Batman confidential #7 talkback*spoilers of course*

[jv2k]

While I did enjoy the story, I've always been somewhat split on whether I liked the joker as a comedian or as a criminal. On one hand I never really felt anything for the man who mass murders on a whim every couple weeks despite how interesting he was as a character. It also doesn't make sense that after losing his family, failing as a comedian, and getting an acid bath he became a ruthless criminal genius. Losing everything and everyone he had may make a person cold, and it may even drive them insane and to murder, but all the inventions joker has come up with over the years and the ease in which he can kill people requires a bit more training than acid bath and a career in comedy can give you. It would also makes more sense for him to be a ruthless killer before becoming the joker when references are made to him being more sane than he lets on.

At the same time the killing joke was a great story and criminal joker just seems somewhat plane in comparison to a tragic joker. I mean so what is criminal joker's motivation? He had a man crush on batman because he was bored, dressed up as red hood to mess with batman, got an acid bath, and then decided to go with that as his new theme? Even if the story is well written and being an intelligent hitman makes more sense the tragic joker just makes for the better story.


All in all though I did enjoy this first issue. I thought the idea of the Joker being a hitman who had gotten tired of his life was an interesting take on the character. I also loved how they tied him further to the batman. Gotham was finally starting to clean up and if Bruce hadn't showed up when he did the Joker would have let the security guard shoot him. Batman's interference with that crime caused the chain of events that would open gotham up to masked criminals and lead to Dick getting shot and Jason getting killed. I'm sure that woman he went out with is going to die in this arc too which also means that if he had chosen to stay with her instead of gotham, the Joker would have died before he had been born and Bruce may have actually gained a serious relationship with this woman.


For better or worse we have a Joker origin now.

[drwho]

Depending on word of mouth I may come back for the trade on this.

[Murrocko]

Yeah, if it gets a generally good review I'll pick up the trade. Though I get the feeling that this origin is just for the movie that's coming out next summer.

[brundlefly]

I thought this was quite subpar, both in terms of writing and art. Skip this; wake me when the Azzarello/Bermejo Joker miniseries ships instead.

[vazel]

Well I read this because I'm DC's bitch even though I hate what they're doing. I liked the art and enjoyed the story all the way until Jack made his appearance then I started rolling my eyes. I admit I was biased to hate this story from the start but after reading it it gave me good enough reason not to like it. So Joker was an emo criminal at the top of his game? Ugh.

"Get that joker out of here" "Not a very funny guy are you?" "Mister J" Oh HARDY HAR HAR! :rolleyes: And then it turns out that gal is Harley!

[The Xenos]

Ugh. I read the online preview, 20 full pages of it. This was terrible. I still bought it because I told my shop to order it. I'm telling him to drop my order for issue 3. Instead I'll be getting the O'Neil /Cowan Question tpb.

I told my shop owner that DC itself posted 20 pages and I already read it and thought it was terrible. He was suprrised DC posted such a good deal of the book online.

I haven't finished reading the story, but judging from that large online preview, it's terrible. DC needs to quit changing things just to make a buck. Didn't they learn from the failure of their last revamp of Joker's origin in Gotham Knights? That made me drop that book as this one made me drop this one.

Yeah, that bit with Harley was bullcrap.

Any positives? Well the Batman scenes were damn good. Too bad the totally stupid new Joker origin is most of the book and it's terrible.

I guess anything else was already said in the preview thread. Here's what I posted there.

Ugh. If they're integrating stuff from the 1989 film into regular continuity, this sounds like utter s---. Nevermind that DC is yet again just grabbing some popular TV writer with no background in comics to craft quite an important story. This sounds like a total failiure.

Hey! We got a quintessential Joker origin story by comics icon Alan Moore. Who can we find to change that? Um.. that show Heroes is popular and mainstream and involves superheros. Hey, it even knocks off Moore's Watchmen. Let's take a random writer from that show and have him reinvent the Joker.

Grrr. And I like Heroes. It and its writers just doesn't have s--- to do with the Joker.

