This week you get TWO podcasts for the price of one. James Robinson returns to talk EARTH 2 along with what's coming up in future issues. The second half features some BATMAN #17 arguing and a run down of this week's comics.
Talking about The Flash book. They mention Flash is dealing with the Gorilla Warfare the same moment as Throne of Atlantis.
And the Batbooks, since there are about 8 of them, why couldn't The Dark Knight and whatever be the fill in of what Bruce has been up to since Court of Owls until Death of the Family. Batman has a ton of options, hah.
But yeah, I'm really not worried about continuity. I like when it is present but dang, people care about it waaay too much. Like when asking about it all the time.
I like how Earth 2 set up the story of Dr. Fate, it builds up what it means to put on the helmet. Rather than it seeming so easy, it takes a lot out of him. I like that.
For me there are like two well-ish known Sean Needhams. The first is an Irish Singer, and the second is a Boardway Actor. I am not those. I am the comic artist.
They could compromise, and instead of doing a whole page about what happened last time, they could just do a Prologue Introduction. Many comics do this, even DC ones. "And there came a day, a day unlike any other, when Earth's Mightiest Heroes found themselves united against a common threat! On that day, the Avengers were born, to fight the foes no single super hero could withstand." -Avengers, "Struck by a bolt of lightning and doused in chemicals, police scientist Barry Allen was transformed into the fastest man alive. With every step he runs, the Scarlet Speedster generates an enigmatic energy called the Speed Force, able to be tapped into by others throughout time who share his sense of justice. Today, Barry Allen protects and serves the world as the FLASH" -Flash, "Captain Hal "Highball" Jordan was chosen to represent an intergalactic Police force created by the oldest beings in existence-- the Guardians of the Universe. Protecting Earth and all of Space Sector 2814 from every extraterrestrial threat imaginable. Hal Jordan shines his light proudly as the GREEN LANTERN" -Green Lantern.
They could do a quick summation like this, even including what happened last issue. I for one like the whole page about last issue.
@G-Man@Babs If our questions weren't asked, and those same questions weren't asked last time, what is the way to get those questions read? I mean, do we repost them? Do we quote them? Do we leave them because you will get to them eventually? What about our James Questions? Is there a specific spot to send or post them? Just asking because mine weren't asked this week and you said that was all the James questions, so maybe I posted them in the wrong spot. Just curious.
@EnSabahNurX: You want to talk about being realistic? This is a comic book. Killing a super bad villain for good just means that they would be replaced with another one. One can rationalize it any way they want within the context of the world a hero lives in, but in terms of people writing these books to entertain people with and get their money, there will always be super evil/strong/diabolical villains.
I'm getting tired of this Batman should kill Joker crap myself, his death really wouldn't change a thing.
O_O Really? He should at least ponder it, lets be realistic for a second AFTER ALL OF THIS batman doesn't falter even a little??? That makes batman the joker's accomplice. The joker has gone far beyond what other villains have done. Batman has a will far beyond rational or even irrational thought. Obviously the joker knows batman will allow him to continue crossing the line and he will raise the stakes every time till he finally kills someone important to batman again. Honestly the joker isn't even interesting anymore because nothing is going to change and I'd prefer to not use him in stories anymore it's completely boring. P.S. Killing one villain would not make you a constant killer, logically/psychologically thats not how it works. So tired of people putting batman on a pedestal that makes him so far beyond human, humans would contemplate killing at this point. He's allowed to be human, like sara and corey said he could have just thought about it and it would have been SOO much better. Fanboys never want him to waiver or have a flaw aside from arrogance. Also if batman thought about killing the joker it would have further splintered the family because he could just have been more angry instead of mopey, more driven to never allow himself to falter again. It would have made him pull away from the family.
By that way of thinking, we should say its okay for Superman to kill Lex Luthor, or Spider-Man to kill Green Goblin or Doc Ock. That is not what these characters are, thats the point. Characters like these have a moral code to not kill, and its a big part of them. Also, I am pretty sure Batman has questioned whether or not he should kill the Joker a few times before this story arc.
@EnSabahNurX: Also, he absolutely DID ponder it. He talks about it with Alfred.
And it's that this city...I truly believe that if I did it, if I KILLED JOKER, Gotham would just send me someone worse. Maybe even send him back, but worse than before.
