informationgeek: (djpon3)
[personal profile] informationgeek posting in [community profile] scans_daily
batman673cover

The following is an excerpt from Batman #763, part of Grant Morrison's run.



batman67301

batman67302

batman67303

batman67304

batman67305

batman67306

batman67307

batman67308



What do you all think of this particular scene? I never particularly liked this one at all.

Date: 2016-05-05 02:31 am (UTC)
starwolf_oakley: (Default)
From: [personal profile] starwolf_oakley
Class warfare doesn't work that way. Also, I'm starting to think Grant Morrison is doing an elseworlds.

Date: 2016-05-05 02:55 am (UTC)
freezer: (Default)
From: [personal profile] freezer
It does when you run it through the Self-Pity and Paranoia filters.

Date: 2016-05-05 02:49 am (UTC)
reveen: (Default)
From: [personal profile] reveen
I've always liked the idea f Joe Chill being some guy driven to robbery who got twitchy with his trigger finger and has spent his whole life either being haunted by it or in general being down on his luck. It shows that Batman's mission isn't as simple as white hats black hats and that should just as much be fighting to prevent future Joe Chills as he punches them in the face.

Stuff like this just comes off as revenge fantasy to me.

I really liked the Batman Begins portrayal, where he's shown shaking during the robbery, is duly arrested and subjected to due process, is apparently regretful of the crime, and is assassinated by the mob.
Edited Date: 2016-05-05 03:04 am (UTC)

Date: 2016-05-05 03:51 am (UTC)
glprime: (Default)
From: [personal profile] glprime
And then Bruce even joined street gangs and organized crime in his training to under stand better what it was that drove them. That made sense.

Date: 2016-05-05 10:04 pm (UTC)
beoweasel: (Default)
From: [personal profile] beoweasel
I had a similar concept for a Batman story involving Joe Chill.

In my take, Joe Chill was a down on his luck type struggling with drug addiction. Dead broke, suffering from withdrawal and no means means to pay off his debts, he tries to rob the Waynes, but ends up murdering them. From there, he attempts suicide, but can't bring himself to do it. He goes to a priest, confesses, and is told to turn his life around.

Shoot forward twenty years, and Joe now runs a home for runaways and orphans, a place where kids can turn to when they have nowhere else to go (part of this could be out of guilt because he left a child an orphan). Though Chill makes the best of his volunteer work and helping others, time hasn't been good to him, serious drug abuse and hard living have prematurely aged him, and he looks more like he's in his 60s, rather than in his 40s, and he's much shorter than he use to be.

He also has heart problems, which becomes a plot point. While going on a morning jog (as advised by his doctor), he inadvertently runs into Bruce Wayne at a traffic stop. At first, Joe doesn't recognize Bruce, and Bruce certainly doesn't recognize Chill (in Bruce's mind, his parents' murderer is this large, intimidating thug hidden in shadows...not a little, wizened old man in an oversized tracksuit). However, upon seeing Bruce's eyes, Chill realizes they're like the same eyes of the boy who haunts his nightmares. The sudden shock causes Chill to have a heart attack, but Bruce manages to save his life long enough for paramedics to arrive.

From there, their lives are intertwined again. Admittedly, I'm still trying to figure out how to get from there to Batman being involved. But I want there to be a inner conflict in Bruce's mind. How does he reconcile with this? He's long wanted vengeance on the man who killed his parents, but does that justify the beating of a little old man who is trying to make at least a tiny part of Gotham a better place? Does Chill's virtuous acts mitigate the damage he did to Bruce and the murder of two innocent people? I'm not going to pretend I know the answers to those questions, but I think they should be asked all the same.

All too often in comics, villains stay villains, even the lowly thugs are portrayed as irredeemable, and when they do have a turn of heart, it rarely, if ever lasts. This is especially true of Joe Chill, who in every depiction I see, is either shown as a loser or a crime boss, but never portrayed as someone trying to make amends, I guess because that would interrupt the power/vengeance fantasy that people build around Batman.

Date: 2016-05-06 09:18 am (UTC)
lbd_nytetrayn: Star Force Dragonzord Power! (Default)
From: [personal profile] lbd_nytetrayn
Reminds me ever-so slightly of how Batman: Gotham Adventures handled it, in that it wasn't a revenge fantasy at all, and Batman tried to save Chill, who was haunted by the whole thing -- all without ever realizing that he was trying to save the man who killed his parents.

Date: 2016-05-05 02:51 am (UTC)
thatnickguy: Oreo-lovin' Martian (Default)
From: [personal profile] thatnickguy
Those panels with Batman's chest exposed and someone using paddles makes me think this was some kind of dream sequence.

Date: 2016-05-05 03:09 am (UTC)
starwolf_oakley: (Default)
From: [personal profile] starwolf_oakley
It's Grant Morrison. Meta is a given. I read a blog that said Morrison does his own continuity like Bob Haney did. So maybe that is it as well.

Bat boobs? moobs? Why am I looking at these?

Date: 2016-05-05 03:34 am (UTC)
From: [personal profile] 7dialsmystery
They kind of took away from the gravity of the confrontation.

Date: 2016-05-05 04:12 am (UTC)
cyberghostface: (Default)
From: [personal profile] cyberghostface
How many Joe Chill deaths are there?

There's Year Two, there's the silver age story where the criminals killed him because he 'made' Batman, there's this and he showed up in Endgame.

