Export thread
Grant Morrison's Mind Blowing Killing Joke Revelation
#1
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
http://robot6.comicbookresources.co...-why-its-called-the-killing-joke/#more-162457
“No one gets the end,” the writer says, “because Batman kills The Joker. [...] That’s why it’s called The Killing Joke. The Joker tells the ‘Killing Joke’ at the end, Batman reaches out and breaks his neck, and that’s why the laughter stops and the light goes out, ’cause that was the last chance at crossing that bridge. And Alan Moore wrote the ultimate Batman/Joker story — he finished it.”
Uh...wow. I mean, I've read The Killing Joke dozens of times, but...wow. I scoffed at the idea when I read this earlier, but the more I've considered it, the more I realize how spot-on Morrison might be on this.
“No one gets the end,” the writer says, “because Batman kills The Joker. [...] That’s why it’s called The Killing Joke. The Joker tells the ‘Killing Joke’ at the end, Batman reaches out and breaks his neck, and that’s why the laughter stops and the light goes out, ’cause that was the last chance at crossing that bridge. And Alan Moore wrote the ultimate Batman/Joker story — he finished it.”
Uh...wow. I mean, I've read The Killing Joke dozens of times, but...wow. I scoffed at the idea when I read this earlier, but the more I've considered it, the more I realize how spot-on Morrison might be on this.
#2
sixpackshaker
sixpackshaker
I guess it is time to break it out again.
It is odd that they left Babs handicapped, but Mr. J. was living...
It is odd that they left Babs handicapped, but Mr. J. was living...
#3
drawn_inward
I guess that makes sense, but I never really considered it seriously. I wonder why they chose to be ambiguous about it.
EDIT: Not as ambiguous as I remembered.
drawn_inward
I guess that makes sense, but I never really considered it seriously. I wonder why they chose to be ambiguous about it.
EDIT: Not as ambiguous as I remembered.
#4
GasBandit
GasBandit
That looks pretty ambiguous to me. I would have assumed Bats just dragged him away or something.
#5
figmentPez
figmentPez
Cue fan outrage "Batman doesn't kill!!111!!!one!!!!1!!!"
#6
Gryfter
Gryfter
Nice try Grant, but no. If we are to take that seriously, think of all the other comic stories the we could alter just by suggesting something happens off panel that the story or art does not suggest at all. There is nothing in the last page that says Bats killed the Joker. If he, meaning Moore, had meant to even suggest that Joker's neck was broken where is the resounding 'SNAP!' that should appear among all those other sound effects like the laughing and the police sirens? Nope, the most horrific thing that happens in that story is the crippling of Babara Gordon, which DC brilliantly kept as canon leading to Oracle and then New 52 cheapened by making her Batgirl again.
#7
Espy
Espy
I'll buy that. Makes sense to me.
#8
Yoshimickster
Yoshimickster
Interesting, never thought of it like that. Well *clap* time to wait & see if Alan Moore does a classic crazy Alan Moore rant!
#9
Ravenpoe
Ravenpoe
It make's Batman's laugh make much more sense. He's laughing because he finally gets the joke. He realizes what he's going to have to do, and that the Joker has won by making him do it. The silhouetted panel even appears far more sinister this way, Batman's face one of rage, and Joker's laughing stance one of much more anguish.I'll buy that. Makes sense to me.
#10
bhamv3
bhamv3
Plausible given the art, implausible given who Batman is.
#11
Terrik
Terrik
Plausible given the art, implausible given who the Goddamned Batman is.
#12
Bowielee
I don't understand why everyone is blown away by someone who was not involved in the book itself giving their interpretation of an ambiguous ending.
Bowielee
Alan Moore hates any work he puts out after it becomes popular. As is the case with the Killing Joke.Interesting, never thought of it like that. Well *clap* time to wait & see if Alan Moore does a classic crazy Alan Moore rant!
I don't understand why everyone is blown away by someone who was not involved in the book itself giving their interpretation of an ambiguous ending.
#13
ThatNickGuy
Was it Moore's intention? Who knows. Someone elsewhere claims that Moore said in an interview that yes, Batman kills Joker at the end, but he didn't have a source.
But it's still a really interesting interpretation, one that actually fits within everything we're presented with the story, including the title. There's enough evidence to make it believable.
ThatNickGuy
Well foe one, it's Morrison, who is a guy that - while I may not like all of his work (Invisibles) - I enjoy most of it and find him to be a very intellectual guy with a lot of really interesting, in-depth ideas about the superhero mythos. And honestly, the way he explains it here? It does actually kind of make sense. You could even add on the visual metaphor of the beam of light between the two of them and the last panel, it's gone, like one of the crazies just killed the other.Alan Moore hates any work he puts out after it becomes popular. As is the case with the Killing Joke.
I don't understand why everyone is blown away by someone who was not involved in the book itself giving their interpretation of an ambiguous ending.
Was it Moore's intention? Who knows. Someone elsewhere claims that Moore said in an interview that yes, Batman kills Joker at the end, but he didn't have a source.
But it's still a really interesting interpretation, one that actually fits within everything we're presented with the story, including the title. There's enough evidence to make it believable.