Gotham is sorta alive. That's been touched on several times. It'd be just as bad if Peter Parker killed Kingpin during Back in Black for Aunt May getting shot. Not wanting a character to go completely against everything their character is about is not being a fanboy. Batman doesn't kill. That's it.
God I wish the Shade had come out in hardcover. It would look so nice next to my Starman omnibus collection. Still wanna track down all the variant covers.
I think I agree that Batman sorta ended in a flat sense, but I would hate Batman if he did cross that line. I think they could have done a foresight thing and saw his possibility of doiing it and then not doing it. I think Sara is sorta right in that, even though I agree more with Tony. Batman shouldnt kill, and if he did then his whole basis as a character would be lost forever
That Batman review was pretty intense. I agree with Tony though. Not killing is a part of Batman and his mythos. If he were to kill The Joker (even in appearance) it fundamentally changes the character of Batman not only moving forwards, but backwards. At this point, we could then look back at all previous issues and future ones and say that they're meaningless because he could've just killed. The reason Batman is held in such high regard is due to his refusal to kill. The 80 years of history Sarah brings up would all be pointless if he ultimately killed.
i always used to think that team books and... single character books were all stand alone (IE: i thought books like uncanny xmen, astonishing xmen, wolverine, avengers, etc. had nothing to do with each other except for the characters). it wasn't until recently (round the beginning of AvX or when i started listening to the podcast) that i learned that they do have some continuity to them. although i have been wondering if the Beyond stories (batman beyond, justice league beyond, superman beyond) have any continuity. where do they all fit in with each other?
@G-Man@Babs I'm kind of in the middle of you two on this, mainly because I'm not sure what the "wedge" was? To me the wedge is the same issue that Sara has with Batman's actions. The family does not trust him because after all of this he didn't do anything about it, after what the Joker did to the family, after what he did to Alfred he couldn't kill the joker. Not that I think Batman should kill (and lets face it Joker is probably the most iconic comic book villain ever, so he's not going anywhere) but I think the family was looking for him to take care of business. When you think of it like that it makes sense. The family is upset at Batman for the same reason Sara is upset at Batman. Does that make sense, or was the "wedge" something completely different?
I'm getting tired of this Batman should kill Joker crap myself, his death really wouldn't change a thing.
it would be an interesting story though
Until Joker comes back to life, making that story meaningless and the only thing to look forward too is what Joker does to the people of Gotham and Batman family to celebrate his rebirth.
I'm getting tired of this Batman should kill Joker crap myself, his death really wouldn't change a thing.
it would be an interesting story though
Until Joker comes back to life, making that story meaningless and the only thing to look forward too is what Joker does to the people of Gotham and Batman family to celebrate his rebirth.
That's anything that has ever happened in a comic book ever, it's only important at the time it's happening.
I've lost a lot of respect for you Tony. You acted like such a baby, its almost like you are not equipped to handle people disagreeing with you. It is displayed in your rants when someone disagrees with you in a review and when clearly someone in real life disagrees with you about a Topic.
Pfft, I only listen to these Podcasts for Sara and Corey anyways.
I've lost a lot of respect for you Tony. You acted like such a baby, its almost like you are not equipped to handle people disagreeing with you. It is displayed in your rants when someone disagrees with you in a review and when clearly someone in real life disagrees with you about a Topic.
Pfft, I only listen to these Podcasts for Sara and Corey anyways.
People talk about putting Joker in a wheelchair or cutting of hands, but that wouldn't stop him from killing people. In a episode of Batman: the Brave and the Bold Joker was old, in a wheelchair and dying from his years messing with chemicals and he made a new Joker that killed Batman and Catwoman.
Batman should have dropped Joker, and effectively tried to kill him. If Batman doesn't have a limit then it means there's no point to pushing him at all. It would have been the perfect moment for Batman to kill (or attempt to kill) the Joker. The only reason Batman even exists is because he went crazy after his family died. Tony complains about Sarah interrupting HIM for a change. LOL. Tony is right that it would change the Batman, but if Batman doesn't have a breaking point then it makes him vastly less interesting.
 I agree with both Tony and Sara, I really enjoyed Batman #17 and Batman shouldn't kill but a little more should have happened in that issue. the last pages, it seemed the bat family was going alright. and looked like Batman was real hapy.