Date: 2016-05-05 05:03 am (UTC)
candescencearia: (Default)
From: [personal profile] candescencearia
Sure, Bruce, you don't kill people but you hand them an implement to kill themselves. Deliberately choosing not to save people when you easily could isn't much different from killing them if you intended for them to die anyway. But I'm sure this hypocrisy has been covered a hundred times before.

Though, the logo exclamation without punctuation is absolutely hilarious to me, it's just so cartoony and out of place in what is supposed to be a serious scene.

Date: 2016-05-05 02:50 pm (UTC)
an_idol_mind: (Default)
From: [personal profile] an_idol_mind
"Sure, Bruce, you don't kill people but you hand them an implement to kill themselves. Deliberately choosing not to save people when you easily could isn't much different from killing them if you intended for them to die anyway. But I'm sure this hypocrisy has been covered a hundred times before."

That's one of my big problems with the no-kill thing in superhero comics - it's treated as such a technicality instead of a reverence for life.

Date: 2016-05-06 04:21 am (UTC)
candescencearia: (Default)
From: [personal profile] candescencearia
I think this is generally more of a problem with DC than Marvel, at least with the Avengers you see the likes of Cap accepting that killing might be necessary at times, especially in extreme circumstances (and Cap is/was a soldier, so he's killed plenty of people in the line of duty, but isn't the kind of dark spirit like Bruce Wayne who is afraid that accepting the temptation would be a slippery slope). Even Daredevil once was willing to shoot Frank Castle to stop him, only to be only firing blanks, though being a lawyer, he does understand why superheroes should not be undermining the rule of law through extra-judicial killing. SpOck killing Massacre was even tolerated by other heroes and the public until Otto showed he was a lot less judicious about lethal force than people thought.

Preserving life and letting the courts decide on whether to hang criminals or not as much as possible is a pretty noble and reasonable ideal, but a line needs to be drawn somewhere when that system stops working, especially with cases like the Joker, who should have been put down ages ago, regardless of who does the deed.

Date: 2016-05-05 12:14 pm (UTC)
From: [personal profile] lego_joker
Guh. I think this is my number-one antipathy about pre-Crisis Batman: the whole web of BS that's grown around the guy who shot Batman's parents. It's like writer after writer decided a mere mugger wasn't "good enough" to have made Batman, and just have to turn it into a giant conspiracy.

(A close second in antipathy: Thomas Wayne being the "original" Batman. Surely there are better ways to give him actual character?)

Date: 2016-05-05 01:11 pm (UTC)
dr_archeville: Doctor Arkeville (Default)
From: [personal profile] dr_archeville
Exactly! Joe Chill being a random mook with a gun was the entire point, to show that "Crime" and "Criminals" are big, tangled, hard-to-confront things which cannot easily be confronted, let alone defeated.

Date: 2016-05-05 01:19 pm (UTC)
sadoeuphemist: (Default)
From: [personal profile] sadoeuphemist
Where's the conspiracy here? He was a mere mugger who shot Bruce Wayne's parents, who then found success later in life.

Date: 2016-05-05 01:42 pm (UTC)
From: [personal profile] lego_joker
I admit Morrison isn't *quite* as bad here as certain other writers were, but I rather dislike the idea of even giving the mugger a name, let alone having Batman facing him as an adult.

For my money, I still prefer how Miller handled the matter in DKR: Bruce never met the guy again, but in his old age eventually grew to realize the mugger was just another scared, desperate soul, not the Ultimate Evil.

Date: 2016-05-05 01:53 pm (UTC)
sadoeuphemist: (Default)
From: [personal profile] sadoeuphemist
That seems to be going too far on the other end. The guy who shot Bruce Wayne's parents was a person, and had a name, and a life, and all of that.

Like, in the scans above Joe Chill grows into a mid-level crime boss who ends up anxious and helpless while Batman psychologically tortures him into committing suicide. There's nothing mythological or conspiratorial about Joe Chill. The only thing remarkable about him is that Batman really goddamn hates his guts.

Date: 2016-05-06 02:24 am (UTC)
starwolf_oakley: (Default)
From: [personal profile] starwolf_oakley
Some of these responses seem to be turning Joe Chill into the Burglar that killed Peter Parker's Uncle Ben (who relatively recently was given the name Carradine for simplicity's sake).

Spider-Man blames himself for Ben's death more than Carradine for reasons. So, should Bruce Wayne blame himself for the death of the Waynes more than he blames Joe Chill? So, his whole career as Batman is penance for getting his parents killed?

Date: 2016-05-06 02:53 am (UTC)
crinos: (Default)
From: [personal profile] crinos
I personally like the Batman: The Brave and the Bold take on the Joe Chill story, where Joe has become an arms dealer to Gotham's supervillains, and when Batman confronts him, he runs to them for protection... only for them to turn on him because he's the one who made Batman.

Date: 2016-05-15 08:21 am (UTC)
From: [personal profile] torporish
Honestly, my favorite take on Joe Chill was the bartender in Neil Gaiman's Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader. For some reason, I really liked that image...

Profile

scans_daily: (Default)
Scans Daily

Extras

Founded by girl geeks and members of the slash fandom, [community profile] scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free.

Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively, [community profile] scans_daily is probably not for you.

Please read the community ethos and rules before posting or commenting.

April 2019

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 2324252627
282930    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags