Behind Batman: Battle for the Cowl Part Two [Archive]

Doc Goblin

04-13-2009, 06:14 PM

Anyone who is a Jason Todd fan wont be too happy with what he is doing.

You're damn right about that.

I read BftC #2 and was clinging to the hope that Daniel had something more complex in mind with Jason that would be shown in the third issue. But I guess not. Sorry, but Jason as an anti-hero is so much more interesting than him as a flat-out psycho villain. That is just weak. It doesn't even make sense. All of a sudden he's willing to shoot kids and gut Tim. It's not necessary to cripple Jason's character with this crap to show that Dick is the one who should be Batman. Hell, that's not even a challenge.

I know it's probably too much to hope for, but hopefully Winick can play damage control on Jason. Unless he's changed his mind about the character and Daniel is working off of his BftC notes.

Seraku

04-13-2009, 06:17 PM

in my denial I will blindly blame Countdown

Captain Jim

04-13-2009, 06:27 PM

You're damn right about that.

I read BftC #2 and was clinging to the hope that Daniel had something more complex in mind with Jason that would be shown in the third issue. But I guess not. Sorry, but Jason as an anti-hero is so much more interesting than him as a flat-out psycho villain. That is just weak. It doesn't even make sense. All of a sudden he's willing to shoot kids and gut Tim. It's not necessary to cripple Jason's character with this crap to show that Dick is the one who should be Batman. Hell, that's not even a challenge.

I know it's probably too much to hope for, but hopefully Winick can play damage control on Jason. Unless he's changed his mind about the character and Daniel is working off of his BftC notes.

Did you read "Under the Hood"? I think this portrayal is pretty consistent with that. Jason was not brought back to be an anti-hero; he was brought back to be a villain.

Red Lotus

04-13-2009, 06:42 PM

I think Jason fits as a villain to Grayson's Batman better then he did with Bruce. Its kind of like what Moriarty was to Holmes or Faith was to Buffy.

Violently Apathetic

04-13-2009, 06:44 PM

Did you read "Under the Hood"? I think this portrayal is pretty consistent with that. Jason was not brought back to be an anti-hero; he was brought back to be a villain.

BS.

To make it very simple; The Red Hood made it abundantly clear that he would not tolerate the gangs in Gotham endangering children under his watch, threatening their very lives if they sold drugs near schoolyards. 'Jason' in Battle for the Cowl shot a ten year old in the chest. Point blank.

Tomacatawata

04-13-2009, 06:46 PM

Did you read "Under the Hood"? I think this portrayal is pretty consistent with that. Jason was not brought back to be an anti-hero; he was brought back to be a villain.

Actually it's pretty inconsistent with Under The Hood. The only thing Daniel got right was the fact that he was doing this because he thinks killing was the answer to most of Gothams problem.

Jason Todd was a nihilist in this BTFC. Seriously "saving another worthless life?" What the hell was that? How was that at all consistent of his original character since his resurrection? It's one thing for Jason to kill criminals, it's completely another for him to shoot a child as distraction to get away and not give a damn about it.

Doc Goblin

04-13-2009, 06:50 PM

Did you read "Under the Hood"? I think this portrayal is pretty consistent with that. Jason was not brought back to be an anti-hero; he was brought back to be a villain.

I did read Under the Hood and I have to disagree.

Jason never did anything particularly villainous in Winick's run on Batman or the arc on Green Arrow. What he did wasn't that much. He fought the heroes and put them in danger but never really tried to kill any of them. Even when he stabbed Onyx, it was in the shoulder and he even slapped a bandage on her. And far from shooting kids, his main priority seemed to be protecting kids from pimps and drug dealers. Those were the people he killed. Them and the Black Mask's organization.

He wasn't even written crazy. The only time he really seemed to lose is much was in that last confrontation with him, Joker and Batman. He behaved very together mentally the whole rest of the time.