I completely agree with Bendis' story being better for trade. I'm loving his ANXM run so far, but when I finished the last issue I just thought, "That's it?" One issue from Bendis feels like a 5-10 scene from a television episode than an entire episode or movie.
I dropped Supergirl and Superboy because of this crossover. DC really needs to fix their Superfamily line.
Wow, that Batman conversation got heated. You guys need to learn to stop interrupting each other. You all do it a lot. IMO, Batman shouldn't kill Joker. It would be pointless because the Joker would just come back and it would go against his character. I think the fans that want the Batman to kill the Joker are projecting themselves onto Batman.
I love Bachalo's art. Don't get the hate.
They bought back the Spider mysticism. Jesus, Slott is such a hack.
All I've heard is hate for Cable and the X-Force. Personally, I think it's just okay.
I like how the Batman movie explained it, Batman will and can never Kill. If killing the Joker is the thing that has to happen, why not have Gordon do it? Or why not have Dick or Jason do it?
I do think that Batman killing the Joker, and Joker surviving somehow, would have lead to some great stories and character development down the line. Bruce can torture himself over killing the Joker, despite the praise from anyone, and can get some harsh criticism from someone like Gordon or Alfred. Maybe Gordon and Batman's relationship has become strained and Gordon no longer trusts him, because killing is the one thing Gordon couldn't "ignore." The next big threat he faces Bruce can beat himself up over whether or not to kill again. Say the next time Bane has a whole building hostage, and has already killed an entire floor. Bruce thinks, I have done it once. Then maybe he doesn't kill Bane but Bane ends up killing just three more people and Bruce beats himself up over letting those three people die. He can go get advice from Wonder Woman and Superman, and get very different arguments. Then the next guy he could come close to killing him, say the Riddler. But now its always an option and a struggle for him. And then the Joker can return and be super angry that Batman actually tried to kill him. Joker could be disappointed that Batman crossed that line, and after Joker tried to help him. And now Bruce/Batman's character can go from being all about his war on crime that consumes his life to being thie conflucted guy. Maybe his all consuming war on crime has consumed him too much, maybe he should step down, stop it, because he has crossed that line. I mean, as Batman he sees the absolute worst things imaginable, people doing the worst, acting their worst, death, blood, horror, but unlike anyone else, he cannot stop or have down time and has little to no one to talk to about it. So it festers in him, and he can think, maybe I have let that consume me as well. And ultimately he can sort of, if not completely, break through all that and see the light and go back to being himself, only now he has the attempted murder on his conscious. Something that could almost make him pull his punches. So it would be a great development all around I think.
But according to the New 52 it hasn't been 80 years, so the Joker has only been active as the Joker for about 5 years, maybe 7.
Regarding the ending of Batman #17, I think it was a very fitting ending. I mean throughout the story arc, it's shown that The Joker is doing all of this out of love, however sick and twisted it might be. And in issue 17, he brings up the fact that Batman hasn't killed him and questioning why he hasn't done it already. To me, it seems like The Joker was pretty much trying to say that the reason why Batman hasn't killed him is because Batman loves him too and that they need each other. I know this sounds very weird and a bit disgusting but I think that's the point. The endings supposed to be very unsettling and make you question Batman's motivations. That's why Joker won. I dont believe that Batman's reason for not killing Joker is because he doesnt want to go down that path. I think the reason is because he DOESN'T want to kill the Joker. In the same way, Joker doesnt want to kill Batman. Because it just simply wouldn't be fun for either of them anymore. Since Batman didn't kill him, it only further proves that Batman might share The Joker's love. And about Batman pushing him off the cliff. I think that that's a stupid idea. Just the whole idea of Joker falling to his death is because its been done like a million times and should a cliche at this point. I'm pretty sure CBR even did a whole article about the times The Jokers fallen to his death.
Great podcast this week! Love it when James stops by.
Send more 4 hour podcasts!
Spoilers are fine when you announce them!
Go ahead and curse... keep it real up in the field, a'right?
! I think Sara represented the faction that thought "Batman #17" was disappointing very well. I loved hearing the in-fighting and Tony's surly, bordering on churlish, behavior. Luv ya g-man.
110 Comments