What Makes The Punisher 'Cool'?

What makes characters like The Punisher, Dirty Harry, or Batman 'cool'? what do you guys think are the implications of these general definitions of cool based on these characters and their actions?

I wanted to make a topic where I could discuss freely the supposed philosophies behind these characters. Dirty Harry for example received a lot of flak when it first came out and still does because of what were called 'fascist themes', namely how the title character took it into his own hands to fight crime, often in a brutal manner. The same criticism could be made of Batman and The Punisher; The Punisher even first appeared in comics in the same time period when Dirty Harry was released.

So regarding these criticisms, I've thought and wondered what it is about them that people think is cool, and what the implications are of that.

This seems like a fun topic.

I think a fair measure of Darkis Not Evil and getting away with their brand of justice plays a part on this perception of them. Add other personality quirks, and some relatable mundane things and the fact visual media allows for a lot of just plain awesome, attractive visuals and there's a killer combination.

People typically like someone who breaks social rules. It takes a certain level of power and badassity to choose to do something that breaks the mold in such a way that you immediately stand out. If you feel confident in doing so, even better.

As for implications...well, I think America is an extreme example of this ideal, where people are expected to be complete masters of their own destinies no matter what. Extreme Libertarianism and Republicanism tend to advocate this sort of thing.

Frank Miller explores this concept to an extreme in his stories, where his chosen avatar is basically an Übermensch that knows what's best and knows he right way to deal with a world gone wrong. Everyone else is a sheep doing what they're told and will either "wake up" when exposed to the Ubermensch or shut their eyes even tighter.

edited 11th Sep '14 8:59:59 AM by KingZeal

He appeals to our desires of taking the worst of humanity and making them suffer the harm they put others through.

I think a big part of the appeal of these kind of Vigilante Man characters is the fantasy of a world where "true justice" exists, i.e. bad guys always get what they deserve in the end. In real life, criminals can get away with nothing due to lack of evidence and stuff like that, and this is a thought that disturbs many people.

This is acknowledged by the writers, who then "solve" this problem by adding a ruthless Anti-Hero character, who punishes those the justice system has failed to punish, into the picture. Fictional heroes also tend to have a strong sense of justice that guides them to do the right thing without fail, whereas in real life actions like disobeying the direct orders of your commanding officer make the situation worse more often than not (this is why a chain of command is used in the first place).

Fictional heroes, however, always know what's the right thing to do, and to show how dedicated they are to doing their job, they do it even if it means breaking a couple laws.

What it comes the implications of liking these kind of characters, obviously, you don't need to accept vigilante justice to like characters who utilize it.

edited 11th Sep '14 9:26:38 AM by Paradisesnake

This is something I touched on once in the Order of the Stick thread: there are what I call the three stages of Moral Relativity that fans go through as we get older and start to outgrow the basic White Hats v. Black Hats storytelling setup.

0 - Basic good versus evil. Some people are good guys. Some people are bad guys. They oppose each other.

1 - Good and Evil are illusions. There are no good and evil, just people trying to do what they do.

2 - Everyone is the hero of his own story. There are such concepts as good and evil, but they're wholly subjective on the part of the beholder. Nobody deliberately tries to be evil or do evil things, but the road to Hell is paved with good intentions; great evil can be created even by people who are doing what they truly believe is just.

3 - People are complicated. They cannot be summarized for easy reference in the manner of, 'The elves are a lithe, pointy-eared people who excel at poverty.' Yes, people tend to believe themselves to be the good guy, but that doesn't mean they always act for what they believe is right. People have personal flaws, vices, foibles, justifications...it's not hard for some people to excuse an act they believe to be evil, or even just that it would be evil for others to do, without ever noticing the hypocrisy. Everyone has values, but some people cling more tightly to those than others, and the distinction between a Good person and an Evil one, while still having no Absolute Measure, is ultimately not as fluid as it may have looked years ago.

Characters like the Punisher, Kratos, or Rorschach appeal on a sincere, "This is the hero for me!" level to people in stage 1 and 2 relativity, where their terrible actions are easily excused by the fact that they fight people who are worse than them.

At stage 2 and 3 relativity, they can also find some appeal, but in another capacity: personally, I adore characters like this, not because they are heroes, but because they are each a walking tragedy, rolling steadily down the slope of He Who Fights Monsters. I've written essays in other threads on the steady self-destruction of the character of Kratos throughout his games, as he mindlessly pursues his vendetta against anyone and everyone he ever perceived as slighting him, without ever noticing that the true villain of his story, the person responsible for all of his woes, is ultimately Kratos himself.

edited 11th Sep '14 9:46:07 AM by TobiasDrake

I wanted to add something to the topic, but Paradisesnake stated a very similar opinion.