Batman's enemy, definitely. But Jason was far from an outright villain.

Captain Jim

04-13-2009, 06:55 PM

He was brought back as a killer. Once you rationalize that killing is okay in some situations, it's only a matter of time before you rationalize it's also okay in other situations.

If you don't like this, don't blame Daniels. He's obviously working within the confines of the direction that editorial has determined for this character.

Captain Jim

04-13-2009, 06:57 PM

I did read Under the Hood and I have to disagree.

Jason never did anything particularly villainous in Winick's run on Batman or the arc on Green Arrow. What he did wasn't that much. He fought the heroes and put them in danger but never really tried to kill any of them. Even when he stabbed Onyx, it was in the shoulder and he even slapped a bandage on her. And far from shooting kids, his main priority seemed to be protecting kids from pimps and drug dealers. Those were the people he killed. Them and the Black Mask's organization.

He wasn't even written crazy. The only time he really seemed to lose is much was in that last confrontation with him, Joker and Batman. He behaved very together mentally the whole rest of the time.

Batman's enemy, definitely. But Jason was far from an outright villain.

He never did anything particularly villainous, even though he killed people. I think we have very different concepts of what a villain is.

Violently Apathetic

04-13-2009, 07:04 PM

He was brought back as a killer. Once you rationalize that killing is okay in some situations, it's only a matter of time before you rationalize it's also okay in other situations.

Hasn't Wonder Woman killed people? Is she a villain now?

Also, if someone is writing a character poorly I see no reason not to blame them. Editorial may share some of the blame, but bad writing is bad writing. Unless we're willing to forgive the writer involved in the Batgirl debacle and all others who may feel editorial pressure. I'm sure Daniels is a great guy, but I think his characterization of Jason Todd blows.

Rollo_Tomasi

04-13-2009, 07:11 PM

I blame Countdown as well.

Also, do we know what the message was that Bruce left Jason Todd in that Last Will and Testament statement?

Captain Jim

04-13-2009, 07:14 PM

My initial post, which was constructed rather hurriedly, is a bit of an oversimplification. Winick's initial thought on having Jason return was, having his former dead partner come back as a villain would be Batman's greatest nightmare. And this was pretty much the scenario he explored. From the start, Jason was depicted as a criminal and a killer. Did he have certain self-imposed boundaries that he wouldn't cross, perhaps even some traits that were admirable? Certainly. But it was always clear that he and Batman's team were on opposite sides of the law.

Then came Countdown and we saw what appeared to be an entirely different character. As I've said before, this Jason appeared to be the "Guy Gardner" of the Batman family, a selfish jerk, but one with good qualities, and essentially a hero at heart. We pretty much saw the same guy in Fabian's recent Robin arc.

The Jason Todd we see in BFTC seems, to me, a return to the original character, with even further steps taken toward the dark side. I see this as pretty much a natural progression of the original (resurrected) character (and something that would not have seemed nearly as shocking if we had not had Countdown & Robin in the middle).

Personally, I applaud this. I had great misgivings about bringing Jason back, but I can see the appeal of him as "Batman's greatest nightmare." I see no appeal in Guy Gardner under a cowl.

Captain Jim

04-13-2009, 07:18 PM

Hasn't Wonder Woman killed people? Is she a villain now?

Apples and oranges. She has done so only rarely and in extreme circumstances. Wonder Woman doesn't callously blow people away.

Also, if someone is writing a character poorly I see no reason not to blame them. Editorial may share some of the blame, but bad writing is bad writing. Unless we're willing to forgive the writer involved in the Batgirl debacle and all others who may feel editorial pressure. I'm sure Daniels is a great guy, but I think his characterization of Jason Todd blows.

It's not just "pressure." These people are essentially told what to write. Believe me, if the decision has been made to make Jason an irredeemable villain, that decision was not make by Tony Daniel.

Captain Jim

04-13-2009, 07:18 PM

I blame Countdown as well.

