Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 39 (click to see context) from:
** Because the Joker relies on unpredictability and more lethal gimmicks and tricks to subdue or harm Batman; we can see from the climax of the book that he's no match at all for Batman in physical combat.
to:
** Because the Joker relies on unpredictability and more lethal gimmicks and tricks to subdue or harm Batman; we can see from the climax of the book that he's no match at all for Batman in physical combat.combat.
----
* Am I the only one who thinks The Joker's flashbacks weren't supposed to be him being an UnreliableNarrator? He wasn't telling his story to anyone, and there's no indication that he's breaking the fourth wall. Even after being spoiled first, this troper just assumed that the "flashbacks" were simply an objective depiction of what happened and that The Joker alone [[DramaticIrony doesn't know his own backstory]].
----
* Am I the only one who thinks The Joker's flashbacks weren't supposed to be him being an UnreliableNarrator? He wasn't telling his story to anyone, and there's no indication that he's breaking the fourth wall. Even after being spoiled first, this troper just assumed that the "flashbacks" were simply an objective depiction of what happened and that The Joker alone [[DramaticIrony doesn't know his own backstory]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 38 (click to see context) from:
* If the Joker started out as a regular human-being who was easily bullied into crime by two ordinary thugs, how’d he go onto attain the skills needed to be a formidable adversary to Batman who endured years of grueling training to gain his savy?
to:
* If the Joker started out as a regular human-being who was easily bullied into crime by two ordinary thugs, how’d he go onto attain the skills needed to be a formidable adversary to Batman who endured years of grueling training to gain his savy?savy?
** Because the Joker relies on unpredictability and more lethal gimmicks and tricks to subdue or harm Batman; we can see from the climax of the book that he's no match at all for Batman in physical combat.
** Because the Joker relies on unpredictability and more lethal gimmicks and tricks to subdue or harm Batman; we can see from the climax of the book that he's no match at all for Batman in physical combat.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 37 (click to see context) from:
** And that's assuming the playing-card manufacturers ''themselves'' aren't covertly tampering with batches of cards, in exchange for hefty kickbacks from whichever crooked casinos they produce them for. Again, this is Gotham we're talking about.
to:
** And that's assuming the playing-card manufacturers ''themselves'' aren't covertly tampering with batches of cards, in exchange for hefty kickbacks from whichever crooked casinos they produce them for. Again, this is Gotham we're talking about.about.
* If the Joker started out as a regular human-being who was easily bullied into crime by two ordinary thugs, how’d he go onto attain the skills needed to be a formidable adversary to Batman who endured years of grueling training to gain his savy?
* If the Joker started out as a regular human-being who was easily bullied into crime by two ordinary thugs, how’d he go onto attain the skills needed to be a formidable adversary to Batman who endured years of grueling training to gain his savy?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 37 (click to see context) from:
** And that's assuming the playing-card manufacturers ''themselves'' aren't covertly tampering with batches of cards, in exchange for a kickback from whatever crooked casinos they produce them for. Again, this is Gotham we're talking about.
to:
** And that's assuming the playing-card manufacturers ''themselves'' aren't covertly tampering with batches of cards, in exchange for a kickback hefty kickbacks from whatever whichever crooked casinos they produce them for. Again, this is Gotham we're talking about.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 36 (click to see context) from:
** Think about it. There are at least two thousand casinos in the world, all of them have various card games and the dealers often change decks to prevent cheating and multi-deck blackjack where they use two to four decks to prevent card counting is also a thing, so each casino would probably have quite a few decks. Then you got people buying decks to play with at home, magicians that use them for card tricks, etc. Robbing a playing card company might not be as lucrative as robbing a bank, but there would still be a pretty decent score if the circumstances are right. And like another troper mentioned, who would even think of robbing a playing card company? As for why a card company would have security that they'd have to avoid, well that's simple, any successful company that doesn't want to get robbed would, at the very least, have security cameras and some kind of alarm system, that's just common sense even if they're not as likely to be robbed as a bank or gas station.
