Comics Alliance pointed us towards a pretty interesting essay about Batman’s moral standards and how he should really just put the Joker six feet under.
We’re torn, because the basic crux of the argument is that the Joker is a genius, that he’s always going to be a homicidal maniac, and that he needs to save the Joker’s future victims by putting a stop to the Joker. And that’s a pretty good argument.
Of course, a better argument is that Batman just needs a better freaking prison. Seriously, why does he still dump the Joker in Arkham? Why doesn’t he take him to Takron-Galtos? Or the Phantom Zone? Or just put him in a cryotube in the Batcave?
What do you think? Should Batman off the Joker’s pasty ass, or not?
image courtesy Warner Brothers
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/photo/569/thumb)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/BAT21inkspg6LR-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/batman-arkham-origins-debuts-a-very-pretty-cutscene-uproxx-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/cccc170513-10-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/butcher-billy-post-punk-new-wave-super-friends-1-150x150.jpg)
I think the problem is that the comic industry is terrified of actual storytelling with meaningful conclusions.
*turns mic sideways, drops it*
*picks up mic, dusts it off*
Put your hands together for Randy Watson!
Sexual Chocolate!
They reset the Universe so often that it should have already happened. If they had thought out the New 52 better it would have been a an atomic bomb for sales as a close-out of the old continuity.
Axisillian is right though. Upsetting the status quo makes the big 2 nervous. That’s why most of the major characters have been frozen in time since about 1985 and major changes are usually retconned back by the end of the next year.
Screw killing the Joker, I think they should have left Bruce Wayne dead. But if comics are afraid of change, the people in charge of the Batman movies are friggin Scooby Doo and a non Bruce Wayne Batman would be like Dutch-ovening an entire boardroom..
I’m not sure why comics every TRY to end things. They’re constantly ruining their cash-cow because they know they can make more money with the controversy, but the changes never stick, because frankly the storytelling isn’t any better with the changes in place.
Seriously, if there were better stories being told by killing off Bruce Wayne or the Joker, I’d be in. But since they can’t manage that then there’s no point.
Honestly, I miss Dick Grayson as Batman, especially when he was teamed up with Damian. There were some excellent stories between Batman RIP and the New 52 Reboot.
My fault for giving up on it quickly.
I preferred Grayson Batman as well. There’s just so much more that can be fresh to that character as opposed to Bruce Wayne tries to rehabilitate Harvey Dent for the 90th time and the Joker falls down a hole again.
I’ve already had an idea about this, like what would happen if there was an “escalation” in the status quo. If superheroes or the government started executing supervillians, what would their response be? Most supervillans (at least the “b-listers” and down) seem to be pretty content to be beaten and captured in most of their schemes. What would be the supervillian community response if being captured and then escaping was no longer an option? Desperation could cause villains to unite in ways that they never had before, which could spell bad news for their respective comic universes.
It’s a worthwhile idea even it’s just an Elseworld or What If story.
Assumption: I imagine Marvel’s villains would defect to Latveria and create a World Power. World War 616, Dr. Doom steamrolls Europe in five minutes.
The DC villain response would probably involve something more subtle under Lex Luthor, though it would be hilarious if everyone’s preferred stop is Captain Cold to try and unionize. Batman being unable to stop the Joker’s federal execution would be an interesting tipping point.
That was a missed opportunity in “Kingdom Come”, I think.
Of course he should, but he won’t. DC would never do it for real, as it would be the end of Joker stories. I guess I’m against it, because if Batman kills the Joker, there’s really no reason for him to not kill the rest of the rogues as well. Sure Joker’s got the highest body count, but most of the rogues must have at least 100 kills each. Where does the line get drawn?
“Joker just killed his 2,000 victim, time to break my vow.”
“What about Two Face?”
“No Robin, he’s only got 1,400, duh.”
As a onetime story with a beginning, middle, and end, absolutely Batman should off him in the finale. But as an ongoing story, he’s forever trapped in the “middle”, so it wouldn’t work logically without turning Batman into the Punisher. I think Porky’s got a great idea- to have Batman finally cross that line and give an actual conclusion to the characters as a close out to the old continuity- but that would require DC to make a smart decision for once.
Personally, I find it harder to believe that no cop (Gordon especially) has killed Joker. No jury in Gotham would convict, if there was even a trial. I doubt it’d go further than “uhh he was totally attempting to escape, I swear.”
Joker shooting Sarah Essen was the moment that should have happened. But Gordon gets talked down into just kneecapping him. Gordon should have snapped and put one in Joker’s chest. You could have Joker in a coma, you could dump him in a Lazarus Pit (and come out temporarily SANE) when it’s time to bring him back. I think it would have done more for Gordon’s character than simply “Batman without the mask, with a gun” that sometimes he gets squarepegged into.
Eh…nobody’s going to be able to come up with a better villain than the Joker, so he would have to be revived, which means you’ve cheapened Batman’s character somewhat for no good reason.
That said, I think a good story could be done about Joker dying (or seemingly dying). Just don’t have Batman himself off him.
There definitely does need to be some sort of rethinking of the status quo where he’s in-and-out of Arkham almost constantly though. Also, post Dark Knight every time the Joker gets out he has to go on some crazy killing spree to the point he must have a yearly kill-tally of like, 1000 people or more. The way things are now is just highlighting the absurdity of the situation.
I say make him more of a permanent thorn-in-the-side style of villain like the Penguin or Lex Luthor — keep him just out of Batman’s reach for whatever reason. At the very least that alleviates the “WHY DO YOU KEEP THROWING THIS GUY BACK IN SH-TTY ARKHAM ASYLUM EVERY TWO WEEKS?!” problem.
That or get some editors with balls who are willing to say to all the Bat-writers — “okay, from now on we’re only doing ONE JOKER STORY PER YEAR. You can’t just throw him in your comic whenever anymore.”
Well, there is the same problem that killing the Joker never fucking sticks. Seriously, how many times has he gotten into a fatal accident or something and pulled a Wolverine?
I guess if we really want to see a “Batman kills the Joker” story that doesn’t involve vampires or steampunk there’s always Nighthawk offing Whiteface in Supreme Power.
Just force Joker to join the Teen Titans.
Wouldn’t work. He’s male.
Yes. He should.
Ultimately Batman’s problem is he is an ego maniac. There are so many times he could save dozens if not hundreds of lives if he just called up Supes and was like “Hey bro could you give me two minutes and come to Gotham and take care of ______, thanks that would be great” Robin would never have died, and Bane would never have broken his back. But again that would make for horrible story telling lol
This biggest issue is that having Batman kill any villain would forever change him. It would no longer make him the Knight if Gotham but rather just vigilante and that is what keeps Bruce and Batman in check. That is the identity that he forged and has sought to keep, the dark knight of justice to protect the peace from the shadows. Killing would sully his name and legacy but the point of another outside force executing the Joker could make for a very interesting story line.
Batman not killing the Joker makes him just a culpable the next time Joker kills an innocent person.