Also, do we know what the message was that Bruce left Jason Todd in that Last Will and Testament statement?

Not yet.

...........

Violently Apathetic

04-13-2009, 07:27 PM

The Jason Todd we see in BFTC seems, to me, a return to the original character, with even further steps taken toward the dark side. I see this as pretty much a natural progression of the original (resurrected) character (and something that would not have seemed nearly as shocking if we had not had Countdown & Robin in the middle).

Personally, I applaud this. I had great misgivings about bringing Jason back, but I can see the appeal of him as "Batman's greatest nightmare." I see no appeal in Guy Gardner under a cowl.

Whereas I see this as a terribly forced and unnatural progression for the character. 'I know, let's make him a totally irredeemable jerk, because it's more badass that way!' It smacks of lazy writing. Morally gray characters who LEGITIMATELY challenge the Batfamily's ridiculously rigid moral code would be too difficult to write, so it makes sense to go with a complete nutter who is entirely unsympathetic because he shoots children.

Jason Todd has always been associated with wasted potential, hamstrung by unimaginative writers and the disturbingly manicheist morality of the Batman world.

Batman's greatest nightmare would not be some nut killing people, he's got plenty of those already, and he, like the rest of us, knows they're wrong. No, a much scarier thing would be if the rejection of his moral code made the individual (Jason) a more effective crime fighter than Batman.

Because that would mean that what Batman stood for was wrong. That his self imposed morality is limiting, and what is keeping Gotham from healing itself. That he, Batman, was perpetuating the darkness he set out to fight.

Instead we have...deluded guy in a Batsuit. Fun.

ETA:

Apples and oranges. She has done so only rarely and in extreme circumstances. Wonder Woman doesn't callously blow people away.

So it IS okay to kill people under certain circumstances, so long as you can rationalize it.

It's not just "pressure." These people are essentially told what to write. Believe me, if the decision has been made to make Jason an irredeemable villain, that decision was not make by Tony Daniel.

He could have written it...well? Or are you suggesting that writers have almost no influence on what they write, that they are simply mindless vehicles for editorial?

In that case, can they receive credit or blame for anything?

Captain Jim

04-13-2009, 07:32 PM

Whereas I see this as a terribly forced and unnatural progression for the character. 'I know, let's make him a totally irredeemable jerk, because it's more badass that way!' It smacks of lazy writing. Morally gray characters who LEGITIMATELY challenge the Batfamily's ridiculously rigid moral code would be too difficult to write, so it makes sense to go with a complete nutter who is entirely unsympathetic because he shoots children.

Jason Todd has always been associated with wasted potential, hamstrung by unimaginative writers and the disturbingly manicheist morality of the Batman world.

Batman's greatest nightmare would not be some nut killing people, he's got plenty of those already, and he, like the rest of us, knows they're wrong. No, a much scarier thing would if the rejection of his moral code made the individual (Jason) a more effective crime fighter than Batman.

Because that would mean that what Batman stood for was wrong. That his self imposed morality is limiting, and what is keeping Gotham from healing itself. That he, Batman, was perpetuating the darkness he set out to fight.

Instead we have...deluded guy in a Batsuit. Fun.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But the scenario you suggested was never the thought behind Jason's return.

So, essentially, it's fine for you to say you think Jason should have been used differently. But you cannot fairly say that Jason is being depicted in a manner inconsistent with his past (unless you are speaking strictly of his Countdown-era past).

Captain Jim

04-13-2009, 07:36 PM

He could have written it...well? Or are you suggesting that writers have almost no influence on what they write, that they are simply mindless vehicles for editorial?

In that case, can they receive credit or blame for anything?

Well, again, you're entitled to your opinion. But the majority of posters on this forum seem to feel that this story has been written well.

Violently Apathetic

04-13-2009, 07:40 PM

So, essentially, it's fine for you to say you think Jason should have been used differently. But you cannot fairly say that Jason is being depicted in a manner inconsistent with his past (unless you are speaking strictly of his Countdown-era past).