#14
MindDetective
MindDetective
Because opinions can be thought provoking. That's what literary discussion is all about. It needn't be an appeal to authority thing in this case, just (for some people) an unexpected interpretation that made them think about the piece in a new light.I don't understand why everyone is blown away by someone who was not involved in the book itself giving their interpretation of an ambiguous ending.
#15
Bowielee
It's obviously not cannon, given that the Joker was alive and well and Babs was crippled in the main continuity, but I had always considered the ending somewhat open to interpretation.
Bowielee
I'm a HUGE Grant Morrison fan, I've pointed out multiple times that Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth is by far my favorite Batman comic. I just don't see what he's said that's so mind blowing. Had no one ever considered that this was a possiblity in a one shot stand alone story?Well foe one, it's Morrison, who is a guy that - while I may not like all of his work (Invisibles) - I enjoy most of it and find him to be a very intellectual guy with a lot of really interesting, in-depth ideas about the superhero mythos. And honestly, the way he explains it here? It does actually kind of make sense. You could even add on the visual metaphor of the beam of light between the two of them and the last panel, it's gone, like one of the crazies just killed the other.
Was it Moore's intention? Who knows. Someone elsewhere claims that Moore said in an interview that yes, Batman kills Joker at the end, but he didn't have a source.
But it's still a really interesting interpretation, one that actually fits within everything we're presented with the story, including the title. There's enough evidence to make it believable.
It's obviously not cannon, given that the Joker was alive and well and Babs was crippled in the main continuity, but I had always considered the ending somewhat open to interpretation.
#16
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
See, I guess that's the thing. This is the first time I've ever heard that interpretation. Before, I'd always assumed Bats just hauled Joker off the jail as usual. Even Mark Waid's mind was blown when he linked it on Twitter.I'm a HUGE Grant Morrison fan, I've pointed out multiple times that Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth is by far my favorite Batman comic. I just don't see what he's said that's so mind blowing. Had no one ever considered that this was a possiblity in a one shot stand alone story?
It's obviously not cannon, given that the Joker was alive and well and Babs was crippled in the main continuity, but I had always considered the ending somewhat open to interpretation.
#17
Yoshimickster
Or was he angry just because he is full of anger?
Yoshimickster
Really? I thought that he had an angry pride of his work, like when Grant asked Alan if it was okay for him to write for one of his characters and Alan snapped at him?Alan Moore hates any work he puts out after it becomes popular. As is the case with the Killing Joke.
Or was he angry just because he is full of anger?
#18
Bowielee
Bowielee
Alan Moore is pretty much a genious, with all the pluses and minuses that come with it.
#19
Yoshimickster
Yoshimickster
Indeed, a scary angry magical genious.
Honestly I wasn't that blown away by the theory, I always thought Joker and Bats just walked away and their laughter dissipated in the background. Its a cool theory mind you, but I've had better mind fucks.
Honestly I wasn't that blown away by the theory, I always thought Joker and Bats just walked away and their laughter dissipated in the background. Its a cool theory mind you, but I've had better mind fucks.
#20
Bowielee
Bowielee
I guess I'm just surprised by how surprised everyone is.
#21
Espy
Espy
Yeah, no I never even considered that to be the real ending. It's way more amazing this way. Way more fitting too. I'm playing through all the Arkham games again, and I guess this is the cynical side of me (that me 10 years ago would have hated for saying this) but yeah, dude totally responsible for these crazies and he doesn't have the guts to end them because they give him a reason to live. So yeah, this ending makes sense to 33 year old me.
#22
Bowielee
Bowielee
It could even be that it was Moore's intent to have it end with him killing the Joker, but DC editorial wouldn't allow it.
Even though they'd let Barbara get crippled.
Obligitory: Women in Refrigerators
Even though they'd let Barbara get crippled.
Obligitory: Women in Refrigerators
#23
Ravenpoe
That's unsettling.
Ravenpoe
I remember seeing somewhere that Moore actually asked DC if it was ok to shoot Barbara, and they sent back a note saying "Cripple that bitch."It could even be that it was Moore's intent to have it end with him killing the Joker, but DC editorial wouldn't allow it.
Even though they'd let Barbara get crippled.
Obligitory: Women in Refrigerators
That's unsettling.
#24
Espy
Espy
I think the ambiguous nature of it is perfect. Morrison points that out, that hey, it can fit into continuity and the cops just haul Joker away or it could be read the way he says and then Moore wrote the last Batman story under everyones nose. Brilliant.
#25
figmentPez
The only reason a Gotham cop would be blamed for shooting a handcuffed Joker is because plot armor would cause that poor cop to shoot an innocent instead, or end up arming the Joker, or shooting a Joker-look-a-like. Well, Batman would blame the cop, but any sane person wouldn't blame whoever killed the Joker, not after the Joker has proven that he can't be held by any prison facility, has no hope of being "cured" and generally no way to be stopped. Yet they keep ramping up the violence, and the psychopathy and the horrific things that Joker continues to do just to prove that he's the big bad evil.
I don't like Batman written as a superhuman incarnation of godlike justice, and I don't like Joker written as a supernatural force of evil.
figmentPez
One of the things that bugs me most about an ongoing killer like the Joker is that he's only alive via plot armor. In the real world when someone commits as many acts of terror as the Joker, and doesn't control a country, he gets hunted down and shot on sight. If there were some super-vigilante who left Bin Laden tied up for the cops, and the cop who found him just shot Bin Laden instead of taking him into custody, the cop would probably get arrested but then receive a presidential pardon.Yeah, no I never even considered that to be the real ending. It's way more amazing this way. Way more fitting too. I'm playing through all the Arkham games again, and I guess this is the cynical side of me (that me 10 years ago would have hated for saying this) but yeah, dude totally responsible for these crazies and he doesn't have the guts to end them because they give him a reason to live. So yeah, this ending makes sense to 33 year old me.
The only reason a Gotham cop would be blamed for shooting a handcuffed Joker is because plot armor would cause that poor cop to shoot an innocent instead, or end up arming the Joker, or shooting a Joker-look-a-like. Well, Batman would blame the cop, but any sane person wouldn't blame whoever killed the Joker, not after the Joker has proven that he can't be held by any prison facility, has no hope of being "cured" and generally no way to be stopped. Yet they keep ramping up the violence, and the psychopathy and the horrific things that Joker continues to do just to prove that he's the big bad evil.
I don't like Batman written as a superhuman incarnation of godlike justice, and I don't like Joker written as a supernatural force of evil.
#26
Bowielee
Bowielee
The alternative is no stories with the Joker in them. EVER AGAIN. Is it against all logic? Sure it is, but so is people only aging a few years yet having worn bell bottoms when they were 19 and are wearing current fashions now at 21, or that the property damage caused by any single superhero fight would bankrupt even the most prosperous city in repair bills alone, yet they seem fine all the time. It's one of the things that you just have to accept when you're dealing with the medium.One of the things that bugs me most about an ongoing killer like the Joker is that he's only alive via plot armor. In the real world when someone commits as many acts of terror as the Joker, and doesn't control a country, he gets hunted down and shot on sight. If there were some super-vigilante who left Bin Laden tied up for the cops, and the cop who found him just shot Bin Laden instead of taking him into custody, the cop would probably get arrested but then receive a presidential pardon.
The only reason a Gotham cop would be blamed for shooting a handcuffed Joker is because plot armor would cause that poor cop to shoot an innocent instead, or end up arming the Joker, or shooting a Joker-look-a-like. Well, Batman would blame the cop, but any sane person wouldn't blame whoever killed the Joker, not after the Joker has proven that he can't be held by any prison facility, has no hope of being "cured" and generally no way to be stopped. Yet they keep ramping up the violence, and the psychopathy and the horrific things that Joker continues to do just to prove that he's the big bad evil.
I don't like Batman written as a superhuman incarnation of godlike justice, and I don't like Joker written as a supernatural force of evil.
#27
Ravenpoe
Ravenpoe
I would really hope not, because that's cold blooded murder.If there were some super-vigilante who left Bin Laden tied up for the cops, and the cop who found him just shot Bin Laden instead of taking him into custody, the cop would probably get arrested but then receive a presidential pardon.
#28
Hailey Knight
Then I read The Dark Knight Returns and one of the Joker's doctors notes a feeling like there's something supernatural about him. The other doctor tells him to be a man of science or some shit like that, but I was on the first guy's side and glad it had been put into words.
I've never read The Killing Joke, but looking at that last page, I can't see how anyone interpreted it as anything else. But that's looking at the page alone and perhaps if I'd read the whole thing (before this thread) I'd have come to a different conclusion.
Hailey Knight
I've come to love the Joker more since I found stories going this route. It was something in my mind when watching the animated series, particularly the World's Finest crossover with Superman. It seems like he's dead ... but they never find the body. And I knew he wouldn't be dead, he never is.I don't like Joker written as a supernatural force of evil.
Then I read The Dark Knight Returns and one of the Joker's doctors notes a feeling like there's something supernatural about him. The other doctor tells him to be a man of science or some shit like that, but I was on the first guy's side and glad it had been put into words.
I've never read The Killing Joke, but looking at that last page, I can't see how anyone interpreted it as anything else. But that's looking at the page alone and perhaps if I'd read the whole thing (before this thread) I'd have come to a different conclusion.
#29
HCGLNS
HCGLNS
Is this 1989 or something? This isn't a new mind shattering revelation, it's been one of the primary theories since the story was published.
Get off my lawn.
Get off my lawn.
#30
Covar
Covar
Killing Joke has always been a hugely overrated terrible story anyway, if Morrison's theory were true it would still be hugely overrated and an even more terrible story.
#31
Allen who is Quiet
Allen who is Quiet
Killing Joke has always been a hugely overrated terrible story anyway, if Morrison's theory were true it would still be hugely overrated and an even more terrible story.
#32
Bowielee
Bowielee
I don't... I can't even.... That's like saying that the Pheonix Saga was the worst X-Men story. If you don't like the Killing Joke, I can only assume that you don't like Batman. It's the quintessential Batman story.Killing Joke has always been a hugely overrated terrible story anyway, if Morrison's theory were true it would still be hugely overrated and an even more terrible story.
