Yeah, this is one of those times where I wish for Batman to lose and for someone to make him choke on his self-righteous no-kill policy. I’m actually rooting for the other guy in this arc.
Same here. It be nice to see the old guy get over on Batman, especially since he’s mopping the floor with all these young killers. This seems like a guy in his late 50s taking out everyone.
Because Quiet Man is in the right. People can only put up with so much injustice, so much suffering, before they decide to do something about it. This has been an ongoing problem with Batman that was featured way back in the “Under the Hood” Arc and other stories, and also with Clownhunter. Batman has this overly developed sense of self-righteousness that somehow not killing psychotic freaks, mass murderers, terrorists is somehow morally responsible. The one thing I’ve always actually hated about Batman is his sanctimonious aversion to killing and how he judges those who do or try to kill for the correct reasons.
Too often Bruce acts as if his moral superiority is the only true justice, that everyone is supposed to adhere to it, even when his way allows vile murderers and psychos to cause even more harm.
The best example I can give that featured this problem was Clownhunter, a boy who was forced to watch as the Joker murdered his parents and watched over and over again as the Joker continued to cause more pain, more death, and Batman has never done a damn thing to actually stop it.
Now, here’s someone who is not only sick of evil continuing to exist, who has every right to kill the sick freak who murdered his child, but he has the skill to challenge Batman and the sense of moral outrage and actual justice that shatters Batman’s pontificating moralization. No man or woman should ever have to outlive their child, and any parent whose child has been murdered has the right to be outraged at the sight of their child’s killer simply walking away.
This is something I’ve been waiting for a long time in the Batman and DC comics in general. A character who challenges or even shatters this ongoing narrative that killing villains is somehow wrong. For the sake of good plot, storytelling and originality, it’d be engaging to read an arc where Batman’s sense of self-righteous justice is not only challenged but defeated. That would make this story stand out from the countless number of other stories and arcs where Batman faces this moral dilemma but somehow always ends up in the right or on top.
I really understand your point man,sorry if my english is bad but you don’t think that the people who starts killing in search for revenge or justice like quiet man or punisher in some point or even in the start they become hypocrites because they did turn in what they hate? For example if one of the victms of quiet man has a child, this child will grown up in search for justice against him. What I mean to say is they in search for justice become someone’s else villain. What Batman tries to do is redeem or save the villains like what he did in his new run with killercroc, instead of fight with him batman sees that what killercroc needs now is a conversation and psychological help. Batman in his most deep needs to think that everyone has some kind of saving, I know that sometimes gives the impression that He’s talking like superior but I don’t think that is the case. I think that he expresses himself badly, of course that some interactions he does think that he’s superior but is not most of. I like that you bring under the red hood because that final conversation with jason represent perfect what I’m talking about because he say exactly what I’m saying here that if he kills in what point he’s different than the villains. I hope that you understand my point besides the bad english
I understand the point you’re trying to make, but it holds no water for me. Though I do appreciate the conversation and exchange of opinion.
That whole argument about killing a villain makes the hero no different is meaningless and empty because it’s untrue. How is killing a serial killer an evil thing? It’s not. The only way for evil to thrive is for good people to allow it, and the only way to truly put a stop to evil is to cut it down. In the way back when, during the “Countdown to 52” arc, Jason Todd found himself in an alternate reality where, after Jason’s brutal murder, Batman did what he should have done with his crusade, lost the half measures, and actually killed the vast majority of villains. This made the Justice League of that reality try to hunt him down, but Gotham was considerably safer. I feel that far too often, Batman cares more about his own self-righteous code than he does about the lives of civilians.
What most people don’t understand, especially the whole concept of Batman, is the fact that it takes strength to kill, despite what too many heroic themed pieces of fiction says. It takes strength of character to take on the burden of ending a life and living with it for the rest of your life. Batman doesn’t have that kind of strength, unlike people who’ve joined the military that I’ve met.
The Quiet Man is on a vengeance kick, but nobody has the right to tell him that he doesn’t have the right seek it out, least of all Batman. Not when Batman knowingly, intentionally puts children in danger as soldiers in his self-appointed war on crime, especially after he got Jason Todd killed, beaten to death with a crowbar by a psychotic serial killer/terrorist.