I'm tempted to pick it up for the Denys Cowan art, but the story and idea sounds awful.

Well, hopefully we can ignore this yet another revamp to Joker's origin. Plus I hope none of this crap is in The Dark Knight and parent company AOL TIME WARNER hasn't whipped DC into conforming into its older movies. Never mind the idiots making the movie were so creative they named the character after the actor playing him. (Jon Peters and Nicholson wanted extra royalties from action figures, so they made up a name for the Joker. Utter bulls---.)

The idea that the Joker was a criminal before hand is bullcrap. Moore's set up was brilliant. He was a good man, a failing comedian, who got suckered into doing one crime in that red hood get up. Then he falls into the vat.

All it took was one bad day.

Now they're going to change that very very important idea about Joker. They think adding more to the story makes it better, when all it does is ruin the soup. More is not always better.

Well, hopefully this will be forgotten and ignored just like the dumb attempt over in Batman Gotham Knights during the Hush fiasco.

Then again, this also adds to the mess that is DC continuity. Instead of simplifying things, they just keep making more of a mess.

...

Oh dear s---. They have him and Harley meeting before hand. Dear s---, DC. Can they ever have one story and stick to it?

Wow. You can tell it's by a writer on Heroes. First issue and there's already an amazing coincidental meeting. Now, I enjoy it on that show. I don't enjoy it in Joker's origin.

[swedishmeatballs]

There is sure some Harley hate around here. I don't mind the timing.

I thought it was interesting. I like the first part and how Cowan got the mechanics of Bruce/Batman's drive/obsession. The art doesn't detract from the story, for me at least (but I did think that Gordon looked like a walrus in the Luthor arc). Killing Joke will always be the best for me and I'm giving this series a chance. The last panel made me laugh.:D I'm not expecting something deep like Moore did in his work.

[Violently Apathetic]

I don't know, I like the 'Jack' character, and I think his expression in the very last panel was great, despite the subpar art. However I think it would better if it were an entirely new character who began to fixate on Batman in an attempt to combat his intense ennui, rather than the Joker, simply because the very idea of something displacing The Killing Joke (for no other reason than 'it's old') makes me anxious. Or instead of making it the 'official' origin why not just claim it's an option, one of the multiple choices that the Joker mentioned in Moore's tale?

[The Xenos]

I cheked out the issues again. Didn't fully read it like I read the preview. I just realize the damn 20 page online preview shows you the beginning and the end. They skipped a bunch of pages in between. That's crazy.

Still, the writing I saw on the Joker part is just painfully blunt.

Plus why are we going backwards? That whole Jack Napier thing was a mistake. It was a moronic money grab by a Hollywood hack. Let's leave it in the dust.

Unless Warners and Jon Peters are playing games and screwing around with Nolan's Batman and whpping boy DC is playing alone for the ride. That's bulls---.

And to clarify, I don't hate Harley at all. I hate how she's tossed in in this ZOMG! amazing coincidental meeting.

Really, what the hell is wrong with Killing Joke's origin tale? Plus Dini's introduction of Harley as a psychiatrist who met the Joker, not some jackass named Jack.

Hopefully this garbage origin reboot will be forgotten just like that last one in Gotham Knights.

[Captain Jim]

I get the feeling that this origin is just for the movie that's coming out next summer.

I really don't think it has anything to do with that.

[Jack Zodiac]

Y'know... if you ignore the fact that Jack is The Joker, or the man who will become The Joker, just as a simple, early Batman story, this book wasn't half-bad. The art was alright (certainly an improvement from the last arc), and the focus on Bruce's campaign on normal, organized crime while balancing his social life was great, but the looming promise of this being another rewrite of the Joker's origin... kind of ruins it for me.

Still, I'll enjoy it for as long as it's enjoyable.

[jadrax]

This was a really well crafted issue, really got into the mindset of year one Batman.