People root for the vigilantes because the legal systems don't always work. Even a Lighter and Softer case of vigilantism, as depicted in Leverage, is appealing, I'd even risk claiming that it's more appealing than Punisher's brutal simplicity. Gunning someone down is simple and people may be opposed to violence, even against bad guys (hey, we're living in weird times). But Guile Hero, Laser-Guided Karma and Ironic Punishment? Those show that not all is lost in the world and the systems still work, they just need a gentle push in the right direction.

As noted, the root of their coolness is the failing from our justice system. Those vigilantes present a seemingly easy, violent fix to systemic problems. They're juvenile power fantasies coupled with naive dreams of making the world a better place all by yourself. But just because that wouldn't work in real life doesn't mean they're inherently bad as long as they're understood as escapism.

I've always thought those characters were ways for the audience to live out their particular vengeance fantasies. Because that's what they're doing - they're not subjecting criminals to justice, as that would require balance, fairness, evidence. They just go out and murder^note because that's what the Punisher does when he's sniping embezzlers or molestors or whoever or beat the crap out of people who, while they might deserve to be punished, usually don't deserve the same punishment they're receiving. And if the heroes have proof of their guilt, they could still be working within the system to ensure their punishment, at least in the cases where writing provides illogal situations like Arkham Asylum's revolving door.

Like many have said above I'd say the appeal about those characters sometimes is that they are a sort of revenge fantasy and Ubersmench-like figure that stands above our petty human laws, but I'll also say that the appeal sometimes is simply exploring what this sort of extreme vigilantism entails to both the vigilante and society itself. For instance, two of the examples used, Punisher and Batman, are often written by people keenly self-aware of the philosophical and sociological issues with these characters, and so explore them to the fullest in some sort of Decon-Recon Switch (The Batman's great one is that in the end, he may not be helping Gotham at all, while the Punisher's recurring theme seems to be if he is just as bad as the criminals he fights or not).

So I'd say more than just the appeal of revenge fantasy and escapism, it's also about exploring the concepts and themes of such characters.

In other words, well-rounded characters are cool.

Cos He Get Shit Done.

Well, aside from the "primal justice power fantasy" aspect that's already been covered, I find there's three things that make Dirty Harry, Max Payne and the Punisher simply "cooler" than similar vigilantes and escapist characters:

First, they don't just "get things done" - they focus entirely on getting things done. There's no moral posturing, no public appeasement, outright no pseudoheroic pretense that they have to be somehow nobler than the crooks they put down. In short, they are unfettered by public image niceties - in an age where everyone's basically become a Slave to PR, that is a power fantasy in itself.

Second, they go further than others would ever consider, including the crooks themselves. The enjoyment of seeing evil paid unto evil aside, there's a great deal of comfort in the idea of a hero that doesn't hold back, putting innocent people's lives before any moral stance or methodological squeamishness. A bonafide papa wolf who's undeniably more confident and driven than any antagonist projects a lot more powerful image than a self-doubting moralist whose undue restraint is continually exploited by the crooks. There's comfort in that kind of simplicity and reliability.

The last reason is the same as why evil comes off as cooler in general. It's the same reason why even Allied planes in WWII were painted with monstrous sharkteeth on their noses, while Marines still pride themselves on being called "Devil Dogs" by the Germans. Namely, that in the singularly violent framework of action films, superhero comics and even adventure tales, you simply don't want morally pristine paragon types. Instead, the welcomed heroes of such times are an even more gruesome batch of basterds than the enemy, but one that happens to be on your side.

And this is where the Punisher gets his appeal - much like Rambo in his jungle, he's just the right man for the job. That is, if it really is that kind of job. I'm all for humane heroes, so long as the antagonists are just as complex and humanized - if anything, that's the more realistic view. But, if the villain of the story is made to be a flat out complete monster, then there's nothing particularly moral in holding back.

This could easily go into a Wall of Text but I'll give the short version for each.

Punisher is what, ex Marine and SEAL right? Marines are cool. And especially after Bin Laden's death SEALS are cool. To take that and wage war on criminals, those who escape the law, avenging those who are forced into sex slavery or who the law had failed or cannot protect, that holds a real appeal for someone to come along and deal out the treatment a lot of people feel such scum deserve. Just for a quick comparison in Buffy the Vampire Slayer (yes I'm a huge fan, thank you for asking) we have Willow avenging Tara's death by hunting down and killing Warren. Buffy was all for letting him live, incarceration. Given what he'd done and how he had shown the law could not handle him In-Universe up to the time Willow kills him it's questioned why she was in the wrong, to say nothing of the fan reaction over Buffy getting her panties in a twist over it and you can apply that to any superhero type character where they spare the villain.