Yes I can, because as you yourself mentioned, Red Hood Jason had standards. He wished to avoid endangering children (and, past instances as Robin would suggest that he also had a soft spot for women in peril). He rarely seemed interested in killing his surrogate brothers, and even made the conscious decision to let Tim live. IIRC, he also helped Nightwing out during an arc in the Outsiders. He, like the Rogues, seemed to have the good sense to try to avoid killing or maiming capes (also, considering his debt to Talia I doubt he'd be so quick to blow a hole in her son...so that goes right along with the 'he doesn't kill kids' thing when it comes to that thing with Damian). He seemed to have a legitimate interest in reaching Mia and making connections.

He was not, as was previously pointed out, a Nihilist.

You could argue that Battle for the Cowl is an exaggerated version of his previous characterization, and I'd be hard pressed to argue the point, but when you're defending what is essentially caricature, well...

Well, again, you're entitled to your opinion. But the majority of posters on this forum seem to feel that this story has been written well.

Do they? Okay, but the majority of posters at another forum I frequent think it's crap. How do you like THEM apples? :tongue:

Wind-Breaker

04-13-2009, 07:54 PM

I kind of felt that Daniel made Todd's motivation a tad one dimensional. If he wanted to make Todd into a murderous Batman, why not heavily reference Todd's experience in Countdown where he visited Earth-51 (which was a world that was nearly a paradise due to Bruce killing every criminal in out there). It would be kind of like taking a page from Marvel's book on how they handled Bishop's full on heel turn (only that with Bishop his goal is to prevent a heinous future, with Todd he'd try to duplicate what Bruce did in Earth-51). It would have made Countdown have some relevance, and it would play more to Todd thinking his way is right.

DarienA

04-13-2009, 07:58 PM

I see the back and forth about current Jason not being consistent with Red Hood Jason... and all I can add is that Jason's been through alot since those Red Hood days... and yeah I liked him more back then too. Though as a recurring character to battle against Dick... I think I'd like that it returns to their back and forth in Nightwing.

Doc Goblin

04-13-2009, 07:58 PM

He never did anything particularly villainous, even though he killed people. I think we have very different concepts of what a villain is.

Maybe we do. I don't consider the Punisher a villain either. I consider him an anti-hero. For me, killing criminals isn't heroic or villainous. It's in this gray area in between.

But whether we agree on what constitutes a villain or not, I still can't agree that Jason's portrayal in BftC is consistent with what has come before. Even if you consider him a villain since day one of his return, this is not the same villainous behavior. Shooting a kid, stabbing Tim in the gut and being treated as "off his rocker" is just not consistent with even some of the worst written Jason stories that have come before.

And he didn't just shoot a kid, which is way off course for Jason enough as it is. He shot Talia's son. Talia has been probably his only real ally since he returned from the dead, and he shot her son like it was nothing. That just does not mesh with Jason's character.

Lemurion

04-13-2009, 08:03 PM

I thought it was consistent with "Under the Hood." I like the idea of Jason Todd as a villain that sometimes fights crime; it works much bettter for me than an anti-hero.

sherlocke

04-13-2009, 08:19 PM

Jason Todd's Batman costume design reeks of the bad azrael -batman armor one. Oh and poor Tim. Didn't he get burned a few issues ago and now he's stabbed.

Tomacatawata

04-13-2009, 08:29 PM

This issue was the very definition of Motive Decay for Jason's character.

For those that don't know what motive decay is:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MotiveDecay

A sort of Character Derailment where a villain with an initially complex and even reasonable motive for his actions is Flanderized into a Flat Character who is simply evil for pure, unadulterated love of evil.

This is often someone who starts out with a specific goal, as a Well Intentioned Extremist or someone out for revenge against the perpetrators of a particular (perceived) wrong, or someone who is driven to villainous actions by unfortunate circumstances. This can make a very deep and often tragic villain, but it's hard for the writers to keep it up, especially in a long-running franchise, where later writers often just don't "get" it. Sometimes the writer is trying to give some kind of Aesop that because their original motive was grey, this leads to darkness quickly. Too quickly.

Perhaps even more strangely, the heroes won't notice this decay and will, at the least, be unsurprised that this tragic character is now a cartoonishly evil megalomaniac. At worst, they may even, in As You Know style, inform the audience by way of another character that they have met the villain before, and that he's evil to the core and consumed with a lust for doing bad.

This is, if anything, even more common in stories told out of order, as a writer wishing to give a two-dimensional villain more depth will go back and write a backstory exploring the reasons behind his evil, especially as the villain tends to be the protagonist of the backstory.

Compare The Dark Side Will Make You Forget, where the changing of motives is a form of Character Development. Similar, It Gets Easier is an in-story development of motives.

Comics do this a lot, as various writers are more or less interested in the character depth of the villains.

Compare: Villain Decay, Plot Tumor.

Seraku

04-14-2009, 12:14 AM

Also, do we know what the message was that Bruce left Jason Todd in that Last Will and Testament statement?only person we've seen the last will to is Alfred so far

Red Lotus

04-14-2009, 02:37 PM

IIRC, he also helped Nightwing out during an arc in the Outsiders. :

I think his helping Nigthwing was more him giving Nightwing some info. That was pretty much it. But he also put on a Nightwing costume and went around killing criminals.

Maybe we do. I don't consider the Punisher a villain either. I consider him an anti-hero. For me, killing criminals isn't heroic or villainous. It's in this gray area in between.

Being compared to the Punisher isn't a good thing.

Vic Vega

04-14-2009, 03:22 PM

Are we SURE that this is Jason Todd, then?

It could just as easily be Jean Paul Valley, a dude who also knows the Batfam’s secret I.D.s and is not the most stable dude in the world either.

Lemurion

04-14-2009, 03:37 PM

Are we SURE that this is Jason Todd, then?

It could just as easily be Jean Paul Valley, a dude who also knows the Batfam’s secret I.D.s and is not the most stable dude in the world either.

Yes we are sure this is Jason Todd. If you read the IGN article linked to in the first post in this thread you will see that Tony Daniel explicitly states that this is Jason Todd.

HopeLantern

04-14-2009, 05:21 PM

I personally like Daniel's portrayal of Todd. I think this works b/c it finally gives Todd a characterization, which from my earlier thread (placed here (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=261024)) you'll recall that's one of the problems I thought the character originally had. Now this is something for future writers to work with. He's a mad man a la Punisher, or Venom who thinks he's doing right by doing the only thing he knew to do...kill. I think this is perfect if Todd goes on to become Dick's primary villian. I fully support this portrayal of the character.

Abeja

04-14-2009, 06:08 PM

creepy_craze

04-14-2009, 07:09 PM

I hope Dick and Damien are B&R, and Tim is Red Robin (which I think another thread said he is). RR will be Tims way to be his own.

I agree, I would chose Dick to be the batman instead of Todd, though in the story Todd has decided he is the only one who can replace Batman. As Nightwing and Damien were trying to stop him, Todd during the battle, open fire on Damien leaving him clinging to life, which weighs heavy on Nghtwing..

http://cdn.springboard.gorillanation.com/storage/craveonline.com/articles/74970/image_assets/image_1.jpg

Captain Jim

04-14-2009, 09:14 PM

He shot Talia's son. Talia has been probably his only real ally since he returned from the dead, and he shot her son like it was nothing. That just does not mesh with Jason's character.

I dunno; he also stabbed Tim like it was nothing. And Tim was the one who broke him out of jail a couple of months ago.

On the other hand, this raises an interesting question. Do we know for sure that Jason realizes this was Talia's son?

Shush

04-15-2009, 04:04 AM

The biggest gripe I have with Jason's portrayal in BFTC is the fact that he shot a child, and judging by the amount of effort needed to stabilise Damian, Jason was shooting to kill. The same Jason Todd who said in under the hood:

"You stay away from kids and school yards. No deadling to children, got it? If you do, you're dead."

It's not even like Damian posed any threat to Jason. He practically swatted him aside anyway. I can even buy Jason mortally wounding Tim since he was getting whacked with a crowbar, but Jason shooting Damian seemed out of character. Then again as people have already said that whole scene was sloppy with Dick telling Huntress and Canary to back off.

I found much more depth and potential in Jason in under the hood. Now's he's just another nut job with a gun.

Violently Apathetic

04-15-2009, 04:14 AM

I dunno; he also stabbed Tim like it was nothing. And Tim was the one who broke him out of jail a couple of months ago.

Right, and that seemed out of character as well, but at least there's a history of animosity and jealousy there. Damian should have been a non-issue.

On the other hand, this raises an interesting question. Do we know for sure that Jason realizes this was Talia's son?

Good point, but given his history with both Talia and Bruce I'd like to think that if he wasn't told outright he could put two and two together. Though I think there's a lot of interesting potential wasted there. Their 'meeting' could have been so much better.

Jason: 'I am Batman. Blood, death, destruction, yadda, yadda...'
Damian: 'Hey, weren't you that brain dead vegetable Mother used to care for? I think she intended to keep you as a pet.'
Jason: ...
Damian: 'I used to stick gum behind your ears.'
Jason: ...*shoots*

AiyokuSama

04-15-2009, 05:27 AM

Anyone who is a Jason Todd fan wont be too happy with what he is doing.

I'm a Jason fan, and I'm not happy, but that's really just the tip of the iceberg why I'm not happy.

AiyokuSama

04-15-2009, 05:43 AM

Did you read "Under the Hood"? I think this portrayal is pretty consistent with that.

Yes, I have. It's because I read Under The Hood that I think he's atrociously out of character. Jason was very explicate about what happens to those dealing drugs to kids. So him turning around a shooting a kid is completely absurd.

dreyga2000

04-15-2009, 08:31 AM

The biggest gripe I have with Jason's portrayal in BFTC is the fact that he shot a child, and judging by the amount of effort needed to stabilise Damian, Jason was shooting to kill.

In Jason's defense, he once a child who reagularly beat grown men and supervillains to a bloody pulp using nothing more than his fists... More often than not what really screwed over the guy he beat the snot out of was their under estimation of him..

I personally think it would be completely assine for Jason not to consider the masked another child hanging with the Bat family not to be a notable threat...

That goes for any other crook in Gotham you see a kid in a mask doing a triple black flip, you take off the kid gloves or your likely to get your ass kicked....

Shush

04-15-2009, 09:55 AM

In Jason's defense, he once a child who reagularly beat grown men and supervillains to a bloody pulp using nothing more than his fists... More often than not what really screwed over the guy he beat the snot out of was their under estimation of him..

I personally think it would be completely assine for Jason not to consider the masked another child hanging with the Bat family not to be a notable threat...

That goes for any other crook in Gotham you see a kid in a mask doing a triple black flip, you take off the kid gloves or your likely to get your ass kicked....

Thing is this wasn't in the heat of battle. Jason had already effortlessly swatted Damian aside, afterwhich he is jumpkicked in the face by Dick. Then out of knowhere Jason critically shoots an already neutralized Damian and runs away. Poor pacing, characterization and logic. I'm aware this was to set up Alfreds little pep talk and for Dick to take responsibility for Damian, but it made no sense on Jasons part, and I wasnt even thinking of the Jason/Talia connection.

Of course an easy answer would be that the lazarus pit makes you crazy, so any previous character development (as crappy as it might have been) goes out the window.