[Paul Dee]

Y'know... if you ignore the fact that Jack is The Joker, or the man who will become The Joker, just as a simple, early Batman story, this book wasn't half-bad. The art was alright (certainly an improvement from the last arc), and the focus on Bruce's campaign on normal, organized crime while balancing his social life was great, but the looming promise of this being another rewrite of the Joker's origin... kind of ruins it for me.

You've summed up this issue for me perfectly to be honest

The stuff with Batman was great - the guy really gets into Year One Batman's head and does a great job. I love how it starts with Bruce thinking he's completely figured out how crime works because of its order and how this is going to be destroyed when he eventually meets the Joker (incidentally, is he actually going to meet the Joker in this arc? That'll displace The Man Who Laughs then won't it?). The art was great as well, nice stylised sketchy style. I still don't like the idea of the arc in general of course, disliking the idea of the Joker's definite origin but I'm definitely going to be picking up the next few issues to see where it goes.

I mentioned this in the preview thread but will do so again - the main thing that I disliked was the scene where he met Harley. It's just uneccessary and not at all clever. All the little references (Mr J, "get this joker out", "I hope you find your smile" etc) are just extremely lazy and an embarassment. It's a shame becasue this sort of coincidental meeting is such an obvious and unoriginal idea and you'd expect more somehow.

[karaokefanboy]

I really don't think it has anything to do with that.

Then you really underestimate the lengths DC will go to pander their corporate taskmasters. DC is but one part of Warner Brothers, and Marketing 101 dictates that consistent corporate identity is key to continued success. New Batman movie, new gritty origin, plain and simple.

I won't read it, let alone touch it in the comics shop. Think about this: DC has just retconned an Alan Moore story. In favor of a predictable Joker-was-a-crook origin over the regular-Joe-has-one-bad-day shtick, which was much more compelling for a modern mythical dervish like the Clown Prince. And which created a more dynamic connection to Batman, more ethereal, than a literal physical encounter.

Goes to show where the comics audience has gone. In the late '80s, The Killing Joke by Alan Moore was well received and instantly respected. Now it's fodder for rewritable continuity. The writer that took this job should be ashamed.

[karaokefanboy]

Although I do seriously respect that someone would honor their commitment to their comics shop and buy the issue after they've ordered it, despite their distaste for it. Shop owners probably get a lot of flack for stuff like that ("But I read a preview and I DON'T WANT it now! You sell it to someone else!"), and we should respect that these guys own a business where moving current inventory is key. Nice to see that note here.

[Ryan Day]

I won't read it, let alone touch it in the comics shop. Think about this: DC has just retconned an Alan Moore story.

Goes to show where the comics audience has gone. In the late '80s, The Killing Joke by Alan Moore was well received and instantly respected. Now it's fodder for rewritable continuity. The writer that took this job should be ashamed.

Yeah, but even Alan Moore doesn't have a terribly high opinion about Killing Joke. (And I can't say I blame him, to be totally honest; it's a good story with )

[The Xenos]

Then you really underestimate the lengths DC will go to pander their corporate taskmasters. DC is but one part of Warner Brothers, and Marketing 101 dictates that consistent corporate identity is key to continued success. New Batman movie, new gritty origin, plain and simple.

I won't read it, let alone touch it in the comics shop. Think about this: DC has just retconned an Alan Moore story. In favor of a predictable Joker-was-a-crook origin over the regular-Joe-has-one-bad-day shtick, which was much more compelling for a modern mythical dervish like the Clown Prince. And which created a more dynamic connection to Batman, more ethereal, than a literal physical encounter.

Goes to show where the comics audience has gone. In the late '80s, The Killing Joke by Alan Moore was well received and instantly respected. Now it's fodder for rewritable continuity. The writer that took this job should be ashamed.

Amen to that.

First, I have a phrase to sum up your first part. "DC is AOL Time Warner's bitch." They're a small cog in a media giant. (One of six giants that control all you see and hear. Spread the paranoia.)

