saw her boob, that totally makes his suffering worse.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
he shot her, not just took naked pictures of her.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
k, but taking off her panties doesn't really have anything to do with torture though, if all he's doing is taking them off and doing nothing with that. Being naked isn't torture, you strip someone naked to have access to them.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I'd imagine that seeing your naked daughter bleeding out would be pretty traumatizing
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
no more traumatising than seeing your daughter bleeding out in a skirt and tubesocks.
Batman has saved dozens of hostages over the years without killing anyone. This is bad only because there's no reason he couldn't save the joker here without bloodshed.
Joker should be Batman's white whale: his obsession that he has to fix no matter what, the symbol of the dysfunction that took his parents from him. The reason he wears the costume. In that context saving him like this makes sense, what is losing one life (or several hundred) compared to giving up on Gotham and admitting its better off dead?
he wasn't willing, he was just at a loss at what to do since he didn't wanna arrest Gordon either. The page before that he was begging Gordon to please not shoot Joker, but he couldn't force him to stop.
The uniform in BvS isn't Jason's, it's Dick's.
Batman Arkham Knight didn't hurt Batman's image at all, the animation didn't hurt Batman's image at all, the comic didn't hurt Batman's image at all.
No. It's trash.
I legit think this plus the movie are what really started making people turn on Batman and question his moronic sense of justice.
redditors are not people
This, Batman letting Joker get away with murder is justice.
Joker goes to prison for murder, he explicitly doesn’t get away with it
Noone has “turned on” Batman, only the same vocal minority of morons there’s always been
it's the single most out of character moment in the franchise's history. Not a single Batman fan has ever defended this book. 2003-2005 Batman editorial was fricking evil. There's a reason Morrison's run is considered great, it's because of the nonsense that came before and after it
>it's the single most out of character moment in the franchise's history
Bruce does stuff like this all the time, it’s really not out of character.
Some people just can’t accept Bruce is not perfect and wholesome always, he’s eccentric and violent and weird with how much he wants to save lives. Morrison himself accepted and acknowledged that in Serious House, that craziness is part of Batman’s appeal. Take that away and he’d become boring
You're talking about a character with 80 years of history where the only times he's ever been presented as psychopathic have all occurred within the last 35 years of his publication history.
Batman The Cult, Serious House, Datk Knight Returns, Killing Joke and Death in the Family were all made in the 80s, anon
>Serious House, Datk Knight Returns
mentally ill, not psychopathic. Not devoid of empathy and would never put a child in harm's way.
>Batman The Cult, Killing Joke and Death in the Family were all made in the 80s, anon
all took place in 88 or 89, 35 years ago, hence why I specified 35 years. Also two of those stories were done by Jim Starlin, whose Batman run is equally ridiculous.
Batman from 1988-1989 onward is a completely different character.
Jason’s not a damn child in Red Hood lmao. And if you mean Robins, DKR takes Carrie Kelley along with him to fight the most deraved Joker he’d ever fought up to that point
>under 25
he's a child
Go back to twitter holy shit lol
Old enough to fight in the army, old enough to frick around and find out from Batman
let me make this simple for you.
If you are male and under the age of 25, you are not a man.
Been a hot minute, but Batman didn't really display any psychosis in Death in the Family or The Killing Joke.
>make story where Batman arrests joker
>insanity plea doesn’t work and he gets the chair
>I know Jesus has forgiven me.jpg
>no more joker
There, problem solved.
Robot Chicken did it
What about the time when he was actually going to kill the clown himself and Gordon had to put a round in him to get him to stop?
>No Barbara, Joker didn’t come to your house and rape you because I let you be my sidekick. He doesn’t know who we are. Trust.
*later*
>…ok yes, I ADMIT, Joker knows who we all are, and YES, I have always known this. BUT, and I mean BUT, he doesn’t actually care who we are so he didn’t rape you just because of that.
>Well, he doesn’t care who I am, I don’t really know about you guys. He definitely cared who you are, Jason. He definitely tortured you because you worked for me. And you, Dick, that’s why he killed everyone in Hailey’s Circus like just yesterday, which we won’t bring up in the main book. Heck I remember this one time he poisoned Lois Lane and told me out loud he knows who Superman’s parents are. But no, definitely not YOU Barbara. Trust.
>rape
Did that really happen?
it's argued whether he raped her or just took her clothes off naked for no reason at all. Bullock was really sickened when he mentioned they found her nude. Book didn't say whether he did and Moore will never answer, so we won't know.
>for no reason at all
To humiliate her and frick with her dad? Or maybe the clothes got in the way of all the shit he was doing to her. Or maybe they got destroyed during these events.
most of the follow up stuff that touches on it just says he took naked pictures
Nothing, anywhere, has ever said he "just" took naked pictures. They only mention the paralysis part in follow up stuff, and have never ever mentioned the pictures.
>
that says he took pictures, not that he only took pictures and nothing else. She even says she goes into shock when he strips her, so she has no awareness of what happens next
so you're saying she got raped but is somehow unaware and the cops didn't tell her? All of the DC writers and editors also just rolled with that and didn't make it a big deal despite when chicks getting raped damn near defines them in cape stories? Your reasons for believing this?
because the creative team on the original book have said it was left purposefully ambiguous, and Barbara going into shock is there to show she is unconscious for whatever happens next.
But also mostly because stripping her naked doesn't accomplish anything to the torture if he doesn't frick her after that. Oh no, Gordon saw her boob, that totally makes his suffering worse.
he shot her, not just took naked pictures of her.
k, but taking off her panties doesn't really have anything to do with torture though, if all he's doing is taking them off and doing nothing with that. Being naked isn't torture, you strip someone naked to have access to them.
I'd imagine that seeing your naked daughter bleeding out would be pretty traumatizing
no more traumatising than seeing your daughter bleeding out in a skirt and tubesocks.
POO POO
PEE PEE
DOO DOO
That is absolutely not survivable.
No, Winick fixed it in the movie.
Batman throws the batarang at Joker's neck, causing a similar scene. The guy, thinking that Joker is dead, runs away. Batman then stops the bleeding.
They actually said it was stupid so much that when the scene was eventually redone in Under the Red Hood everyone agreed it was a better change.
Just because something stupid was done in the comics doesn't mean you have to stick to it, HM. FALCON.
Batman has saved dozens of hostages over the years without killing anyone. This is bad only because there's no reason he couldn't save the joker here without bloodshed.
Joker should be Batman's white whale: his obsession that he has to fix no matter what, the symbol of the dysfunction that took his parents from him. The reason he wears the costume. In that context saving him like this makes sense, what is losing one life (or several hundred) compared to giving up on Gotham and admitting its better off dead?
Jason deserved to die again
Joker is Bruce's true lover.
>Bruce was willing to let Gordon kill the Joker
>takes Jason down with lethal force
he wasn't willing, he was just at a loss at what to do since he didn't wanna arrest Gordon either. The page before that he was begging Gordon to please not shoot Joker, but he couldn't force him to stop.
he very clearly could force him to stop (ask Jason) but he didn't
Gordon doesn't deserve having his throat slashed, Jason did
Dude should have pulled the trigger after 1.
I like how happy Joker is during that entire confrontation.
It's his dream come true
>Joker broke Batman
>Joker broke Jason
>Jason hates Batman
>All three of them die together in a bad end
this panel caused irreparable damage to Batman convinced me that he needs to be kept far, FAR away from the writers at DC.
The uniform in BvS isn't Jason's, it's Dick's.
Batman Arkham Knight didn't hurt Batman's image at all, the animation didn't hurt Batman's image at all, the comic didn't hurt Batman's image at all.