#33
bhamv3
bhamv3
Admittedly I haven't read a ton of Batman comics, but the Killing Joke was probably the best Batman comic I've read. Followed by the Knightfall saga.
#34
Covar
The best thing to come out of the Killing Joke was done by two other writers.
Covar
No it's a terrible Batman story all about how Joker is right, and Batman's just as insane and wrong as he is. There is nothing heroic about it and (this is particularly true if you subscribe to Morrison's fan theory) just pisses on Batman the whole way through, as he is inept, ineffectual and holds a view of the world that we are told is ultimately flawed, foolish, and literally laughable. The only reason the book is even remembered is because Alan Moore wrote it and Barbra Gordon was shot, nearly ruining the character forever. This "shocking" women in refrigerators moment itself becomes memorable and relevant largely because of Kim Yale and John Ostrander being upset about Babs getting crippled and deciding to revive the character as Oracle.I don't... I can't even.... That's like saying that the Phoenix Saga was the worst X-Men story. If you don't like the Killing Joke, I can only assume that you don't like Batman. It's the quintessential Batman story.
The best thing to come out of the Killing Joke was done by two other writers.
#35
GasBandit
GasBandit
The only thing people like better than a hero is to see him fail.
Wait, wrong comic brand.
Wait, wrong comic brand.
#36
mikerc
Except he's wrong - yes Batman was traumatized by his bad day but he found a way to cope (admittedly dressing up as a giant bat and punching criminals in the face isn't a coping mechanism that would work for most orphans), and Gordon wasn't broken by everything Joker did. The whole point of the story is to show that Joker is wrong.
mikerc
Now see I got the complete opposite impression. Joker's saying "I'm not responsible for what I am, I had a really bad day once and it made me this, Batman had a really bad day once and it drove him insane too, I'll prove it by giving Commissioner Gordon a bad day driving him insane."No it's a terrible Batman story all about how Joker is right, and Batman's just as insane and wrong as he is.
Except he's wrong - yes Batman was traumatized by his bad day but he found a way to cope (admittedly dressing up as a giant bat and punching criminals in the face isn't a coping mechanism that would work for most orphans), and Gordon wasn't broken by everything Joker did. The whole point of the story is to show that Joker is wrong.
#37
Bowielee
Bowielee
That synopsis sounds like you literally never even read the story. As was pointed out, the story is exactly the opposite of what you're saying.No it's a terrible Batman story all about how Joker is right, and Batman's just as insane and wrong as he is. There is nothing heroic about it and (this is particularly true if you subscribe to Morrison's fan theory) just pisses on Batman the whole way through, as he is inept, ineffectual and holds a view of the world that we are told is ultimately flawed, foolish, and literally laughable. The only reason the book is even remembered is because Alan Moore wrote it and Barbra Gordon was shot, nearly ruining the character forever. This "shocking" women in refrigerators moment itself becomes memorable and relevant largely because of Kim Yale and John Ostrander being upset about Babs getting crippled and deciding to revive the character as Oracle.
The best thing to come out of the Killing Joke was done by two other writers.
#38
HCGLNS
HCGLNS
Hold on now, you can't dismiss his opinion entirely. Barbara staying paralyzed is perhaps one of the most important and lingering outcomes from that story. It's one of the few instances in comics that had lasting consequences and shone a spotlight on the disabled.
#39
Bowielee
Bowielee
He said that Barbara Gordon being shot was one of the most terrible things about the story.Hold on now, you can't dismiss his opinion entirely. Barbara staying paralyzed is perhaps one of the most important and lingering outcomes from that story. It's one of the few instances in comics that had lasting consequences and shone a spotlight on the disabled.
#40
HCGLNS
HCGLNS
He said that the best thing to come out of the story was done by two others. And that's a measure of how a story impacts a "comic-verse", by how it affects other stories and authors. If it were to have no impact, the other story tellers would put down the book and ignore it, but they didn't they chose to take what had happened and make it part of their own works. That's impact. Sadly, I think this was ignored for the traits laid out for Batman in the comic. It's my belief that it is harder for this to occur in prominent characters as everyone is striving to have this occur for the stories they write themselves and tend to brush off any groundwork laid by other authors.
#41
Bowielee
Bowielee
What you're saying is the exact opposite of what he's saying.
#42
HCGLNS
HCGLNS
Nuh uh, you're like this
And I'm like thisNo it's a terrible Batman story all about how Joker is right, and Batman's just as insane and wrong as he is. There is nothing heroic about it and (this is particularly true if you subscribe to Morrison's fan theory) just pisses on Batman the whole way through, as he is inept, ineffectual and holds a view of the world that we are told is ultimately flawed, foolish, and literally laughable. The only reason the book is even remembered is because Alan Moore wrote it and Barbra Gordon was shot, nearly ruining the character forever. This "shocking" women in refrigerators moment itself becomes memorable and relevant largely because of Kim Yale and John Ostrander being upset about Babs getting crippled and deciding to revive the character as Oracle.
The best thing to come out of the Killing Joke was done by two other writers.