to:
** Think about it. There are at least two thousand casinos in the world, all of them have various card games and the dealers often change decks to prevent cheating and multi-deck blackjack where they use two to four decks to prevent card counting is also a thing, so each casino would probably have quite a few decks. Then you got people buying decks to play with at home, magicians that use them for card tricks, etc. Robbing a playing card company might not be as lucrative as robbing a bank, but there would still be a pretty decent score if the circumstances are right. And like another troper mentioned, who would even think of robbing a playing card company? As for why a card company would have security that they'd have to avoid, well that's simple, any successful company that doesn't want to get robbed would, at the very least, have security cameras and some kind of alarm system, that's just common sense even if they're not as likely to be robbed as a bank or gas station.station.
** And that's assuming the playing-card manufacturers ''themselves'' aren't covertly tampering with batches of cards, in exchange for a kickback from whatever crooked casinos they produce them for. Again, this is Gotham we're talking about.
** And that's assuming the playing-card manufacturers ''themselves'' aren't covertly tampering with batches of cards, in exchange for a kickback from whatever crooked casinos they produce them for. Again, this is Gotham we're talking about.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
----
Added DiffLines:
----
Added DiffLines:
----
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 32 (click to see context) from:
** They were probably going after the payroll, or the takings from a big transaction, meaning there was a lot more money in there than usual, meaning that security was beefed up more than it would be. Most of the time, it wouldn't be as much trouble to break in, but that would also mean there'd be no reason to break in. As for robbing a playing card company, hey, is it the first thing you'd think of? If not, then it's not a bad target; it's probably going to be easier than robbing the obvious targets like a bank or a jewellery store. And of course, RuleOfSymbolism: playing cards = Joker.
to:
** They were probably going after the payroll, or the takings from a big transaction, meaning there was a lot more money in there than usual, meaning that security was beefed up more than it would be. Most of the time, it wouldn't be as much trouble to break in, but that would also mean there'd be no reason to break in. As for robbing a playing card company, hey, is it the first thing you'd think of? If not, then it's not a bad target; it's probably going to be easier than robbing the obvious targets like a bank or a jewellery store. And of course, RuleOfSymbolism: playing cards = Joker.Joker.
** Think about it. There are at least two thousand casinos in the world, all of them have various card games and the dealers often change decks to prevent cheating and multi-deck blackjack where they use two to four decks to prevent card counting is also a thing, so each casino would probably have quite a few decks. Then you got people buying decks to play with at home, magicians that use them for card tricks, etc. Robbing a playing card company might not be as lucrative as robbing a bank, but there would still be a pretty decent score if the circumstances are right. And like another troper mentioned, who would even think of robbing a playing card company? As for why a card company would have security that they'd have to avoid, well that's simple, any successful company that doesn't want to get robbed would, at the very least, have security cameras and some kind of alarm system, that's just common sense even if they're not as likely to be robbed as a bank or gas station.
** Think about it. There are at least two thousand casinos in the world, all of them have various card games and the dealers often change decks to prevent cheating and multi-deck blackjack where they use two to four decks to prevent card counting is also a thing, so each casino would probably have quite a few decks. Then you got people buying decks to play with at home, magicians that use them for card tricks, etc. Robbing a playing card company might not be as lucrative as robbing a bank, but there would still be a pretty decent score if the circumstances are right. And like another troper mentioned, who would even think of robbing a playing card company? As for why a card company would have security that they'd have to avoid, well that's simple, any successful company that doesn't want to get robbed would, at the very least, have security cameras and some kind of alarm system, that's just common sense even if they're not as likely to be robbed as a bank or gas station.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** All that stress and heightened anxiety Batman was feeling had to go somewhere. He'd beaten The Joker down and the fight was over. And he'd promised James Gordon that he'd not only refrain from killing Joker, but that he'd take him in lawfully. Batman laughed not only because he saw how the tragic comedy of the joke reflected their (his and The Joker's) situation, but because otherwise he'd scream, cry or just kill the pasty-faced bastard.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1,2 (click to see context) from:
* I know I am being incredibly dense right now, but the joke that the joker tells at the end, who is supposed to represent Batman and who is supposed to represent the joker?