Batman is the ultimate male power fantasy. Just look at the Arkham series, one of the appeals is doing all the awesome stuff you see in comics TV and film. He's a millionaire...sorry billionaire who unlike those with superpowers is on par with the likes of Superman and what he is and what he does is achievable. Maybe ten guys in the world would be able to get to that point if they really put their minds to it but he's not a alien, he wasn't bitten by a radioactive spider, he's a normal guy who worked his ass off and trained to the max and in doing so he could defeat Superman. Superman for crap's sake. He has the wealth, he has the training and abilities anyone with a pair would desire, he has the cool toys and he uses all of these to fulfill what many would love to do and take on the criminal underworld.

As for Harry Callahan, see above. Plus he has this cool wit, he gets to mouth off to superiors which I'm sure all of us would love to do at one point or another, and even at the time it was larger than life but still believable, human.

You can really apply this to most any similar character, Worf, Jin, Cloud, Chris or Leon, Revan Han Mara or Kyle, Kim, Jack, Shepard, Buffy, the list could go on and on and on. In many respects that is the appeal these characters have, whether it's a Badass Normal doing extraordinary feats, a Jerkass who can get away with the things they do or an utter Bad Ass doing either what we would like to do ourselves or see someone do.

In the case of the the punisher at least apart from the character being a 'Bad Ass' his appeal comes from him being the clearest example of a deconstruction of the superhero vigilante^*  The term deconstruction gets throw around to the point of meaninglessness but I think it's appropriate here.

There's a refreshing lack of of 'gimmick' to his character. He's a vigilante who punishes criminals in revenge for his family. He has no powers or abilities outside military training and noticeable little in regards to theatrics or moral posturing. This 'no-nonsense' approach to makes him stand in a stark contrast to most superheroes.

Gun play, one-liners and bad things happening to bad people; what's not to love?

I dislike the term 'revenge fantasy', it makes it sound pathetic and needy. Maybe it is, but it's cathartic. We need it.

Well, I need it, at least. After years of, admittedly entirely voluntarily, being put in the position of seeing terrible things happen to people and seeing the ideas of justice and karma proven to be complete horseshit, watching one-dimensional bad guys getting blown away on screen becomes a fuckload more than just entertainment.

edited 14th Sep '14 2:02:50 AM by InverurieJones

We all know that one asshole who didn't get what they deserve.

These guys make sure those assholes don't get away with it.

Can't help but love and admire that.

And because it's fiction, you rarely have to deal with circumstances where the f*cker who got what he deserves...was never convicted because he didn't actually do it, as opposed to because of a broken system or corruption or bribes or something.

edited 18th Sep '14 12:19:32 PM by TobiasDrake

exactly. It's guilt free escapism.

Plus how can you not just want to be in some ways like these guys?

They took their pain and they made themselves something more from it. They're all human so they're relatable and especially in Jayne's case, real. A lot of men hit the gym after 300. You can be a little bit like these guys in some way. You want a friend like them.

Now these guys do have some serious mental issues, but they're proactive and protective in attempts to keep good people from being hurt like they were.

I wondering if Light from Death Note is thought of in the same light as a 'cool guy' compared to say punisher or Dirty Harry.

He's a vigilante killer just like the above, but he does't have an 'average guy push to far' element to him. He is not a 'Badass Normal', making use of death magic to reach his ends, nor does he seems to care much about wasting innocent bystanders who get in his way.

Perhaps most damningly he's does't heroically kill criminals in a manner a 'real man' should. Picking them off at distance with out any way of them defending themselves or putting himself in any direct physical danger

edited 22nd Sep '14 10:50:36 PM by joeyjojo

The main difference that I see is that Punisher and Dirty Harry are pretty unambiguously the heroes. In Death Note, it varies quite a bit (at least in the early episodes) whether Light or L is the hero, and honestly the argument could go either way pretty much all the way up to past the halfway point of the anime.

Death note is froathing with Christian imagery, especially L washing Lights feet before Light kills him. L knows he is going to die.

No. I would not put Light in with these guys because Light kills for power, not justice.

Light definitely ends up going on a slippery slop to sheer insanity when he begins killing out the opposition for no other reason other than it being the opposition. Darker anti hero type of characters actually remain on the fringe, showing actual guilt, trepidation, and so instead of just murdering whoever gets in their way for the sake of it.

It is a thin line, and easy to cross, but Light really, really goes past it.

He actually crosses the line really flipping early. When you start comparing yourself as like unto a god, you're not an anti-hero.

edited 23rd Sep '14 3:05:51 PM by Euodiachloris

True. But. Calling yourself something is one thing. Doing something is another. So I prefer to judge him if anything by his actions rather than what he says.

Still, he did go cray cray far earlier. Bad Light. Baaaad. -whacks with newspaper-