No it's a terrible Batman story all about how Joker is right, and Batman's just as insane and wrong as he is. There is nothing heroic about it and (this is particularly true if you subscribe to Morrison's fan theory) just pisses on Batman the whole way through, as he is inept, ineffectual and holds a view of the world that we are told is ultimately flawed, foolish, and literally laughable. The only reason the book is even remembered is because Alan Moore wrote it and Barbra Gordon was shot, nearly ruining the character forever. This "shocking" women in refrigerators moment itself becomes memorable and relevant largely because of Kim Yale and John Ostrander being upset about Babs getting crippled and deciding to revive the character as Oracle.
The best thing to come out of the Killing Joke was done by two other writers.
#43
Bowielee
because that's what he's saying.
Bowielee
So, you agree with him that the only good thing to come out of the comic was Babs being crippled and other writers polishing the crap from an otherwise terrible comic?Nuh uh, you're like this
And I'm like this
because that's what he's saying.
#44
HCGLNS
HCGLNS
I'm saying that it is the most enduring thing to come out of the comic and thus the best as sadly the other excellent elements in the comic were ignored so that the next writer to come along could write the great quintessential Batman story.
That was a very long sentence.
That was a very long sentence.
#45
Allen who is Quiet
Allen who is Quiet
Bowie, has anyone ever told you that your argument style is terrible for arguing but great for making yourself look like an asshole?
#46
Bowielee
Bowielee
Nope, but thanks for the out of nowhere personal attack.Bowie, has anyone ever told you that your argument style is terrible for arguing but great for making yourself look like an asshole?
#47
GasBandit
GasBandit
I have noticed Allen who used to be quiet has gotten something stuck in his craw, lately.
#48
Bubble181
Bubble181
True enough, but the same goes a bit for Bowie. No offense to either meant.
Allen, I don't know why, has been fairly easy to goad into attacking since he's been back, and relatively quick to lash out.
Bowie, you've been quite....vehement in your insistence on being "right" on topics where there really isn't much of a right or wrong side. You tend to fall on the right side ofthings as far as I'm concerned, but in this, for example? It's a comic. Covar, Roosc has his/her/its/their own opinion. I have mine, you have yours. You may find more things in the comic to support your point of view, but claiming you're right and he's wrong for 2 pages on end is a bit persistent. You're trying to prove an opinion on art "wrong". "LHOOQ is art! No, it's a piece of trash! No, it's Art!" - it's a useless discussion, as it's both.
I haven't read the story, nor do I really want to. I will, however, say that you're currently claiming that a story in which it's heavily implied Batman killed someone, is the quintessential Batman story - which is like saying "Man of Steel" is the quintessential Superman story. It may be a great and interesting story about the character and serious problems he's overcome, it may be the best story written with the character, but I doubt it's the most typical, the perfect representative story.
Allen, I don't know why, has been fairly easy to goad into attacking since he's been back, and relatively quick to lash out.
Bowie, you've been quite....vehement in your insistence on being "right" on topics where there really isn't much of a right or wrong side. You tend to fall on the right side ofthings as far as I'm concerned, but in this, for example? It's a comic. Covar, Roosc has his/her/its/their own opinion. I have mine, you have yours. You may find more things in the comic to support your point of view, but claiming you're right and he's wrong for 2 pages on end is a bit persistent. You're trying to prove an opinion on art "wrong". "LHOOQ is art! No, it's a piece of trash! No, it's Art!" - it's a useless discussion, as it's both.
I haven't read the story, nor do I really want to. I will, however, say that you're currently claiming that a story in which it's heavily implied Batman killed someone, is the quintessential Batman story - which is like saying "Man of Steel" is the quintessential Superman story. It may be a great and interesting story about the character and serious problems he's overcome, it may be the best story written with the character, but I doubt it's the most typical, the perfect representative story.
#49
Bowielee
Point the second: It is not heavily implied that Batman killed someone. That's the entire point of this thread. Most people never even considered that was a possibility, apparently.
Point the final: I'm simply stating my opinion, and as far as I can see, it was in a far less caustic way than Covar did, but I'm the one getting shit for it.
Bowielee
Point the first: Covar has 2 posts that I have replied to. Hardly arguing over two pages.True enough, but the same goes a bit for Bowie. No offense to either meant.
Allen, I don't know why, has been fairly easy to goad into attacking since he's been back, and relatively quick to lash out.
Bowie, you've been quite....vehement in your insistence on being "right" on topics where there really isn't much of a right or wrong side. You tend to fall on the right side ofthings as far as I'm concerned, but in this, for example? It's a comic. Covar, Roosc has his/her/its/their own opinion. I have mine, you have yours. You may find more things in the comic to support your point of view, but claiming you're right and he's wrong for 2 pages on end is a bit persistent. You're trying to prove an opinion on art "wrong". "LHOOQ is art! No, it's a piece of trash! No, it's Art!" - it's a useless discussion, as it's both.
I haven't read the story, nor do I really want to. I will, however, say that you're currently claiming that a story in which it's heavily implied Batman killed someone, is the quintessential Batman story - which is like saying "Man of Steel" is the quintessential Superman story. It may be a great and interesting story about the character and serious problems he's overcome, it may be the best story written with the character, but I doubt it's the most typical, the perfect representative story.
Point the second: It is not heavily implied that Batman killed someone. That's the entire point of this thread. Most people never even considered that was a possibility, apparently.
Point the final: I'm simply stating my opinion, and as far as I can see, it was in a far less caustic way than Covar did, but I'm the one getting shit for it.
#50
Bubble181
Bubble181
A) You've made 13 posts in a 42-post thread. You may not be arguing directly at one person or another, you're definitely pretty pushing your own opinion pretty hard and treating every other opinion as if it's disagreeing with yours and "fighting back" even when it seems unnecessary.
B) True enough; I may have been guided by your own posts higher up saying it's a "clearly ambiguous" ending and at being surprised how surprised everyone is.
C) Reading back, you're right. Your language is much more aggressive than his. I could argue your way of phrasing things, plus the reply-to-every-post come off as fairly antagonising, but you're right that Covar is far more of a potty mouth and words his opinion more strongly. However, while Covar was attacking the story/writing/author, you attacked Covar. You didn't say "here's why I think the story is about something else", you said he hadn't read it, that he was wrong and, pretty much, "just didn't get it".
Either he's trolling you and you're falling for it, or he happens to have an opinion on some work of art, opposite to yours, and you're flying off the handle over it - I'm not quite sure which.
B) True enough; I may have been guided by your own posts higher up saying it's a "clearly ambiguous" ending and at being surprised how surprised everyone is.
C) Reading back, you're right. Your language is much more aggressive than his. I could argue your way of phrasing things, plus the reply-to-every-post come off as fairly antagonising, but you're right that Covar is far more of a potty mouth and words his opinion more strongly. However, while Covar was attacking the story/writing/author, you attacked Covar. You didn't say "here's why I think the story is about something else", you said he hadn't read it, that he was wrong and, pretty much, "just didn't get it".
Either he's trolling you and you're falling for it, or he happens to have an opinion on some work of art, opposite to yours, and you're flying off the handle over it - I'm not quite sure which.
#51
Covar
Covar
I feel like the guy who was messing around with some matches and came back to find the house on fire.
I really do passionately hate the Killing Joke and have no issue with @Bowielee's posts. We just have strong differences of opinions. In other news I do really enjoy Brian Bollands art, although I didn't really appreciate it until I got the really nice Judge Dredd: The Complete Brian Bolland vol 1 collection, which is absolutely stunning.
I really do passionately hate the Killing Joke and have no issue with @Bowielee's posts. We just have strong differences of opinions. In other news I do really enjoy Brian Bollands art, although I didn't really appreciate it until I got the really nice Judge Dredd: The Complete Brian Bolland vol 1 collection, which is absolutely stunning.
#52
Espy
Espy
Man, Brian Bolland is really just one of the best comic book artists, period.
#53
Fun Size
Fun Size
Really, I think the issue here is that what's being debated is an extremely controversial interpretation of a reasonably popular work. I think we all just need to take a step back and focus on something else for a minute.
So, who liked the ending of Lost?
So, who liked the ending of Lost?
#54
Covar
Covar
I didn't see it, but I heard it was about as terrible as a well done steak.Really, I think the issue here is that what's being debated is an extremely controversial interpretation of a reasonably popular work. I think we all just need to take a step back and focus on something else for a minute.
So, who liked the ending of Lost?
#55
sixpackshaker
sixpackshaker
It was worse than authentic, deep-dish pizza.I didn't see it, but I heard it was about as terrible as a well done steak.
#56
GasBandit
GasBandit
But not quite as bad as Firefly.
#58
GasBandit
GasBandit
What can I say, I was tired of watching amateurs dabble. 
#59
Null
Null
Haven't read the story, but to me, one of the cores of Batman's character is that he doesn't give in. The Joker wants to push Batman to kill him, to prove that he's as fallible and breakable as anyone else. He wants Batman to break one of his own ironclad principles. Hell, the page beforehand Commissioner Gordon literally tells Batman - "Bring him in, by the book. Show him our way works!" Granted, it's a weird book when 'arrest by vigilante dressed as a nocturnal flying mammal' is in it, but the point is clear - don't cross the line. So I don't believe that Batman killed the Joker there. That's not my interpretation of it, at any rate.
#60
figmentPez
figmentPez
From the Batman's speech at the beginning of The Killing Joke:
"I've been thinking lately. About you and me. About what's going to happen to us, in the end. We're going to kill each other, aren't we?.... Perhaps you'll kill me. Perhaps I'll kill you. Perhaps sooner. Perhaps later. I just wanted to know that I'd made a genuine attempt to talk things over and avert that outcome. Just once.... Are you listening to me? It's life and death that I'm discussing here. Maybe my death... ...maybe yours. I don't fully understand why ours should be such a fatal relationship, but I don't want your murder on my... ...hands..."
At this point Batman realizes he's talking to an impostor who has taken Joker's place in jail, but Batman recalls this speech as he's headed off to face the Joker, just before the Joker gives his monologue. At another point in the story, Batman talks about how much he hates that the Joker keeps escaping, and all they can do is hope that he won't get away with anything too terrible this time. In the afterword the artist, Brian Bolland, jokes that he's going to reveal what happened at the end of the book; that "Batman's hand reached out and...." He leaves the sentence unfinished, but I think it's pretty clear that the original intent of the work was to be at least ambiguous, with the possibility that Batman did kill Joker.