** The point is that the two work. If the man with the flashlight is the Joker, then the idea is that "freedom" is full-on insanity, and Batman is refusing to embrace it for reasons that are, in and on themselves, nuts ("you'd turn it off while I was halfway across"). It plays into the Joker's general interpretation of Batman and his "insanity": both are crazy, but one (Bats) is crazy in a way that makes him ''think'' there's a logic to the world. If the man with the flashlight is Batman, then the Joker thinks that not only would Batman give up on his attempt at rehabilitation halfway through, but the whole idea that he could be redeemed is as crazy as the idea that you could walk on a beam of light.
** The point is that the two work. If the man with the flashlight is the Joker, then the idea is that "freedom" is full-on insanity, and Batman is refusing to embrace it for reasons that are, in and on themselves, nuts ("you'd turn it off while I was halfway across"). It plays into the Joker's general interpretation of Batman and his "insanity": both are crazy, but one (Bats) is crazy in a way that makes him ''think'' there's a logic to the world. If the man with the flashlight is Batman, then the Joker thinks that not only would Batman give up on his attempt at rehabilitation halfway through, but the whole idea that he could be redeemed is as crazy as the idea that you could walk on a beam of light.
to:
* I know I am being incredibly dense right now, but the joke that the joker The Joker tells at the end, who is supposed to represent Batman and who is supposed to represent the joker?
The Joker?
** The point is that the two work. If the man with the flashlight isthe The Joker, then the idea is that "freedom" is full-on insanity, and Batman is refusing to embrace it for reasons that are, in and on themselves, nuts ("you'd turn it off while I was halfway across"). It plays into the The Joker's general interpretation of Batman and his "insanity": both are crazy, but one (Bats) is crazy in a way that makes him ''think'' there's a logic to the world. If the man with the flashlight is Batman, then the The Joker thinks that not only would Batman give up on his attempt at rehabilitation halfway through, but the whole idea that he could be redeemed is as crazy as the idea that you could walk on a beam of light.
** The point is that the two work. If the man with the flashlight is
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Alan Moore himself has said that he never intended the ending to be more than what we see in the comic, two men having a moment of lucidity among all the madeness and having a laugh at the absurdity of their situation.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Besides, its Gotham. Theres probably half a dozen abandoned amusement parks, he had to know which one.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 2 (click to see context) from:
** The point is that the two work. If the man with the flashlight is the Joker, then the idea is that "freedom" is full-on insanity, and Batman is refusing to embrace it for reasons that are, in and on themselves, nuts ("you'd turn it off while I was halfway across"). It plays into the Joker's general interpretation of Batman and his "insanity": both are crazy, but one (Bats) is crazy in a way that makes him ''think'' there's a logic to the world. If the man with the flashlight is Batman, then the Joker thinks that not only would Batman give up on his attempt at rehabilitation halfway through, but the whole idea that he could be redeemed is as crazy as the idea that you could work on a beam of light.
to:
** The point is that the two work. If the man with the flashlight is the Joker, then the idea is that "freedom" is full-on insanity, and Batman is refusing to embrace it for reasons that are, in and on themselves, nuts ("you'd turn it off while I was halfway across"). It plays into the Joker's general interpretation of Batman and his "insanity": both are crazy, but one (Bats) is crazy in a way that makes him ''think'' there's a logic to the world. If the man with the flashlight is Batman, then the Joker thinks that not only would Batman give up on his attempt at rehabilitation halfway through, but the whole idea that he could be redeemed is as crazy as the idea that you could work walk on a beam of light.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 29 (click to see context) from:
** They were probably going after the payroll, or the takings from a big transaction, meaning there was a lot more money in there than usual, meaning that security was beefed up more than it would be. Most of the time, it wouldn't be as much trouble to break in, but that would also mean there'd be no reason to break in. As for robbing a playing card company, hey, is it the first thing you'd think of? If not, then it's not a bad target; it's going to be easier than robbing the obvious targets like a bank or a jewellery store. And of course, RuleOfSymbolism: playing cards = Joker.