Second, yup, why the hell would anyone want to replace Moore's story? DiDio or whoever came up with that is a blistering idiot with no respect for the characters or the books.

In the words of comedian Bill Hicks,
"Aaah, no really, there's no rationalisation for what you do and you are Satan's little helpers. Okay - kill yourself - seriously. You are the ruiner of all things good, seriously. No this is not a joke, you're going, "there's going to be a joke coming," there's no f---ing joke coming. You are Satan's spawn filling the world with bile and garbage. You are f---ed and you are f---ing us. Kill yourself. It's the only way to save your f---ing soul, kill yourself. "

Third, I think it's more so DC editorials fault. This guy is a newbie and he was given the job of creating a Joker origin to replace or even just stand along side the classic Killing Joke. Wow. What a sh---y first comics assignment. I feel bad for the guy. Then again, it's full of the trademark blunt dialog and coincidental meetings that you see in Heroes. I like it there. I hate it here. So we can blame him for that.

Although I do seriously respect that someone would honor their commitment to their comics shop and buy the issue after they've ordered it, despite their distaste for it. Shop owners probably get a lot of flack for stuff like that ("But I read a preview and I DON'T WANT it now! You sell it to someone else!"), and we should respect that these guys own a business where moving current inventory is key. Nice to see that note here.

Yeah, I bought it anyway because I had my shop order it. Lord knows he can use the cash. Then again, I could have bought something else instead. Then again, I already buy too much.

Anyway, I flat out told my shop owner not to order the third part of the arc for me. I told him my disgust and that it might not be well received by toher fans. Hopefully he orders low on it so he doesn't get stuck with other people realized what crap it is and ending up stuck with issues.

I also told him about the many paged preview that made me not want to buy it. He was gob stopped that DC put it out so many pages, not to mention that the preview made me not want to buy it after he already ordered it. Yet, like I said, I did anyway to help him out.

[Captain Jim]

I really don't think it has anything to do with that.Then you really underestimate the lengths DC will go to pander their corporate taskmasters.

No, you overestimate the importance of such a relatively minor issue in the eyes of the movie people. The general public (who make or break such a project) couldn't care less about this sort of discrepancy.

I won't read it, let alone touch it in the comics shop.

Fine. But then, as far as I'm concerned, you've forfeited your right to comment on the merits of the story or lack thereof.

Think about this: DC has just retconned an Alan Moore story.

Wrong. As stated in a related thread (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=5114385&postcount=21), The Killing Joke never claimed to have the definitive origin. But even if they did, so what? I like Moore as much as everybody else, but it's not like he's a god or anything.

[Nefarius]

Personally,i like the Joker being a crook before his accident.What's worse than a crook turned mad?

[Paul Dee]

Wrong. As stated in a related thread (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=5114385&postcount=21), The Killing Joke never claimed to have the definitive origin. But even if they did, so what? I like Moore as much as everybody else, but it's not like he's a god or anything.

Yeah, definitely. One of the main things you take away from The Killing Joke is that the Joker's authority on his own history is highly questionable ("Some days I remember it one way, other days I remember it another!") so this story doesn't over-ride The Killing Joke at all. Of course, disliking the fact that this new story sets a definitive origin for the Joker as you believe that such a character should be kept in mystery is another matter.

I'm sort of betting/hoping that Batman doesn't encounter the actual Joker in this arc though as that would ret-con The Man Who Laughs. I have a feeling it'll just be Batman vs Jack all the way through with the Joker revealing himself to us at the end.


I'm surprised a few people have criticised the dialogue in this issue. I thought it flowed well to be honest, the Harley scene aside. The parts where Batman was reflecting on gotham and his work was brilliant I thought.

I don't think I've ever been so conflicted about an issue of a comic to be honest. I know that I dislike the idea behind it but I still found it really enjoyable.

[Choppa]

I don't get the yellow symbol stuff. If this is his first year then why would he have a flashback to that if it comes later?

[stealthwise]

This issue was terrible. Really, really bad dialogue and exposition, substandard arc, and a ridiculously nerdy and insular storyline chumped out by an obvious pair of hacks.