"I've been thinking lately. About you and me. About what's going to happen to us, in the end. We're going to kill each other, aren't we?.... Perhaps you'll kill me. Perhaps I'll kill you. Perhaps sooner. Perhaps later. I just wanted to know that I'd made a genuine attempt to talk things over and avert that outcome. Just once.... Are you listening to me? It's life and death that I'm discussing here. Maybe my death... ...maybe yours. I don't fully understand why ours should be such a fatal relationship, but I don't want your murder on my... ...hands..."
At this point Batman realizes he's talking to an impostor who has taken Joker's place in jail, but Batman recalls this speech as he's headed off to face the Joker, just before the Joker gives his monologue. At another point in the story, Batman talks about how much he hates that the Joker keeps escaping, and all they can do is hope that he won't get away with anything too terrible this time. In the afterword the artist, Brian Bolland, jokes that he's going to reveal what happened at the end of the book; that "Batman's hand reached out and...." He leaves the sentence unfinished, but I think it's pretty clear that the original intent of the work was to be at least ambiguous, with the possibility that Batman did kill Joker.
#61
checkeredhat
checkeredhat
Okay, this and Year One are the ONLY Batman stories I have read. I didn't care for the Killing Joke. I purchased it on the high praises of others and was incredibly disappointed. I have said before though, I think this is largely because as I said, it and Year One (Which, by the way, was excellent) are the only Batman stories I've read. I don't think the Killing Joke is meant for people who are not already diehard Batman fans.
But anyway, how else do you possibly interpret those last panels? And, I mean, it is called the Killing Joke.
But anyway, how else do you possibly interpret those last panels? And, I mean, it is called the Killing Joke.
#62
Frank
Frank
Well, the original title was The Hugging Joke but DC changed it at the last minute to be more edgy. They're really hugging it out there.
#63
Bowielee
Bowielee
I do have to admit that I misspoke, The Killing Joke isn't the quintessential Batman story, it's the quintessential Joker story.
#64
fade
fade
Huh, I can honestly say I never interpreted that last page as Batman killing the Joker. Regardless of author intent, if it's intended to be ambiguous, they did a really, really poor job of it, because ambiguity would require some hint that Batman killed Joker. I see no hint whatsover in this art that he did. So the laugh stops. It's not uncommon to wind down to a silent panel in a comic story, and that usually doesn't imply the death of any of the characters in the scene. Why should I believe I'm being shown that in this scene?
#65
HCGLNS
HCGLNS
And when the Joker breaks out of Arkham within 6 months of the Killing Jokes release to become the Iranian Ambassador to the UN why should you ever really consider it? Now if it was shown that the Joker rose out of the Lazarus pit before getting his cushy job at the UN, thus setting the eventual stage for the realities of the the Red Hood, that would be worth talking about!
#66
Covar
Covar
Alan Moore doesn't give a shit about other writers or what they're doing. He's like Grant Morrison in that regard.And when the Joker breaks out of Arkham within a 6 months of the Killing Jokes release to become the Iranian Ambassador to the UN why should you ever really consider it? Now if it was shown that the Joke rose out of the Lazarus pit before getting his cushy job at the UN, thus setting the eventual stage for the realities of the the Red Hood, that would be worth talking about!
#67
checkeredhat
checkeredhat
again, I'm no big Batman lore expert, but I thought the Killing Joke was never originally meant to canon.
#68
GasBandit
GasBandit
Uh.... I'm pretty sure the existence of Oracle cemented it firmly as such.again, I'm no big Batman lore expert, but I thought the Killing Joke was never originally meant to canon.
#69
checkeredhat
checkeredhat
I said ORIGINALLY. As Covar pointed out, that came later. And yeah, when it's canon and the Joker is alive and well in that canon universe, you obviously have to interpret it a certain way. But my understanding was that it was originally penned as a one-off (Making the Joker death ending plausible).Uh.... I'm pretty sure the existence of Oracle cemented it firmly as such.
#70
Bowielee
Bowielee
I still absolutely loathe the fact that they reversed Barbara's crippling in the New 52.
#71
GasBandit
GasBandit
Yeah, I can see the validness of your opinion here, but on the other hand, in a world where limbs are retconned back on even without a reboot and graves can't seem to keep their bodies still EVER, why is it fair that Barbara Gordon's spine has to be the only plot device without a reset switch when the entire universe is rebooted?I still absolutely loathe the fact that they reversed Barbara's crippling in the New 52.
#72
figmentPez
figmentPez
Because Oracle is a damn good character. Does there need to be another reason?Yeah, I can see the validness of your opinion here, but on the other hand, in a world where limbs are retconned back on even without a reboot and graves can't seem to keep their bodies still EVER, why is it fair that Barbara Gordon's spine has to be the only plot device without a reset switch when the entire universe is rebooted?
#73
GasBandit
GasBandit
And Barbara Gordon's Batgirl has to never even get a shot in the new universe because Oracle is a good character?Because Oracle is a damn good character. Does there need to be another reason?
#74
Bowielee
Bowielee
There's also the fact that she was the only mainstream comic character outside of Prof X that was handicapped and unlike the Prof, she was still an awesome character despite her handicap without the benefit of any super powers.And Barbara Gordon's Batgirl has to never even get a shot in the new universe because Oracle is a good character?
#75
figmentPez
figmentPez
There are so many things wrong with the new universe, that I can't even begin to list the number of better ways they could have simplified continuity without having to wipe out lots of great things in DC comics at the same time. This is the problem with DC reboots, they throw the baby out with the bathwater.And Barbara Gordon's Batgirl has to never even get a shot in the new universe because Oracle is a good character?
#76
Bowielee
This new reboot is just horrible in that it wipes away most everything from the past. I'm hoping eventually they do some sort of return to the traditional universe ala Heroes Reborn, but I may just end up being disappointed on that front.
I'm still also pissed in the WAY that it was done. This whole time travel thing is lazy and makes no sense seeing as there are entire groups of entities in the DC universe that are supposed to stop things like this, such as Rip Hunter and the Linear Men. There's no way they would have let this happen. Also, altering timelines is par for the course in the established universe and it's never had this huge of a consequence. That mostly lies on the horrible shoulders of what a lazy, slapped together affair that flashpoint was.
Addendum: Also, as I've said before, it speaks volumes to how bad the circumstances around the reboot are when I'm more willing to accept:
1) Superboy Prime punching on the walls of reality so hard that it alters them
2) A giant, evolved Mr. Mind becoming an interdimentional moth that eats reality who is stopped by a hail mary pass from a repurposed Skeets.
3) Hal Jordan as Parallax destroying the universe and restarting it with a new big bang
All that unbelievably over the top stuff is more believable than Flash going back and stopping his mommy from getting killed.
Bowielee
To be fair, the other reboots have never been as much of a clean break as this one. Some tried to unify worlds and sort out problematic contradictory origin stories (see: Donna Troi and Power Girl). However, they never just completely flushed the existing continuity, just altered it.There are so many things wrong with the new universe, that I can't even begin to list the number of better ways they could have simplified continuity without having to wipe out lots of great things in DC comics at the same time. This is the problem with DC reboots, they throw the baby out with the bathwater.
This new reboot is just horrible in that it wipes away most everything from the past. I'm hoping eventually they do some sort of return to the traditional universe ala Heroes Reborn, but I may just end up being disappointed on that front.
I'm still also pissed in the WAY that it was done. This whole time travel thing is lazy and makes no sense seeing as there are entire groups of entities in the DC universe that are supposed to stop things like this, such as Rip Hunter and the Linear Men. There's no way they would have let this happen. Also, altering timelines is par for the course in the established universe and it's never had this huge of a consequence. That mostly lies on the horrible shoulders of what a lazy, slapped together affair that flashpoint was.
Addendum: Also, as I've said before, it speaks volumes to how bad the circumstances around the reboot are when I'm more willing to accept:
1) Superboy Prime punching on the walls of reality so hard that it alters them
2) A giant, evolved Mr. Mind becoming an interdimentional moth that eats reality who is stopped by a hail mary pass from a repurposed Skeets.
3) Hal Jordan as Parallax destroying the universe and restarting it with a new big bang
All that unbelievably over the top stuff is more believable than Flash going back and stopping his mommy from getting killed.
#77
figmentPez
figmentPez
True, but even in altering existing continuity, they've had problems like nearly erasing Clark Kent & Lois Lane's history together, and rushing them together as a couple, instead of having them spend a while in the bizarre love triangle of Clark, Lois and Superman.To be fair, the other reboots have never been as much of a clean break as this one. Some tried to unify worlds and sort out problematic contradictory origin stories (see: Donna Troi and Power Girl). However, they never just completely flushed the existing continuity, just altered it.
#78
checkeredhat
checkeredhat
as a Dc outsider, it sounds like the problem DC fans have with the reboot is that its an actual reboot and not just a retcon. which sounds backwards to me. but I guess there are certain things that even in a reboot should stay the same. i mean in a language i understand; having Spider-man in love with MJ instead of Gwen at the start is one thing. Having Uncle Ben live would be another.[DOUBLEPOST=1377349761,1377349719][/DOUBLEPOST]no real point to that post just me thinkin "aloud".
#79
AshburnerX
AshburnerX
We already had a great Batgirl in Stephanie Brown and it wasn't until she became Batgirl that the comic became worth reading again. Seriously. They did so many pure fun things in the comic while she was Batgirl that it actually became a must buy for me.And Barbara Gordon's Batgirl has to never even get a shot in the new universe because Oracle is a good character?
#80
Espy
Espy
Honestly, I still think this idea (idea, concept, etc, the execution of it was less than perfect but the idea was great) still stands as fantastic. Hell, a reboot for a comic line sounds brilliant given the ridiculous continuities, etc, that evolve over decades but it seems to me that DC hasn't handled this idea very well. At least that seems to be the consensus.3) Hal Jordan as Parallax destroying the universe and restarting it with a new big bang