to:
** They were probably going after the payroll, or the takings from a big transaction, meaning there was a lot more money in there than usual, meaning that security was beefed up more than it would be. Most of the time, it wouldn't be as much trouble to break in, but that would also mean there'd be no reason to break in. As for robbing a playing card company, hey, is it the first thing you'd think of? If not, then it's not a bad target; it's probably going to be easier than robbing the obvious targets like a bank or a jewellery store. And of course, RuleOfSymbolism: playing cards = Joker.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 28 (click to see context) from:
** Knowing Gotham, it's probably a front for something else.
to:
** Knowing Gotham, it's probably a front for something else.else.
** They were probably going after the payroll, or the takings from a big transaction, meaning there was a lot more money in there than usual, meaning that security was beefed up more than it would be. Most of the time, it wouldn't be as much trouble to break in, but that would also mean there'd be no reason to break in. As for robbing a playing card company, hey, is it the first thing you'd think of? If not, then it's not a bad target; it's going to be easier than robbing the obvious targets like a bank or a jewellery store. And of course, RuleOfSymbolism: playing cards = Joker.
** They were probably going after the payroll, or the takings from a big transaction, meaning there was a lot more money in there than usual, meaning that security was beefed up more than it would be. Most of the time, it wouldn't be as much trouble to break in, but that would also mean there'd be no reason to break in. As for robbing a playing card company, hey, is it the first thing you'd think of? If not, then it's not a bad target; it's going to be easier than robbing the obvious targets like a bank or a jewellery store. And of course, RuleOfSymbolism: playing cards = Joker.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 25,27 (click to see context) :
* The ending is meant to be ambiguous. Maybe the Batman broke Joker's neck - or maybe he didn't. The reader has no sure way of knowing.
* the scene of Batman killing Joker by breaking his neck was a completely different story entirely. if i recall correctly, it was pretty close to a mutual kill as well, given Bats had at least four bullet wounds in the chest and stomach. completely unrelated to the Killing Joke though.
** I think you're thinking of ''ComicBook/TheDarkKnightReturns'', which was an {{Elseworlds}}. Batman ''did'' [[spoiler:NeckSnap Joker in that one, but "only" to the point of paralysis; Joker actually mocks him for his restraint before finishing the job himself.]]
* the scene of Batman killing Joker by breaking his neck was a completely different story entirely. if i recall correctly, it was pretty close to a mutual kill as well, given Bats had at least four bullet wounds in the chest and stomach. completely unrelated to the Killing Joke though.
** I think you're thinking of ''ComicBook/TheDarkKnightReturns'', which was an {{Elseworlds}}. Batman ''did'' [[spoiler:NeckSnap Joker in that one, but "only" to the point of paralysis; Joker actually mocks him for his restraint before finishing the job himself.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 30 (click to see context) from:
* So why did those thugs go to so much trouble just to rob a ''playing card company?'' The way they talk about it you'd think they were trying to get into Fort Knox. They apparently needed to sneak in through the adjacent building to avoid all the security for a place that makes freaking ''playing cards?''
to:
* So why did those thugs go to so much trouble just to rob a ''playing card company?'' The way they talk about it you'd think they were trying to get into Fort Knox. They apparently needed to sneak in through the adjacent building to avoid all the security for a place that makes freaking ''playing cards?''cards?''
** Knowing Gotham, it's probably a front for something else.
** Knowing Gotham, it's probably a front for something else.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** The point is that the two work. If the man with the flashlight is the Joker, then the idea is that "freedom" is full-on insanity, and Batman is refusing to embrace it for reasons that are, in and on themselves, nuts ("you'd turn it off while I was halfway across"). It plays into the Joker's general interpretation of Batman and his "insanity": both are crazy, but one (Bats) is crazy in a way that makes him ''think'' there's a logic to the world. If the man with the flashlight is Batman, then the Joker thinks that not only would Batman give up on his attempt at rehabilitation halfway through, but the whole idea that he could be redeemed is as crazy as the idea that you could work on a beam of light.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** I think you're thinking of ''ComicBook/TheDarkKnightReturns'', which was an {{Elseworlds}}. Batman ''did'' [[spoiler:NeckSnap Joker in that one, but "only" to the point of paralysis; Joker actually mocks him for his restraint before finishing the job himself.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27 (click to see context) from:
** Because it's an amusement park. It was just a normal place for people to have fun before Joker made it a place of evil. Not all amusement parks are controlled by madmen.
to:
** Because it's an amusement park. It was just a normal place for people to have fun before Joker made it a place of evil. Not all amusement parks are controlled by madmen.madmen.
* So why did those thugs go to so much trouble just to rob a ''playing card company?'' The way they talk about it you'd think they were trying to get into Fort Knox. They apparently needed to sneak in through the adjacent building to avoid all the security for a place that makes freaking ''playing cards?''
* So why did those thugs go to so much trouble just to rob a ''playing card company?'' The way they talk about it you'd think they were trying to get into Fort Knox. They apparently needed to sneak in through the adjacent building to avoid all the security for a place that makes freaking ''playing cards?''
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*the scene of Batman killing Joker by breaking his neck was a completely different story entirely. if i recall correctly, it was pretty close to a mutual kill as well, given Bats had at least four bullet wounds in the chest and stomach. completely unrelated to the Killing Joke though.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
* I know I am being incredibly dense right now, but the joke that the joker tells at the end, who is supposed to represent batman and who is supposed to represent the joker?
to:
* I know I am being incredibly dense right now, but the joke that the joker tells at the end, who is supposed to represent batman Batman and who is supposed to represent the joker?
Changed line(s) 18 (click to see context) from:
** It's because Batman pities the Joker and thinks he genuinely needs help. That's all. He doesn't (completely) blame the Joker for what he has done here, because he doesn't believe that the Joker is in complete control of his actions, or at least not of the mania that leads him to such actions. He rejects the idea that it all it took was "One Bad Day" to make the Joker like this, but that only means even the Joker failed to realize just how ill he was all this time. That's ''this'' version of the Joker mind- other ones (eg. the MarkHamill Joker), as well as the original Golden Age Joker, are just evil sadists who kill for their own amusement and commit violent crimes for attention and their own ego.
to:
** It's because Batman pities the Joker and thinks he genuinely needs help. That's all. He doesn't (completely) blame the Joker for what he has done here, because he doesn't believe that the Joker is in complete control of his actions, or at least not of the mania that leads him to such actions. He rejects the idea that it all it took was "One Bad Day" to make the Joker like this, but that only means even the Joker failed to realize just how ill he was all this time. That's ''this'' version of the Joker mind- other ones (eg. the MarkHamill Creator/MarkHamill Joker), as well as the original Golden Age Joker, are just evil sadists who kill for their own amusement and commit violent crimes for attention and their own ego.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 25 (click to see context) from:
* So I guess SupermanStaysOutOfGotham covers why Batman's not calling every superhero he knows to track down the Joker, but why does the World's Greatest Detective need a literal invitation before he checks the local AmusementParkOfDoom, again?
to:
* So I guess SupermanStaysOutOfGotham covers why Batman's not calling every superhero he knows to track down the Joker, but why does the World's Greatest Detective need a literal invitation before he checks the local AmusementParkOfDoom, again?again?
** Because it's an amusement park. It was just a normal place for people to have fun before Joker made it a place of evil. Not all amusement parks are controlled by madmen.
** Because it's an amusement park. It was just a normal place for people to have fun before Joker made it a place of evil. Not all amusement parks are controlled by madmen.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 25 (click to see context) from:
* So I guess SupermanStaysOutOfGotham covers why Batman's not calling every superhero he knows to track down the Joker, but why does the World's Greatest Detective need a literal invitation to check out the local AmusementParkOfDoom, again?
to:
* So I guess SupermanStaysOutOfGotham covers why Batman's not calling every superhero he knows to track down the Joker, but why does the World's Greatest Detective need a literal invitation to check out before he checks the local AmusementParkOfDoom, again?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 24 (click to see context) from:
* The ending is meant to be ambiguous. Maybe the Batman broke Joker's neck - or maybe he didn't. The reader has no sure way of knowing.
to:
* The ending is meant to be ambiguous. Maybe the Batman broke Joker's neck - or maybe he didn't. The reader has no sure way of knowing.knowing.
* So I guess SupermanStaysOutOfGotham covers why Batman's not calling every superhero he knows to track down the Joker, but why does the World's Greatest Detective need a literal invitation to check out the local AmusementParkOfDoom, again?
* So I guess SupermanStaysOutOfGotham covers why Batman's not calling every superhero he knows to track down the Joker, but why does the World's Greatest Detective need a literal invitation to check out the local AmusementParkOfDoom, again?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
*** No, it isn't. The script for the scene says nothing about him breaking his neck, and there's no indication this happens. [[http://www.unleashthefanboy.com/comics/batman-doesnt-kill-joker-in-the-killing-jok/68199 Seriously]]. [[http://comicbook.com/blog/2013/08/17/the-killing-joke-script-proves-batman-didnt-kill-the-joker/ It just plain is not true]]. So please stop using it as an answer, because it's missing the point of the whole story.
to:
*** No, it isn't. The script for the scene says nothing about him breaking his neck, and there's no indication this happens. [[http://www.unleashthefanboy.com/comics/batman-doesnt-kill-joker-in-the-killing-jok/68199 Seriously]]. [[http://comicbook.com/blog/2013/08/17/the-killing-joke-script-proves-batman-didnt-kill-the-joker/ It just plain is not true]]. So please stop using it as an answer, because it's missing the point of the whole story.story.
* The ending is meant to be ambiguous. Maybe the Batman broke Joker's neck - or maybe he didn't. The reader has no sure way of knowing.
* The ending is meant to be ambiguous. Maybe the Batman broke Joker's neck - or maybe he didn't. The reader has no sure way of knowing.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Or the Joker knows he's insane, and knows that Batman's offer of help simply will not work for him -- the beam is a path he simply cannot take, and even if he accepted and miraculously managed to get on, he would be afraid that they would give up on him halfway and he would plummet down.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** It's important to note that Gordon isn't just any man, he's a police commissioner and one of the few members of Gotham PD who has always kept their integrity and upheld the law. Throwing away all of his principles for something as petty as revenge doesn't make him a "real man," if him sticking to the principles that both him and his daughter dedicated their lives to makes you lose respect for him then I question your priorities.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** By not crossing that line, by not descending to that level, Gordon denied Joker the satisfaction of knowing he got to him. Joker humiliated the man, tortured his daughter, and STILL LOST because Gordon didn't do what Joker wanted him to do. Everything Joker did? It was for nothing, because it DIDN'T WORK. Joker was trying to justify his mania, and it failed. Like Batman said, it wasn't a bad day, it was all on the Joker. Had Gordon abandoned his stance and had Joker beaten, it would have been TotallyWorthIt for Joker because the maniac would have the satisfaction of winning, of getting what he wanted. That did for more damage than any physical beating could have done.
