What would you prefer they did with Jason Todd?

[Crimson]

Not everyone might agree he's back but he is back... so lets leave the "He should of never returned" alone. Now he is back and is firmly established in the Bat books we can all be fairly sure he's not going any where any time soon!

Since he's return he's been a bit of a directionless character, changing his ways with every new writer who got hold of him. A phsyco. A harder version of Batman. A fragile little boy in a man's body.

So I just want to ask what would you do with him?

Personally I would of liked to have seen him carry on his transformation in Countdown. Sure the series was bad and his character was further butchered but it was an interesting way to take the character.

I could of seen him becoming the DC Univere's equivilant of Punisher, using lethal force to try clean up Gotham because Batman's 15 years or so of trying to do so have offered no improvements and if anything, have only made things worse.

The fact he's out there killing, doing what Batman would never do, would still of left him to be a sort of enemy to Batman, who could feel guilt over what has happened to Jason.

The phsyco, I'm going to kill everyone because I was killed stuff is kinda of boring.

[Artificial idiot]

If they're going for a 'Punisher of the DC Universe' then I'd rather they bring Hitman back. He was a much more fun and interesting character, and setting up Todd as that kind of character on the streets of Gotham, in direct competition to Batman, and having him portrayed as some badass anti-hero would just leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Just make him a straight up Bat-villain and be done with it. After everything they've done with the character since he came back, it's the mold that he'd fit best into.

[AiyokuSama]

I voted for the anti-hero. Not so much in the "punisher" vain but that his own methods and motives are questionable, existing in the grey area of moral ambiguity. Actually, that can still be a hero, but many people would question that designation.

I would like to see a reconnection with the Batfamily, but not for Jason to necessarily be on board with them. A grudging truce?

I definitely want to see Jason back to his Under the Hood mentality, rather then the off his rocker portrayal for BftC. Who he was in Under the Hood, was a competent individual with a plan. He was hurting and had revenge in mind, but he wasn't stupid or insane.

[SpideyZERO]

Vote anti-hero-ish. Jason trying to do good but in a rather questionable way, similar with Under The Hood storyline

[DetectiveDupin]

I actually love Jason as an anti-hero. It's the best he's ever been written (Under The Hood, Morrison's arc). I think the only thing that has been inconsistent is his identity crisis and *some writers write him a little crazier than others.

[Batman Fan 31593]

Other: Take up permanent residency in comic book limbo, dethroning Merryman as the title King of Limbo.


Edit: With Grant Morrison on the Bat-books, this isn't as unlikely as you might think! :wink:

[wrecksracer]

a horrible experiment gone awry changes him into Bat Mite. He is then killed again with a crowbar.

[MikeCr]

So I just want to ask what would you do with him?
No option for "whatever best serves the interests of the story being told"?

Why pigeon-hole any character into a particular iteration and deny authors the oppurtunity to craft their own version? "Character" being such a mutable construct at the best of times anyways.

[Quinnhop]

I actually love Jason as an anti-hero. It's the best he's ever been written (Under The Hood, Morrison's arc). I think the only thing that has been inconsistent is his identity crisis and *some writers write him a little crazier than others.

Agreed. Morrison and Winick have done the character the most justice since his resurrection.

That said, he doesn't need to become an "anti-hero" because, like you said, he already is one. But the reason I voted "other" instead is that I feel he shouldn't remain at "odds" with the Bat-Family. He should be his own man, while also managing to come to terms with Bruce. They shouldn't be doing this "scorned lover" thing for the rest of the character's life.

Jason needs to move on. He needs to find some emotional/spiritual/intellectual stability within himself before he can become a proper hero ("anti" or otherwise).

Ultimately, I would like to see him and Bruce reconcile, followed by a mini-series in which Jason spends some time traveling around the world, figuring out who he is. Let him confront Talia about the way she used him, for example. Then let him confront the Joker, but with a less emotionally disturbed result than when he did so in "Under the Hood".

The character -- not as a character but as a person -- has been so royally ****ed by everyone around him, but he's not going to find peace until he moves on internally. Then he can put things into perspective, confront the external sources of his pain, and move on to become a better man, crime-fighter, and all-around character.

He's not ruined yet, just broken. Give a good writer the chance to fix him by letting him fix himself.

Not Winick, though. Winick would only continue the characterization he's already cemented.

IDEALLY, in the end, I would enjoy seeing Jason on "The Outsiders" -- not as a leader, but, as the team's Bat. As a symbol. And as a badass, crime-stomping, no-holds-barred brawling anti-hero with an identity all his own. Maybe under the name "Jersey Devil" or "Nosferatu".

[DonC]

No option for "whatever best serves the interests of the story being told"?

Why pigeon-hole any character into a particular iteration and deny authors the oppurtunity to craft their own version? "Character" being such a mutable construct at the best of times anyways.


Jason can't be an anti-hero killing people for jaywalking one issue, then a trusted ally the next. That lack of one direction is what Crimson is complaining about. Although, right now they seem to have settled on him being the anti-hero willing to use lethal force. I can handle him appearing like that maybe once a year, but I don't really want to read about him much more than that.

[DetectiveDupin]

Agreed. Morrison and Winick have done the character the most justice since his resurrection.

That said, he doesn't need to become an "anti-hero" because, like you said, he already is one. But the reason I voted "other" instead is that I feel he shouldn't remain at "odds" with the Bat-Family. He should be his own man, while also managing to come to terms with Bruce. They shouldn't be doing this "scorned lover" thing for the rest of the character's life.

Jason needs to move on. He needs to find some emotional/spiritual/intellectual stability within himself before he can become a proper hero ("anti" or otherwise).

Ultimately, I would like to see him and Bruce reconcile, followed by a mini-series in which Jason spends some time traveling around the world, figuring out who he is. Let him confront Talia about the way she used him, for example. Then let him confront the Joker, but with a less emotionally disturbed result than when he did so in "Under the Hood".

The character -- not as a character but as a person -- has been so royally fucked by everyone around him, but he's not going to find peace until he moves on internally. Then he can put things into perspective, confront the external sources of his pain, and move on to become a better man, crime-fighter, and all-around character.

He's not ruined yet, just broken. Give a good writer the chance to fix him by letting him fix himself.

Not Winick, though. Winick would only continue the characterization he's already cemented.

IDEALLY, in the end, I would enjoy seeing Jason on "The Outsiders" -- not as a leader, but, as the team's Bat. As a symbol. And as a badass, crime-stomping, no-holds-barred brawling anti-hero with an identity all his own. Maybe under the name "Jersey Devil" or "Nosferatu".

Great idea, and I would buy a Jason Todd mini. Although I feel as if the Red Hood identity is his.

[Quinnhop]

Great idea, and I would buy a Jason Todd mini. Although I feel as if the Red Hood identity is his.

But I'm afraid of the connotations being a limit on his character.

How about this?

Morrison has used Todd to reference Milton's "red right hand" of God. Now, let's explore this reference laterally through hypertext.

What we find is that the "red right hand" is also associated with the Red Hand of Ulster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hand_of_Ulster), a Gaelic (specifically Irish) symbol.

Irish? Irish?! Guess who's last name is Irish. Why Jason Todd's, of course.

What does Todd mean in Gaelic? Fox.

(Not unlike another important vigilante by the name of "Zorro" whose name directly translates to fox.)

And another name for bats just happens to be "flying foxes". More specifically, these are the largest bats in the world.

So... Maybe just have him go by Todd? (Or if you want something more silver-agey, "The Flying Fox".)

Give him a signature red-right-glove and a "flying fox" inspired costume and voila, you tie it all together. Hell, maybe even have him spend some time in Ireland, exploring his roots.

NB: And, for the record, homosexuality has been observed in fruit bats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megabat) AKA flying foxes, so...that brings another aspect of the Todd character (or at least one I think he should have) into the mix quite seamlessly (and subtly).

[strictlymonster]

I'm a fan of the Red Hood's twisted brand of justice. I like the anti-Robin Scarlet Twittering disturbing pics of beaten criminals. Anti-Hero works for me.

[the-wolf]

OTHER: I would prefer that we find out that JT is actually a new enemy, an expert imposter on a level Batman has never encountered before. And as the truth is discovered and a final confrontation happens, the imposter dies and Jason Todd's (who was always FAR more more interesting dead than alive) corpse is recovered and we never have to see either of them ever again!

And as Batman walks away from this scene of final carnage, a mysterious figure who looks like JT silently watches; Batman turns thinking he saw something, but whatever it was, it's gone.............................................. ...............................................
.................................................. .................................................. ..................................
...........YEAH RIGHT! THEY'RE BOTH DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! DEAD! DEAD!

[ryerye17]

Why is there no "DIE" option?

[Quinnhop]

Why is there no "DIE" option?

Because we're not about repeating stories that happened 20 years ago.

[ryerye17]

but dying is fun!

[DonC]

Because we're not about repeating stories that happened 20 years ago.


Not a Geoff Johns fan, eh?

[Sizzle]

Why is there no "DIE" option?

That's what I'm sayin'

[durty dee]

I just want a story of him hunting down, and beating the crap out of the Joker.

[DonC]

I just want a story of him hunting down, and beating the crap out of the Joker.

They did that already.

[durty dee]

They did that already.

Correction, I want to see it again. They just had a page of him beating him with a crowbar off panel. After that, he wanted Batman to kill him.

I want to see him take care of his own business. I know that he's still pissed at the Joker.

[Shush]

I want Jason's crazy factor to be toned down about ten notches and for him to be written in the same spirit that Winnick had originally done. My favorite scene of Jason in under the hood is right near the end when he's holding the Joker at gun point.

"Why do all the cub scouts in spendex always say that? "If I cross that line there's no coming back". I'm not talking about killing Cobblepot and Scarecrow or Clayface. Not Riddle or Dent. I'm talking about him. Just Him. And doing it because...because you he took me away from you"

At that point you can see Jason is drawn as a little child. One of the more touching scenes I've read in Batman in the last few years. Deep down Jason still wants to be part of the Bat family, but is heartbroken that his mentor did (in his opinion) nothing to avenge him. This is why Jason is the gut totting punisher lite of gotham. And to be honest, I agree with Jason. Its been discussed countless times on here why Batman hasn't killed the Joker already.

I want to forget all about the child killer demon gatman from Bftc.

Agreed. Morrison and Winick have done the character the most justice since his resurrection.

That said, he doesn't need to become an "anti-hero" because, like you said, he already is one. But the reason I voted "other" instead is that I feel he shouldn't remain at "odds" with the Bat-Family. He should be his own man, while also managing to come to terms with Bruce. They shouldn't be doing this "scorned lover" thing for the rest of the character's life.

Jason needs to move on. He needs to find some emotional/spiritual/intellectual stability within himself before he can become a proper hero ("anti" or otherwise).

Ultimately, I would like to see him and Bruce reconcile, followed by a mini-series in which Jason spends some time traveling around the world, figuring out who he is. Let him confront Talia about the way she used him, for example. Then let him confront the Joker, but with a less emotionally disturbed result than when he did so in "Under the Hood".

The character -- not as a character but as a person -- has been so royally fucked by everyone around him, but he's not going to find peace until he moves on internally. Then he can put things into perspective, confront the external sources of his pain, and move on to become a better man, crime-fighter, and all-around character.

He's not ruined yet, just broken. Give a good writer the chance to fix him by letting him fix himself.

Not Winick, though. Winick would only continue the characterization he's already cemented.

IDEALLY, in the end, I would enjoy seeing Jason on "The Outsiders" -- not as a leader, but, as the team's Bat. As a symbol.

I love everything about this idea.

[taintedshimmer]

I agree that Jason needs to move on but I do enjoy the anti-hero aspect. I think if you're going to go that route, he needs to find a middle ground, move past things as he was starting to in Countdown and maybe start to find his own place in the world. I think he shows a good point of view but that doesn't make him zomg evil. It makes him human.

Personally, I liked him in Outsiders because he is good at reading people. He's a good information source and he just needs proded into the right direction and given the right writer to get him there. I wouldn't mind seeing him working with Babs or the Outsiders, considering how both of them contain people who toe the line between hero and anti-hero.

And last but not least, for goodness sake, have Bruce actually talk to him. He hasn't since UtH and he clearly needs him to give him a good talking to. Failing that, have Alfred do it. He can whip any of those boys into shape when they're being brats.



That said, he doesn't need to become an "anti-hero" because, like you said, he already is one. But the reason I voted "other" instead is that I feel he shouldn't remain at "odds" with the Bat-Family. He should be his own man, while also managing to come to terms with Bruce. They shouldn't be doing this "scorned lover" thing for the rest of the character's life.

Jason needs to move on. He needs to find some emotional/spiritual/intellectual stability within himself before he can become a proper hero ("anti" or otherwise).

Ultimately, I would like to see him and Bruce reconcile, followed by a mini-series in which Jason spends some time traveling around the world, figuring out who he is. Let him confront Talia about the way she used him, for example. Then let him confront the Joker, but with a less emotionally disturbed result than when he did so in "Under the Hood".

The character -- not as a character but as a person -- has been so royally fucked by everyone around him, but he's not going to find peace until he moves on internally. Then he can put things into perspective, confront the external sources of his pain, and move on to become a better man, crime-fighter, and all-around character.

He's not ruined yet, just broken. Give a good writer the chance to fix him by letting him fix himself.

Not Winick, though. Winick would only continue the characterization he's already cemented.

IDEALLY, in the end, I would enjoy seeing Jason on "The Outsiders" -- not as a leader, but, as the team's Bat. As a symbol. And as a badass, crime-stomping, no-holds-barred brawling anti-hero with an identity all his own. Maybe under the name "Jersey Devil" or "Nosferatu".

Much agreed. I think there should something rebirth in the name, because really it's what brought him back to life and what the character sorely needs after the last few years.

[Godlike13]

I like him as an insane enemy. Like a true Bat rouge.

[DetectiveDupin]

I want Jason's crazy factor to be toned down about ten notches and for him to be written in the same spirit that Winnick had originally done. My favorite scene of Jason in under the hood is right near the end when he's holding the Joker at gun point.

"Why do all the cub scouts in spendex always say that? "If I cross that line there's no coming back". I'm not talking about killing Cobblepot and Scarecrow or Clayface. Not Riddle or Dent. I'm talking about him. Just Him. And doing it because...because you he took me away from you"

At that point you can see Jason is drawn as a little child. One of the more touching scenes I've read in Batman in the last few years. Deep down Jason still wants to be part of the Bat family, but is heartbroken that his mentor did (in his opinion) nothing to avenge him. This is why Jason is the gut totting punisher lite of gotham. And to be honest, I agree with Jason. Its been discussed countless times on here why Batman hasn't killed the Joker already.
.

That's one also one of my favorite moments in the Bat-books of this decade.

[Sean Whitmore]

I don't understand the poll.

Isn't he an anti-hero now?

And how do the "anti-hero" and "enemy" options differ?


SEAN

[AiyokuSama]

I don't understand the poll.

Isn't he an anti-hero now?

And how do the "anti-hero" and "enemy" options differ?

I think he's supposed to be in the "enemy" category now. As for the difference....

Anti-Hero has redeemable/sympathetic qualities and an enemy doesn't?

For me, the line between hero and anti-hero is the tricky one,

[Godlike13]

Anti-Hero has redeemable/sympathetic qualities and an enemy doesn't?

Which is something, i for one, don't want to see. I have no interest in a sympathizing with Todd. He'll just come off as a cry baby because to sympathize with Todd u have to look at Bruce as the bad guy in some ways and that's just not gonna fly if u ask me.

As an enemy he can hurt the Bat family in ways no other enemy can. Plus I think people like the damage he causes and how it plays off the Bats more then the character it self. He just brings more to as table as a enemy/foil IMO.

[Sean Whitmore]

I think he's supposed to be in the "enemy" category now. As for the difference....

Anti-Hero has redeemable/sympathetic qualities and an enemy doesn't?

For me, the line between hero and anti-hero is the tricky one,

It's a vague definition, but I've always thought the anti-hero was just a nontraditional hero. And Jason, killing specifically criminals, would certainly seem to qualify. Though that makes him Batman's enemy as well, since he doesn't want anyone killing anyone.

Unless by "enemy", the poll means full-blown Joker territory.


SEAN

[AiyokuSama]

Which is something, i for one, don't want to see. I have no interest in a sympathizing with Todd. He'll just come off as a cry baby because to sympathize with Todd u have to look at Bruce as the bad guy in some ways and that's just not gonna fly if u ask me.

I don't "have to" see Bruce as a "bad guy" to understand and feel for Jason's reasoning/situation. I'm rather fond of Bruce and don't see him as a bad guy. Did he hurt Jason before and after his death? Sure. On lots of levels. Does that make Bruce a "bad guy"? No, it makes him a wonderfully flawed, human character with depth.

And even though I don't see Bruce as a "bad guy" I can understand Jason's issues. I don't agree with some of his reasoning, but I can understand it.

[AiyokuSama]

It's a vague definition, but I've always thought the anti-hero was just a nontraditional hero.

I would agree. Though such could be used to call Batman himself an anti-hero, thus the blurring of the line.

Unless by "enemy", the poll means full-blown Joker territory.

Unless? I have the feeling that I'm missing something here. Could you explain?

[Sean Whitmore]

I would agree. Though such could be used to call Batman himself an anti-hero, thus the blurring of the line.

Maybe in some respects. But in the broadest strokes--not killing being just one example--Batman's quite traditional.


Unless? I have the feeling that I'm missing something here. Could you explain?

Sorry, that was a bit of an incomplete thought. I mean that if the poll classified the "enemy" option as comparable to someone like the Joker, then I understand its distinction from "anti-hero".


SEAN

[AiyokuSama]

Maybe in some respects. But in the broadest strokes--not killing being just one example--Batman's quite traditional.

Except for his disdain for government, rules and such :tongue:

When I think "hero" I think Superman. Black and white views, do the right thing, and trust the system sort of deal.

While some things about Batman is black and white (like the now killing rule) the ambiguity of much of his actions is part of his appeal for me. Likewise with Jason.

Sorry, that was a bit of an incomplete thought. I mean that if the poll classified the "enemy" option as comparable to someone like the Joker, then I understand its distinction from "anti-hero".

Ah, yes, that would make sense. But would it then rule out other "enemies" such as Penguin who isn't psychotic, but instead is a under world businessman and would-be mob boss?

[Sean Whitmore]

Except for his disdain for government, rules and such :tongue:

Hey, he doesn't disdain rules. He wishes everyone would follow them, so he could retire. :wink:


Ah, yes, that would make sense. But would it then rule out other "enemies" such as Penguin who isn't psychotic, but instead is a under world businessman and would-be mob boss?

Well, I'd argue the Penguin is just as psychotic as the Joker in his own way, but that's a topic for another day. A better way to classify "enemy" in this case might just be those with ill intent. Jason does wrong, for instance, but his intent is still stopping crime. Whereas the Penguin kills and steals in the pursuit of profit.


SEAN

[AiyokuSama]

Hey, he doesn't disdain rules. He wishes everyone would follow them, so he could retire. :wink:

If you mean HIS rules, then yes :rolleyes:

A better way to classify "enemy" in this case might just be those with ill intent. Jason does wrong, for instance, but his intent is still stopping crime.

I like that definition. Though it can no doubt be argued.

Of course, that it can be argued is much of what makes the idea of the anti-hero interesting. And why Jason would be a good fit.

[Rampantlad]

Hell, I'm all for full-on bat-vilain psycho - it's the only route that makes sense after all he's been through. Personally I'd haev left him ded and think his revival is the single worst mistake in all of DC's publishing history, and that includes Countdown (funny how that involved him too). But if we must have him, the only interesting avenue is rage-filled, bitter, vengeant maniac.

[Brack360]

I voted "Other." I would prefer that Jason just goes into limbo and that his resurrection, along with the entire Red Hood storyline, is never mentioned again.

[DetectiveDupin]

I voted "Other." I would prefer that Jason just goes into limbo and that his resurrection, along with the entire Red Hood storyline, is never mentioned again.

Why? It wasn't a bad story, and neither has the Batman and Robin story been. The fact of the matter is that like it or not, Jason is and will always be important to Batman and his mythos, because he is Batman's biggest failure.

[Infinity Man]

Batman who kills and uses guns? Hell yes. That could be a fun book.

[4sake]

Correction, I want to see it again. They just had a page of him beating him with a crowbar off panel. After that, he wanted Batman to kill him.