Sounds harsh, but I'm trying to dissuade anyone from picking up the trades, based on this terrible first issue.

[Paul Dee]

I don't get the yellow symbol stuff. If this is his first year then why would he have a flashback to that if it comes later?


I'll never understand the idea of the yellow symbol/black symbol continuity. Is he meant to have started with the black symbol (like Year One/Confidential), gone for the yellow symbol later (stories from 70's/early 80's etc) and then reverted back to the black symbol in the modern age stories?


The point that Green seemed to be making was that the bright yellow symbol was silly and doesn't fit in with Batman's overall scheme wasn't it?

[Choppa]

I'll never understand the idea of the yellow symbol/black symbol continuity. Is he meant to have started with the black symbol (like Year One/Confidential), gone for the yellow symbol later (stories from 70's/early 80's etc) and then reverted back to the black symbol in the modern age stories?


The point that Green seemed to be making was that the bright yellow symbol was silly and doesn't fit in with Batman's overall scheme wasn't it?

Yeah that's what I'm saying. It would make more sense if this was a current story. But yeah, you're right, the point is to make it look silly, though it's pretty random.

[Erebus]

It was interesting. I was pretty entertained by it, although I don't think its right to ever give Joker a solid origin.

[Constantine Drakon]

N

Wrong. As stated in a related thread (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=5114385&postcount=21), The Killing Joke never claimed to have the definitive origin. But even if they did, so what? I like Moore as much as everybody else, but it's not like he's a god or anything.

Correct, but I don't think that's relevent. The Killing Joke has been extremely well recieved over the years, while saying it may not be the true origin of the Joker. This is a story that is saying it definitely is the true origin, and Killing definitely is not. While this story isn't technically contradicting Killing Joke, it's saying the story that proved so enduring in KJ is untrue, in favor of a story that is, in my opinion, very poor so far (and considering that Batman is dating the curator of an exhibit of clown-themed art, I fear this will be pretty predictable).

[Captain Jim]

Correct, but I don't think that's relevent.

It may not be relevant to your assessment of the book, but it certainly is relevant to the matter at hand. The poster stated that this new story required a retcon of The Killing Joke. I simply pointed out that this is not true.

[Mia]

Did I read the book right..or did Bruce admit to being holed up with a Milanese woman for a month?

[jadrax]

Did I read the book right..or did Bruce admit to being holed up with a Milanese woman for a month?

No, hes saying the Newspapers reported he was holed up with a Milanese woman for a month, when in actual fact he was researching Drug Statistics.

[swedishmeatballs]

Off topic but did anyone else get in their CNS a bit piece of news that there was going to be a hardcover edition of Killing Joke to be released next year?

[the goddamn batman]

in my opinion, very poor so far (and considering that Batman is dating the curator of an exhibit of clown-themed art, I fear this will be pretty predictable).

More like pretty convenient.;)

It's full of that sort of thing. "Get that JOKER out of here" and a few others I've wiped from my memory.:rolleyes:

[Captain Jim]

I finally got around to reading the book last night (I'd read the online preview earlier). Personally, I liked it a lot. In general, I thought it was extremely well written. And the little "winks" to the reader didn't bother me near as much as they did some of you. The art was also very nice, possibly the best work I've seen from Cowen. Personally, I don't mind stylized work--not everybody has to be Jim Lee. All in all, this was the best bat-story I've read in months and months; I'm looking forward to the rest of the story.

Personally, I have yet to get excited by Morrison or Dini. This is much more my cup of tea. But then, not every story has to appeal to everyone; I guess that's why we have multiple titles. It would just be nice if some people could learn the difference between, "Uh, that's trash!" and "Not my thing, I'll pass."

[BeastieRunner]

I dropped this title at #6 and I'm on the fence about picking it back up or not. I enjoyed the first arc a lot but this didn't read like garbage, just something I didn't care for much. I like my Joker mysterious. :confused: