Yes, proximity which may or may not get to him. In all truth, a kryptonian is fast enough to kill you before you even pull the trigger. And that's not even getting to the inconsistency of kryptonite, which sometimes weakens them immediately and sometimes not. Batman punched Superman with a kryptonite ring while Superman was desperately holding back from mind control and he still says Supes could have killed him in an instant if he wanted to.
@ Tobias: That's largely true, but I assume we're talking about killing someone efficiently. Breaking someone's neck in hand-to-hand combat is not that easy to do, although fiction makes it look easy. A clean kill is not easy to do, either—especially avoiding collateral damage or loss of life. Even sniping takes years of training and tons of preparation.
But the entire ballgame changes when you're dealing with superpowers. Also, let's keep in mind that every method Superman could use to kill Zod is a method that Zod could use to kill him. Further, the super-lobotomy method is really inconsistent, especially considering the imperviousness of Kryptonian flesh.
I agree with you, however, on the point of superheroes being focused on ending the fight. I completely agree with you on that level. My problem with heroes that refuse to take like is similar to yours—when it's a situation where the most efficient method of ending imminent danger is to kill someone. Such as (as I mentioned before) if the Joker has his finger on the doomsday button. In that case, yeah, I agree that refusing to kill him just 'cuz is stupid.
But at the same time, on the Person of Mass Destruction level, that would require escalating every fight to lethality immediately, since everything they could do could harm another. That could prove disastrous. One of the many problems with using lethal force as a first resort is that if criminals know they have absolutely nothing to lose, they won't hold anything back. Imagine every Class-3 character in comics knowing that if they resisted arrest, their life was forfeit. Now, worse, imagine Superman-class characters with the same realization.
edited 10th Jun '13 9:33:11 AM by KingZeal
Considering how often Superman himself willpowers his way through Kryptonite poisoning, not only it isn't a measure not guaranteed to work in time, and not only it's avoidable by things like Zod wearing a protection suit, but it's also (theoretically) hard to find and potentially as lethal to Superman himself.
Edit: ninja'ed by a massive post. Wow, that's some speed.
edited 10th Jun '13 9:28:35 AM by NapoleonDeCheese
Not really. Everyone is afraid of different things. Some people are more afraid of being beaten down than outright death.
Yes they are. Career criminals are exceptionally cowardly. And paranoid. How many have you actually met?
So your criteria for "Badass" is A Real Man Is a Killer?
Seriously, you need to meet more Real Life police officers and soldiers. Many of them have done some amazing things, and intimidated criminals, terrorists and everything besides without ever having killed or even fired a weapon in their entire career.
edited 10th Jun '13 9:32:16 AM by KingZeal
Zeal already touched on this, but I think it deserves repeating: a person has to kill in order to be badass? WTF.
Yet he'll open fire on a crowd of people if his target happens to be in it.
edited 10th Jun '13 9:39:12 AM by CorrTerek
And no, I've yet to see the Punisher casually opening fire on a crowd, at least not in his own books; though I may have lapsed somewhat. Still better than Batman not bothering to finish off a serial killer with thousands of victims, knowing full well there'll be thousands more at that rate.
As for Zod and the like, if Squirrel Girl can overpower Galactus, anyone Armed with Canon can punt Darkseid. Treating Power Levels as relevant in assessing threat has gotten old, I think.
edited 10th Jun '13 9:49:57 AM by indiana404
But the entire ballgame changes when you're dealing with superpowers. Also, let's keep in mind that every method Superman could use to kill Zod is a method that Zod could use to kill him. Further, the super-lobotomy method is really inconsistent, especially considering the imperviousness of Kryptonian flesh.
I agree with you, however, on the point of superheroes being focused on ending the fight. I completely agree with you on that level. My problem with heroes that refuse to take like is similar to yours—when it's a situation where the most efficient method of ending imminent danger is to kill someone. Such as (as I mentioned before) if the Joker has his finger on the doomsday button. In that case, yeah, I agree that refusing to kill him just 'cuz is stupid.
But at the same time, on the Person of Mass Destruction level, that would require escalating every fight to lethality immediately, since everything they could do could harm another. That could prove disastrous. One of the many problems with using lethal force as a first resort is that if criminals know they have absolutely nothing to lose, they won't hold anything back. Imagine every Class-3 character in comics knowing that if they resisted arrest, their life was forfeit. Now, worse, imagine Superman-class characters with the same realization.
I would say it's already at that level with most villains. Guys like Doomsday, Darkseid, Zod...they aren't holding anything back to protect the lives of their enemies. Doomsday's not going to become much more dangerous now that he knows Superman's willing to kill him, because he's already giving 100% to killing Superman and everyone else around him. It's really just the heroes holding back right now.
I can't think of a Superman-class villain who was content to surrender and just go to prison, rather than fighting tooth-and-nail to kill whoever was trying to apprehend him.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.@Indiana: So you have no respect for those who are able to feint? Being willing to kill doesn't make you someone who "delivers what you promise"—it makes you a bully and a psycho. Just because you have an image doesn't mean you need to follow up to it. That's hood "gangsta" logic; it's that "keeping it real bullshit" that I see everyday. No wonder I hate it.
My personal argument isn't that the Punisher fires into a crowd—it's that people seriously underestimate how dangerous firing a gun even once is. Even one shot, let alone, a full clip from an automatic, can hit someone with a stray, go through walls and hit someone behind it, miss and travel for miles before hitting someone, or richochet in an incalculable number of directions. Ballistics are a very serious science.
And if we're bringing up Squirrel Girl as an authority on what is or isn't possible in comics, then we've officially thrown Real Life out of the window. If that's the case, then your argument has even less basis.
@Tobias: The average Superman-class fighter has the ability to destroy a city with a single punch. Superman certainly has that ability. Zod had no desire to actually cause more damage than was necessary, as he was more about displays of power than actual destruction. He wanted subjects to kneel before him, not just a pile of corpses. Doomsday is a different kettle of fish—Superman constantly says throughout the fight that he's giving Doomsday the best fight he can without harming the people around him. In fact, Doomsday is a perfect example of just how much destruction would happen if every villain gave zero fucks. His entire personality is that he kills everything as a survival instinct. Fortunately, Doomsday is also generally mindless—he doesn't do anything like, say, targetting a heavily-populated area.
But really, you've also got a point in that supervillains are inconsistently portrayed as going "all-out". However, if that's the case, I'm blaming comic writers having sense of scale. With the amount of force Superman can generate, if a villain was truly going "all out" against him, a single punch would cause a seismic event.
edited 10th Jun '13 10:18:11 AM by KingZeal
I just want to throw in that this is very, very true. Everyone's laughed at Mass Effect 2's, "Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest sonovabitch in space" rant, but the sentiment behind it is completely accurate and is a serious matter. Every time you pull that trigger, you are putting very deadly physics into effect that won't necessarily stop at just hitting your target. Firearms are very, very dangerous weapons. This is why how to properly handle your weapon is a huge part of Combat Training in the Army. Anyone who's been through any kind of military training course knows just how rigidly they enforce proper weapons handling and knowledge to minimize - but not negate, nothing will ever negate - the likelihood of an unfortunate accident occurring with it.
edited 10th Jun '13 10:30:32 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Feinting I understand; it's trying to feint, and failing miserably, that I find laughable and Narm-y. As for guns and crowds, it's the Bat who's in the habit of firing machine guns from his vehichles, especially in crowded areas. Perhaps he is scary... to innocent bystanders. To his opponents, he's just trying too hard. Conversely, the Punisher isn't limited to guns. He's killed people with zoo animals, without breaking stride.
I like Squirrel Girl precisely because she deflates all that serious pathos writers hurl over, let's face it, a man dressed like a bat. Or an alien dressed like a circus strongman. Safe to say Real Life was out of the window since day one, with some writers simply not getting the memo.
edited 10th Jun '13 10:42:06 AM by indiana404
So far, the idea that he "fails" at being scary, or that he "tries to hard" is based solely on the idea that to be scary, you need to kill.
So then this stops being an argument about what's believable or realistic and just becomes a debate about what type of story each of us would like to see.
edited 10th Jun '13 10:59:05 AM by KingZeal
When it comes to dealing with career criminals, yes. Also, in-universe, when was the last time one of the more hardcore rogues showed fear of the cowl? Even Scarecrow actually gets off on the emotion, rather than succumb to intimidation.
And yes, when it comes to fictional stories, maybe we should treat them like stories. The whole deal with not killing the Joker is not about morality or effect on organized crime, but that having an unrepentant one-dimensional serial killer always get away doesn't make for much of a heroic tale. Especially if his opponent is made out to be a frightening and very resourceful detective with unlimited funds. Taken at face value, that's actually less believable.
Coincidentally, what do you want to see in a Joker tale? How should he be dealt with, if no prison could hold him, and no hero would kill him?
edited 10th Jun '13 11:15:54 AM by indiana404
So what? Not every villain ever is scared of the Punisher, either. Just because Batman's harem of super-psychos isn't shaking in their boots at the mention of his name doesn't mean the image is a failure. Hell, at the very least, they consider him to be a Worthy Opponent. That's something. To use another example, even The Reapers merely considered Shepard "an annoyance", but s/he was clearly the only thing they were worried about.
Conversely, what do you want to see of a Joker tale? How should he be dealt with, if no prison would hold him, and no hero should kill him?
Just let the state execute him. Have Batman bring him in, let Jim Gordon walk right up to Batman, shake his hand, tell him thanks for a job well done, give him the key to the city...
...then say that the Mayor, the Governor, and the President have all have all given kill-on-sight orders for The Joker. Then have him pull out his glock and headshot the clown as a formal, state-sanctioned execution.
As I said, I agree with Batman not killing. Which is why the state should do it for him.
edited 10th Jun '13 11:36:57 AM by KingZeal
To periphrase Jack O'Neil: "Batman is a man of terror; his aim is to intimidate the enemy. The Punisher is a man of war; his aim is to kill the enemy." One usually fails, the other regularly succeeds.
Not a bad idea, government execution, but it's only a matter of time before DC brings him back. Although he could work pretty well as a Posthumous Character, appearing in flashbacks or hallucinations and sort of providing color commentary on other cases. Dexter's dad has been doing it for years.
I do notice, however, that killing the Joker appears as a thread subject far more often than, say, killing Magneto or Doom, who dwarf him in bodycount or threat level. Maybe it's not the character that need be killed, but the current slasher villain interpretation. I personally prefer the Nolanverse anarchist to The New 52 strap-on-face pointless killer.
edited 10th Jun '13 11:55:07 AM by indiana404
So you keep saying, and so I keep arguing different. The Punisher kills crooks, yes, but Batman is also intimidating. You only keep saying he fails at it because he doesn't meet your very specific criteria that a "scary" character should.
So what? Death Is Cheap, but Death is still the best Cardboard Prison in the DCU.
That would make him no less executable. Magneto either, for that shit he tried to pull in changing the Earths' magnetic field.
Doom is a special case. He's a villain with rules. He's not like Magneto's "by any means necessary" mutant supremacy or The Joker's "do I look like I have a plan" psychopathy.
edited 10th Jun '13 11:59:30 AM by KingZeal
Being scary is being scary; my criteria is about who gets scared. Frightening the Penguin is like shooting antarctic fish in a barrel. Scaring Bane, on the other hand - that's an accomplishment yet to be seen.
It's not about being executable, it's about having a reason to live. Doom has standards. Magneto has ideals. What does the modern Joker have, sans the urge to kill? An ideal, even if twisted, would give him a leg to stand on by himself, rather than going after the Bat for its own sake.
Doom is also complicated because he's a foreign monarch. Any government action against him can be considered an act of war. Of course, by the same measure, any action he takes on foreign soil can be considered the same. If Doom starts blowing up New York trying to kill Reed Richards...that is a declaration of war from Latveria to the United States.
But this is frequently overlooked because comic books fail foreign politics about as much as domestic politics and criminal justice. Technically, Black Panther should also have to watch his step any time he's engaging in superhero activities on American soil.
edited 10th Jun '13 12:13:23 PM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.That still fails. If Batman doesn't scare Joker, he at the very least makes the Joker see him as a threat. There's a reason joker's the page quote for Badass Normal.
And if street level thugs are afraid of him, even better.
The Joker sees him as a joke, that's the problem. He knows full well of his moral stance, and uses it for personal enjoyment. Conversely, in a rare Punisher crossover, the clown genuinely freaks out when realizing Frank Castle isn't a Martial Pacifist. Best reaction shot ever.
edited 10th Jun '13 12:25:30 PM by indiana404
Just noting, it's kind of hard to tell what the Joker sees him as. The "joke" and "Worthy Opponent" cards have both been played over the years, and it's very Depending on the Writer on which way the Joker sways.
....Hm, Depending on the Writer's been used alot on this thread, hasn't it?
![]()
It was also Character Derailment, courtesy of The Dark Age Of Comic Books. Take, for contrast, the Under The Red Hood story, where some unknown punk shows up making it pretty clear he's going to kill the Joker. The Joker goes from not giving a shit, to being really happy about it after he finds out who the punk is.
Seriously, you think the Joker hasn't faced killer vigilantes before?
Pretty much that.
edited 10th Jun '13 12:37:44 PM by KingZeal
And yet, the Castle incident is there for all to see. Depending on the Writer, old skullchest can very well be more frightening than Batman, to his own rogues to boot... and that's before he gets to the killing.
Still, it's not a bad idea in the future to note which Joker we refer to - Burton's, Nolan's, Dini's, Miller's, Moore's etc. Makes for a clearer discussion.
edited 10th Jun '13 12:39:31 PM by indiana404
Again, The Dark Age Of Comic Books. There's a reason it's considered the worst era for writing in comics. Because if you want to talk about things that are out for all to see, should I bring up demon-killing Punisher?
And no. There's so many interpretations of the Joker, that's a waste of time. When we say "The Joker" we invariably mean the character in aggregate.
edited 10th Jun '13 12:41:39 PM by KingZeal
That Punisher crossover failed on a very basic level: Since it was set in a shared universe, where the Punisher was fairly well known, it was stupid to think the Joker, a seasoned career criminal, would be completely ignorant of the fact that the man carrying heavy lethal weaponry with the giant skull on his chest would be willing to kill him. It was utterly stupid and set up only for the convenience of a plot point, which was sad because Chuck Dixon usually is a very good and consistent writer.
Made it even worse because, in the first book of that crossover, written by Denny O'Neil, Joker already had acted behind the scenes with Jigsaw, the criminal with the most experience at dealing with Punisher. So not only it relied on Joker being an idiot who had never picked a newspaper up or watched TV news, but Jigsaw also being an idiot who never told his ally of the very dangerous foe who could have toppled their joint enterprise.
edited 10th Jun '13 12:46:52 PM by NapoleonDeCheese
![]()
Suit yourself. But in aggregate, he's, as I saw it put elsewhere, "one little twig of an albino who takes fashion tips from Pee-Wee Herman". Not much of a nemesis, all things considered. You could say his whole career hangs on a number of plot contrivances, the least of which is not being shot on sight by lawful and lawless forces alike.

Seriously - the only reason any character in comics is still kicking is due to Plot Armor. Traditional superheroes as a whole come from a time when human weapons couldn't level a continent if we felt like it. Hence the Power Creep superheroes and villains endure in order to stay relevant.
edited 10th Jun '13 9:23:53 AM by indiana404