And as for what you mentioned about what if one of the villains the Quiet Man kills has a kid who grows up to seek revenge for his criminal daddy, that’s not on the Quiet Man. If that villain really cared about his kid(s), he’d do everything he could to be in his kid’s life instead of living the dangerous lifestyle of a criminal. And if that kid wants vengeance/justice for his criminal daddy, as far as I’m concerned, he can either get over it or cry about it, but the fact of the matter would be that his daddy chose to be a criminal and died because of it, so that kid has no right to whatever justice/vengeance he thinks he’s owed.
Far too often, Batman’s methods have yielded no results. Criminals are still criminals, still causing pain and ending lives, while ordinary people, people who don’t have billions of dollars, elite training and cutting-edge technology, still have to life in fear and with the pain of what these monsters do.
The redemption of a criminal is nothing to a parent who has to live with the pain of burying their murdered child. I defy anyone to walk up to someone who has suffered that and say, “I’m sorry your child is dead, but his/her killer has redeemed themself. Hope that eases the pain for you”.
I understand your point and I am very happy for the health exchange of opnion. But the point in killing criminals are wrong is where it’s stops. In injustice timeline superman kills Joker and after he wants to rule the world and actually is successful in a point that the world have almost 0 crimes but the world live in constant fear and superman lost himself in the way because he starts to kill heroes and friends. The same thing happens in death note with light. Is a crime kill someone independent that he’s evil or not but no one is going to judge you for killing a psychopath but where do you stops, once you kill someone something in your head snaps and killing always will be a option to you even though you have a better option that doesn’t need that. I think that batman because of his trauma is physically incapable of killing because killing has brought everything that is bad in his life since his parents deaths. When Jason dies he actually tries to kill Joker but he escapes and after that batman became more darker, punching more strong and not think like before. The idea of cross that line is constantly in his head. But is because of this that robin exists, the concept of robin is bring light back to batman for him doesn’t turn more like his villains and after jason and after batman himself decides to not have another robin, Tim drake convinces him otherwise because without robin batman not act liking a symbol of hope but fear. And he’s not a symbol of fear since year one.
When it comes to Injustice Superman and Light from Death Note, I think that has less to do with killing for the right reasons and more to do with the strength of character of people with power.
Abraham Lincoln once said, “Any man can withstand adversity. If you really want to test a man’s character, give him power”.
Injustice Superman had more power than any human could dream of having, and after killing the Joker, he began to get high on his own power, same thing with Light from Death Note. It wasn’t the killing that made them go down the dark path, it was the power that allowed them to kill. Power doesn’t corrupt, it never has, despite the popular saying. Power doesn’t taint character but reveals what and who a person truly is.
Despite not having superpowers, Batman has more power than 95% of people can possibly dream of possessing. Not only is he insanely rich, not least of which he inherited, runs a multi-billion-dollar company, but he’s one of the smartest people on the planet, and he has enough training, gadgetry and protection that outstrips even Special Forces soldiers. So, for the most part, as a person, Batman doesn’t really understand what life is like for the average person, what they have to live with, like the fear and vulnerability that most people have to put up with.
Symbols are powerful things, but people need more than symbols, they need results, actions. And some of Batman’s action, or inactions in some cases, have caused more harm than good.
My whole point is that for something new and different as far as storytelling goes is that it’d be nice to have a character, like this Quiet Man, challenge Batman’s narrative in order to create a more engaging story. Sometimes what hero needs is not to win, but to lose, have his methods or beliefs challenged and shown that he is not infallible. That would be a refreshing change from the same narrative Batman’s stories have followed whenever he was forced to face this moral dilemma.
I agree with you that batman has to be challenged. And that he brings a lot of bad things to gotham like was discussed in the last arc. But Bruce Wayne brings a lot of good things for gotham, he is the only one that care and do something for the city with a lot of good things. Gotham is a bad place because the big people in gotham wants it to be that way because this way they’ll always have power.
I’m not going to argue any of what you just said. I’m not saying that Bruce Wayne or even Batman hasn’t done a lot of good for Gotham, because they have. But there are instances where Batman is wrong and has no place to pass judgement on someone else for their actions and battles against injustice.
None of the files shown here are provided and hosted by this server. ReadAllcomics helps you discover publicly available material throughout Internet and as a search engine does not host or upload this material and is not responsible for the content.Privacy Policy | Legal Disclamer | Terms of Service | Contact us: [email protected]
Yeah, this is one of those times where I wish for Batman to lose and for someone to make him choke on his self-righteous no-kill policy. I’m actually rooting for the other guy in this arc.
Same here. It be nice to see the old guy get over on Batman, especially since he’s mopping the floor with all these young killers. This seems like a guy in his late 50s taking out everyone.
Yeah, he’s like a working-class, blue collar version of John Wick.
Why are you rooting for quiet man?
Because Quiet Man is in the right. People can only put up with so much injustice, so much suffering, before they decide to do something about it. This has been an ongoing problem with Batman that was featured way back in the “Under the Hood” Arc and other stories, and also with Clownhunter. Batman has this overly developed sense of self-righteousness that somehow not killing psychotic freaks, mass murderers, terrorists is somehow morally responsible. The one thing I’ve always actually hated about Batman is his sanctimonious aversion to killing and how he judges those who do or try to kill for the correct reasons.
Too often Bruce acts as if his moral superiority is the only true justice, that everyone is supposed to adhere to it, even when his way allows vile murderers and psychos to cause even more harm.
The best example I can give that featured this problem was Clownhunter, a boy who was forced to watch as the Joker murdered his parents and watched over and over again as the Joker continued to cause more pain, more death, and Batman has never done a damn thing to actually stop it.
Now, here’s someone who is not only sick of evil continuing to exist, who has every right to kill the sick freak who murdered his child, but he has the skill to challenge Batman and the sense of moral outrage and actual justice that shatters Batman’s pontificating moralization. No man or woman should ever have to outlive their child, and any parent whose child has been murdered has the right to be outraged at the sight of their child’s killer simply walking away.
This is something I’ve been waiting for a long time in the Batman and DC comics in general. A character who challenges or even shatters this ongoing narrative that killing villains is somehow wrong. For the sake of good plot, storytelling and originality, it’d be engaging to read an arc where Batman’s sense of self-righteous justice is not only challenged but defeated. That would make this story stand out from the countless number of other stories and arcs where Batman faces this moral dilemma but somehow always ends up in the right or on top.
I really understand your point man,sorry if my english is bad but you don’t think that the people who starts killing in search for revenge or justice like quiet man or punisher in some point or even in the start they become hypocrites because they did turn in what they hate? For example if one of the victms of quiet man has a child, this child will grown up in search for justice against him. What I mean to say is they in search for justice become someone’s else villain. What Batman tries to do is redeem or save the villains like what he did in his new run with killercroc, instead of fight with him batman sees that what killercroc needs now is a conversation and psychological help. Batman in his most deep needs to think that everyone has some kind of saving, I know that sometimes gives the impression that He’s talking like superior but I don’t think that is the case. I think that he expresses himself badly, of course that some interactions he does think that he’s superior but is not most of. I like that you bring under the red hood because that final conversation with jason represent perfect what I’m talking about because he say exactly what I’m saying here that if he kills in what point he’s different than the villains. I hope that you understand my point besides the bad english
I understand the point you’re trying to make, but it holds no water for me. Though I do appreciate the conversation and exchange of opinion.
That whole argument about killing a villain makes the hero no different is meaningless and empty because it’s untrue. How is killing a serial killer an evil thing? It’s not. The only way for evil to thrive is for good people to allow it, and the only way to truly put a stop to evil is to cut it down. In the way back when, during the “Countdown to 52” arc, Jason Todd found himself in an alternate reality where, after Jason’s brutal murder, Batman did what he should have done with his crusade, lost the half measures, and actually killed the vast majority of villains. This made the Justice League of that reality try to hunt him down, but Gotham was considerably safer. I feel that far too often, Batman cares more about his own self-righteous code than he does about the lives of civilians.
What most people don’t understand, especially the whole concept of Batman, is the fact that it takes strength to kill, despite what too many heroic themed pieces of fiction says. It takes strength of character to take on the burden of ending a life and living with it for the rest of your life. Batman doesn’t have that kind of strength, unlike people who’ve joined the military that I’ve met.
The Quiet Man is on a vengeance kick, but nobody has the right to tell him that he doesn’t have the right seek it out, least of all Batman. Not when Batman knowingly, intentionally puts children in danger as soldiers in his self-appointed war on crime, especially after he got Jason Todd killed, beaten to death with a crowbar by a psychotic serial killer/terrorist.
And as for what you mentioned about what if one of the villains the Quiet Man kills has a kid who grows up to seek revenge for his criminal daddy, that’s not on the Quiet Man. If that villain really cared about his kid(s), he’d do everything he could to be in his kid’s life instead of living the dangerous lifestyle of a criminal. And if that kid wants vengeance/justice for his criminal daddy, as far as I’m concerned, he can either get over it or cry about it, but the fact of the matter would be that his daddy chose to be a criminal and died because of it, so that kid has no right to whatever justice/vengeance he thinks he’s owed.
Far too often, Batman’s methods have yielded no results. Criminals are still criminals, still causing pain and ending lives, while ordinary people, people who don’t have billions of dollars, elite training and cutting-edge technology, still have to life in fear and with the pain of what these monsters do.
The redemption of a criminal is nothing to a parent who has to live with the pain of burying their murdered child. I defy anyone to walk up to someone who has suffered that and say, “I’m sorry your child is dead, but his/her killer has redeemed themself. Hope that eases the pain for you”.
I understand your point and I am very happy for the health exchange of opnion. But the point in killing criminals are wrong is where it’s stops. In injustice timeline superman kills Joker and after he wants to rule the world and actually is successful in a point that the world have almost 0 crimes but the world live in constant fear and superman lost himself in the way because he starts to kill heroes and friends. The same thing happens in death note with light. Is a crime kill someone independent that he’s evil or not but no one is going to judge you for killing a psychopath but where do you stops, once you kill someone something in your head snaps and killing always will be a option to you even though you have a better option that doesn’t need that. I think that batman because of his trauma is physically incapable of killing because killing has brought everything that is bad in his life since his parents deaths. When Jason dies he actually tries to kill Joker but he escapes and after that batman became more darker, punching more strong and not think like before. The idea of cross that line is constantly in his head. But is because of this that robin exists, the concept of robin is bring light back to batman for him doesn’t turn more like his villains and after jason and after batman himself decides to not have another robin, Tim drake convinces him otherwise because without robin batman not act liking a symbol of hope but fear. And he’s not a symbol of fear since year one.
When it comes to Injustice Superman and Light from Death Note, I think that has less to do with killing for the right reasons and more to do with the strength of character of people with power.
Abraham Lincoln once said, “Any man can withstand adversity. If you really want to test a man’s character, give him power”.
Injustice Superman had more power than any human could dream of having, and after killing the Joker, he began to get high on his own power, same thing with Light from Death Note. It wasn’t the killing that made them go down the dark path, it was the power that allowed them to kill. Power doesn’t corrupt, it never has, despite the popular saying. Power doesn’t taint character but reveals what and who a person truly is.
Despite not having superpowers, Batman has more power than 95% of people can possibly dream of possessing. Not only is he insanely rich, not least of which he inherited, runs a multi-billion-dollar company, but he’s one of the smartest people on the planet, and he has enough training, gadgetry and protection that outstrips even Special Forces soldiers. So, for the most part, as a person, Batman doesn’t really understand what life is like for the average person, what they have to live with, like the fear and vulnerability that most people have to put up with.
Symbols are powerful things, but people need more than symbols, they need results, actions. And some of Batman’s action, or inactions in some cases, have caused more harm than good.
My whole point is that for something new and different as far as storytelling goes is that it’d be nice to have a character, like this Quiet Man, challenge Batman’s narrative in order to create a more engaging story. Sometimes what hero needs is not to win, but to lose, have his methods or beliefs challenged and shown that he is not infallible. That would be a refreshing change from the same narrative Batman’s stories have followed whenever he was forced to face this moral dilemma.
I agree with you that batman has to be challenged. And that he brings a lot of bad things to gotham like was discussed in the last arc. But Bruce Wayne brings a lot of good things for gotham, he is the only one that care and do something for the city with a lot of good things. Gotham is a bad place because the big people in gotham wants it to be that way because this way they’ll always have power.
I’m not going to argue any of what you just said. I’m not saying that Bruce Wayne or even Batman hasn’t done a lot of good for Gotham, because they have. But there are instances where Batman is wrong and has no place to pass judgement on someone else for their actions and battles against injustice.
๐๐พ