I want to see him take care of his own business. I know that he's still pissed at the Joker.

Co-signed...:cool:

[BooCoo]

I really liked Winick's take on him. I'd like to see an anti hero with a bit less gore and more restraint. With conflicting feelings for the "family." sometimes working with them, sometimes not. But always dynamic.

I also feel it unecessary that "family" members constantly say his full name. He's not a stranger.

[nepenthes]

Morrison runs generally build to a climax that tie up all the various elements that have featured throught. For example RIP involved Damian, the 3 ghosts of Batman, Club of Heroes again, the joker.

So there's a good chance Jason will be somehow be involved with the climax of Batman &Robin around issue 12, or when joker and Bruce come back into play.

Add me to those who want to see Jason face off against the joker again.

[Sn4tcH]

At this point... I don't like Morrisons take on Jason. I'm enjoying the story, and I am infinitely excited to see this Flamingo character, but Jason himself annoys me. But that's the point, he's trying to market himself, and in all honesty, I hate people who try to market me things. So... Morrison's pulling it off great, right?

[Vakanai]

I went with other, my opinion being they should kill him. Again. Only this time, permanently.

[dreyga2000]

I like decisiveness... Choose something and stick with it... Right now he's an anti-hero/batvillian well keep him that way...Stop changing it around...

[Ninja Man-Bats]

i think you should until Revenge of the red hood is over before answering this

[Ninja Man-Bats]

i think you should wait until Revenge of the red hood is over before answering this

[Plex]

other: kept him dead

[DetectiveDupin]

Not everyone might agree he's back but he is back... so lets leave the "He should of never returned" alone. Now he is back and is firmly established in the Bat books we can all be fairly sure he's not going any where any time soon!


The OP made that quite clear that "let him stay dead" is not a valid answer.

[brundlefly]

Other:
The Joker puts him back in the ground, then afterward gets to quip about "getting to kill the same man twice" when taunting the Bat-family about it.

[Plex]

The OP made that quite clear that "let him stay dead" is not a valid answer.

It is a valid answer just not one that the OP wants in the thread. If you ask for opinions you have to take them all. You can ignore it but that is the way I feel. The way his character was killed was ridiculous and reprehensible. Some things should just be left alone, buried, and forgotten and this is one of them.

So I'll go with brundlefly's idea. that works for me.

[Shadaloo]

Hey, folks. Longtime lurker, first-time poster here, chiming in with my 2 cents...

Allow me to start by just saying that Jason is easily my favorite character next to Bats himself in the DCU, bar none. As a kid, I was introduced to Bats via the 60's West series on TV. Watched it constantly...it wasn't until around late '87 when I first started reading the comics (bought graciously by mom), and I was instantly struck by how much more 'dangerous' Bats' world seemed there, how much 'realer' he and the whole place was, and especially Robin. I didn't know why Robin wasn't the same kid, but I didn't mind. He seemed more like a real teenager to me, a kid with real problems, than Dick had on the show (granted, the West/Ward series was never the proper place to compare personalities to...). I felt like I could relate to him, in my young age...I even liked him after that issue where he may or may not have murdered Felipe Garzonas (I was a kid, after all. The jerk deserved it, in my vindictive child's opinion :P).

Anyway, I was really saddened after Death in the Family. It hit me hard, I'd really liked the character, and I just kind of felt bitter when Tim showed up out of nowhere to take over. Many years passed, I fell in and out of touch with the comics world, and heard about Winick's 'Under The Hood' when it came out. I had serious reservations about someone bringing the character back, but I did feel that overall he did the character justice, and went back to pick up Hush, which got me full swing back into Batman. I was really happy to see Jason come back...and the vigilante angle made sense. Didn't much care for the Superboy punch being part of his return, but I dealt with it, and looked forward to more.

So, uh, yeah. He then steals Dick's identity, starts talking like a yokel (Dickie-bird? Really???), gets turned into a squid-octopus thing (Damn, that Nightwing arc was terrible), heads over to Star City for some reason, then starts reality-hopping - turning into a bigger jerk-ass by the day - and then wears a new costume for all of a half hour before chucking it into the bin and deciding he has to literally become Batman, which of course entails starving criminals to death.

I can't believe I just wrote that paragraph. Seriously, I think the few good issues he got after UTH were that one Teen Titans issue, and that one in Countdown where he was musing over whether he'd be more at home in the Vampire Batman's world. Maaaybe his later interactions with the Earth-51 Bruce could fit in there, if I squinted.

Anyway, I was starting to think it would have been better off if he'd never been brought back in the first place, because everyone had conflicting ideas on where to take him, or just didn't really seem to care. Then Morrison comes along and finally we're starting to see him coming back to what Winick wrote him as being about in the first place. I may have serious criticisms about some of Morrison's choices, but I'm glad to finally see someone treating the character right. Future handlers of the character take note.

That said, it can't be denied that Jason's off his nut a little bit. The way I've looked at it is as follows: his brain was especially susceptible to the insanity effects of the Lazarus Pit after his bath, and so now he's got these very nasty periods where he gets especially violent, which come and go. I was hoping someone might pick up on that, because after his fight with Tim in Teen Titans where he had the - creepy - Robin outfit on underneath, that was the first thing I thought of.

He's been called the red-headed stepchild of the family, and it's true. I can't ever see him coming back to the fold, but at the same time I'd like him to work towards slowly patching things up with Bruce, Dick and Tim at some point in the future. He might make for a good underworld contact, an inside man when matches Malone just can't be made available. I used to envision him becoming the Talon of the current DCU, with elements of the Batman Beyond design thrown in (sans helmet), but Morrison's really made him feel at home in the Red Hood outfit, just like Winick did. Hope he's there to stay.

And for the record, I hope he dyes his hair back to black after this is all over. :D

[Brack360]

Why? It wasn't a bad story, and neither has the Batman and Robin story been. The fact of the matter is that like it or not, Jason is and will always be important to Batman and his mythos, because he is Batman's biggest failure.

I thought "Under the Hood" was a horrible story. Not only was it based around a bad concept, but it was too decompressed and dragged on for too long. I regret buying it, and it is why I have passed on Winick's current run. Jason's resurrection was a cheap and sleazy publicity stunt that has damaged the Batman mythos.

[SarcasmoBlaster]

I like him as an insane enemy. Like a true Bat rouge.


Same here.

[Volvic]

Honestly, I think the character probably should have stayed dead simply because a Robin who was killed in action is a much more powerful reminder of the danger that the Bat family constantly find themselves in and what can happen if any one of them makes a mistake. Having said that though, I don't want DC to kill him off again since that would be cop out and I feel the character as he is now does have a lot of potential it's just that DC isn't doing a great job of exploiting it as well as they could.

I haven't really cared for the way DC have used him since Under The Hood, and even that wasn't that great to be honest. There were some ideas used in Countdown that I quite enjoyed, but it was Countdown and those ideas went nowhere.

Maybe it would best if Todd were to be taken out of Gotham City and put in a book like Suicide Squad. Let whoever is on the book to establish a direction for the character, outside of being a mere nemesis for the Batfamily. Let him establish his own identity, his own motivations - let him be his own man, but at the same time keep him estranged from Bruce and the others.

Go on from there.

[catsmeow]

I wanted Jason Todd to return so badly in Hush and was happy to have him back in Under the Hood, but since OYL, no one's been able to write for this character. I think Jason's had it. Time for the crowbar again...

[DetectiveDupin]

I thought "Under the Hood" was a horrible story. Not only was it based around a bad concept, but it was too decompressed and dragged on for too long. I regret buying it, and it is why I have passed on Winick's current run. Jason's resurrection was a cheap and sleazy publicity stunt that has damaged the Batman mythos.

Millions of things far worse have been written and printed dating back to the Bob Kane years, the mythos haven't been damaged.

[Sn4tcH]

I had no problem when I heard they were bringing Jason Todd back to life. I figured he would come back as a villain, and in all honesty, I could not wait. In the end, the idea isn't so bad, just nobody IMO has written Jason well yet.

[Mr. Holmes]

I voted for anti-hero. I know a lot of people say he already is one, but no, his anti-hero character was more like what Winnick did with him in Under the Hood. Now he's more of a bona fide villain I don't like Winnick, and I don't care for Jason Todd, but that was a fabulous arc and I really dug Jason's MO in that book. Intelligent, cunning, calculating, yet he's doing good, just in an anti-hero fashion, killing all the criminal foot soldiers. His killings were justified. I thought Tony Danie's Gatman was pretty cool, but Morrison seems to not really like Jason at all, and seems to write him as a douche.

Anyway let's go through your choices:

Reform and join the Bat-Family - Eventually I would like to see this happen, and have him reconcile with Bruce. But not yet. I would like to keep him unique as the black sheep of the Bat-family, but not renegade psycho.

[/I]Stay an Enemy - The whole psycho Bat-punisher thing was cool, but I wouldn't want to see it long term. It's too one dimensional and it's something we've already seen with AzBats. If Jason's heart is suppose to be in the right place, we should at least see some redeemable characteristics. Hell, I think even Deathstroke has more redeemable qualities than how Jason is being written, and that shouldn't be th case.

Other Obviously this choice is more open ended, but they shouldn't do is kill him off again. Not because I'm a fan of character, in fact I have not read his Robin run, and I thought he was better as a fallen Robin in the staple of Bat-mythos, but now that they've brought him back they should put him to good use. My suggestion is to make him Deathstroke's partner. In fact, Deathstroke is supposed to be leading his own brand of Titans, and normally the Bat-family is always represented in the Titans teams (Dick in Titans, Tim in Teen Titans, Cassandra in Titans East). I could see Jason wearing a costume that looks sort of like Deadpool's as a homage to Deathstroke's costume and his original Red Hood costume. Make him an anti-hero like Winnick's Red Hood again. Give him redeemable qualities.

That is all.

[the-wolf]

I had no problem when I heard they were bringing Jason Todd back to life. I figured he would come back as a villain, and in all honesty, I could not wait. In the end, the idea isn't so bad, just nobody IMO has written Jason well yet.

Not so bad?

1) character being dead did far more for Bat mythos than when he was alive, either before or after.

2) he's mortal and had been dead for years, bringing him back made everything above a joke and waste of time.

3) no one liked him in the first place.

4) it cheapened death in comics even more. Nothing is sacred.

5) he serves virtually no purpose now. I mean, why? WHY?! What does he add that was mssing? NOTHING!

6) every story is pointless and trite as it'll all be undone or retconned eventually.

7) yeah, yeah, "welcome to comics;" maybe it's time publishers and writers aspired to something a little higher.

[nepenthes]

^ those are hardly objective statements though. In fact for every point you could argue that (:evilsmile: ):

1) bringing him back only enhanced his status as a tragic figure: as a failure on Batmans behalf: gave poignancy to the original story (which is actually quite mediocre) in a modern and meaningful sense
2) death in comics is already a joke, but more importantly, it's not like the death never happened. It's still an event of huge consequence. It's tragedy was not diminished.
3) alot of people liked him - the death vote won by a tiny 70 votes out of a total 10,000. that's a negligible margin
4) see number 2
5) He still serves a purpose highlighting a deviant or 'fallen' Robin: the endagerment of young lives: failure to live up to batmans standards or win his admiration: a rebuke to batmans ideology and method: the lost son: the ghost from the past etc etc
6) Under the Hood was not pointless, the rest of them maybe, but the consequences of the return are clearly still relevant
7) Judd Winick and Grant morrison both wrote something that is above the average standard of batman comics

[Mr. Holmes]

1) character being dead did far more for Bat mythos than when he was alive, either before or after.

So?


2) he's mortal and had been dead for years, bringing him back made everything above a joke and waste of time.[QUOTE=the-wolf;9799445]

Tell that to Green Arrow, and several other mortals who died and have come back.


[QUOTE=the-wolf;9799445]
3) no one liked him in the first place.

No one? Not a single person? Even the people who voted against him dying? LOL.

4) it cheapened death in comics even more. Nothing is sacred.

This is true, but again its happened several times, already, I don't see why Jason is the exception.

5) he serves virtually no purpose now. I mean, why? WHY?! What does he add that was mssing? NOTHING!

He could serve a purpose if we had a good writer.

6) every story is pointless and trite as it'll all be undone or retconned eventually.

This basically is a rehash of your 1st and 4th point.

7) yeah, yeah, "welcome to comics;" maybe it's time publishers and writers aspired to something a little higher.

Yeah but I don't see why Jason is an exception.

[Sean Whitmore]

Not so bad?

1) character being dead did far more for Bat mythos than when he was alive, either before or after.

For a while, sure. But he was dead for close to a decade, I think they'd run the gamut of "guilt over Jason's death" stories.

Granted, "guilt over Jason's insanity" isn't TERRIBLY different, but it's a little different.


2) he's mortal and had been dead for years, bringing him back made everything above a joke and waste of time.

Nonsense. Any "I miss Jason" story still works on the same level it always did because the characters never expected him to come back at the time.


3) no one liked him in the first place.

Wrong for the third time in a row.


4) it cheapened death in comics even more. Nothing is sacred.

Impossible. Death in superhero comics CAN'T be cheapened anymore. To think anything less is naive.


5) he serves virtually no purpose now. I mean, why? WHY?! What does he add that was mssing? NOTHING!

To Bruce he offers a dangerous enemy that he partially created. To Dick he offers a "brother" in competition for the right to take over the family business. To Tim he provides a glimpse down a dark road that he might conceivably take.

That's three different and specific antagonistic roles to three different heroes off the top of my head.


6) every story is pointless and trite as it'll all be undone or retconned eventually.

Then why read anything ever? It could all be undone or retconned.


7) yeah, yeah, "welcome to comics;" maybe it's time publishers and writers aspired to something a little higher.

Oh, many do, you just have to look past Marvel or DC.


SEAN

[Sn4tcH]

I would respond, but those are three perfectly good posts that say everything.

[DetectiveDupin]

For a while, sure. But he was dead for close to a decade, I think they'd run the gamut of "guilt over Jason's death" stories.

Granted, "guilt over Jason's insanity" isn't TERRIBLY different, but it's a little different.




Nonsense. Any "I miss Jason" story still works on the same level it always did because the characters never expected him to come back at the time.




Wrong for the third time in a row.




Impossible. Death in superhero comics CAN'T be cheapened anymore. To think anything less is naive.




To Bruce he offers a dangerous enemy that he partially created. To Dick he offers a "brother" in competition for the right to take over the family business. To Tim he provides a glimpse down a dark road that he might conceivably take.

That's three different and specific antagonistic roles to three different heroes off the top of my head.




Then why read anything ever? It could all be undone or retconned.




Oh, many do, you just have to look past Marvel or DC.


SEAN

QFT. I'd like to add that I liked Jason.

[the-wolf]

It's a line in the sand, I guess. Bringing back Jason Todd was the straw that broke my back, if you will.

Obbiously some people like him, hence the term "hyperbole." But, while he died by only a narrow margin, a great majority of readers back then disliked the character.

You could bring back Uncle Ben or Bruce's parents and make similar arguments. "Does Bruce continue his career?" "What if they fail to live up to Bruce's expectations?" "What if they like Dick better?" "If everyone comes back from the dead, what the hell's the point to my life?"

And yeah, it does take away from past stories because what does Bruce care if Tim dies? Jason came back, Ollie came back, Clark came back, Hal came back, the entire JSA came back, Barry came back, Carter came back, who hasn't come back?

Stories of Tim and the dark road have already been done and can be done from different angles without bringing back JT.

I also think Dick has the job all locked up compared to JT.

"Can be" retconned and "will be" are 2 differenthings.

[Sn4tcH]

You could bring back Uncle Ben or Bruce's parents and make similar arguments. "Does Bruce continue his career?" "What if they fail to live up to Bruce's expectations?"

This has been dealt with in the past. Bruce comes to the same conclusion every time. Even if his parents did magically come back, he would continue because it stopped being about "his" parents a long time ago. Now, it's all about making sure what happened to his parents never happens to anyone else.

And yeah, it does take away from past stories because what does Bruce care if Tim dies? Jason came back, Ollie came back, Clark came back, Hal came back, the entire JSA came back, Barry came back, Carter came back, who hasn't come back?

The people who died have all came back from freak occurences. Yes you could say that death is LESS permanent in the DCU, but it can be done. Also, Clark never actually died, and Barry had a loop hole from day one.

[jrp001]

put him back in the ground... alive, dead, i don't care. the story was interesting, but now its not.

move on

[Sean Whitmore]

And yeah, it does take away from past stories because what does Bruce care if Tim dies? Jason came back, Ollie came back, Clark came back, Hal came back, the entire JSA came back, Barry came back, Carter came back, who hasn't come back?

Not to sound patronizing about it, but since Batman and Co. don't know they're in a fictional world, they can't afford to look at it the same way we do. In their view, any death could be final.



SEAN

[Doug Side]

Not to sound patronizing about it, but since Batman and Co. don't know they're in a fictional world, they can't afford to look at it the same way we do. In their view, any death could be final.



SEAN

With the exception of Tim Drake, who any day now is going to figure out that he is in a comic book.

[Sean Whitmore]

With the exception of Tim Drake, who any day now is going to figure out that he is in a comic book.

Sounds like it's time for an Ambush Bug crossover!


SEAN

[Sn4tcH]

With the exception of Tim Drake, who any day now is going to figure out that he is in a comic book.

Tim Drake is Animal Man?

Grant Morrison is kinda the grand puba of Batman right now... It's just crazy enough to work.

[neverman]

Why is there no "DIE" option?

I thought that too. Didn't people already vote once to kill him and they brought him back for some reason?

[Plex]

I thought that too. Didn't people already vote once to kill him and they brought him back for some reason?

They brought him back because of the appalling way they killed him off with the call in to have him live or die. If I remember correctly they kind of did this because people hated the character originally. I think there was a more vocal group that was against the way they killed him off- the call in vote- over the group that hated the character. I wasn't too fond of the call in to vote thing. I mean did they really think there was any chance the character would get enough votes to stay alive? But since they killed him off, they should have left it that way. (They should have left other characters dead, too but that's another thread.) I think his coming back to life was a way to repair this silly vote thing but it's really kind of way too late for that sort of thing. There could be an interesting side to this, but as others have said here no one knows what to really do with the character, so in all respects should have been left for dead.

[neverman]

It's dumb that Jason came back. Batman characters are supposed to be kind of realistic right? That's why Barbara cant use her legs, right? (Funny how DC let people vote on Robin but not Batgirl.) A robin coming back form the dead does not jibe in Batman mythology. DC gets real messy sometimes. I wonder if anyone's driving the car.

[Sandy Hausler]

Not everyone might agree he's back but he is back... so lets leave the "He should of never returned" alone. Now he is back and is firmly established in the Bat books we can all be fairly sure he's not going any where any time soon!

Since he's return he's been a bit of a directionless character, changing his ways with every new writer who got hold of him. A phsyco. A harder version of Batman. A fragile little boy in a man's body.

So I just want to ask what would you do with him?

Personally I would of liked to have seen him carry on his transformation in Countdown. Sure the series was bad and his character was further butchered but it was an interesting way to take the character.

I could of seen him becoming the DC Univere's equivilant of Punisher, using lethal force to try clean up Gotham because Batman's 15 years or so of trying to do so have offered no improvements and if anything, have only made things worse.

The fact he's out there killing, doing what Batman would never do, would still of left him to be a sort of enemy to Batman, who could feel guilt over what has happened to Jason.

The phsyco, I'm going to kill everyone because I was killed stuff is kinda of boring.

He should have remained dead.

Sandy Hausler

[stillanerd]

Well, what DC should have done with Jason Todd coming back (and considering how he's been handled he was better off dead) was they should have made him Hush right from the outset. That cliffhanger where it appeared Hush was actually Jason certainly had a lot of impact, and yet Loeb squandered it by first revealing "Jason" was actually Clayface and then have Hush turn out to be Tommy Elliot--who was the most obvious culprit since he was a brand new character. It's one of the reasons why Judd Winnick, to his credit, tried to retcon it so that it actually was Jason, with Clayface acting as his double.

Also, remember how in the Batman Begins movie, they had Ra's al Ghul organization be a vigilante cult that adopted a "burn the village in order to save it" approach to eradicating crime and corruption and to act as a "check" on civilization? Well, why not have Jason Todd adopt those ideals? After all, after his resurrection, Jason was resussitated by a Lazarus Pit and trained among the League of Assassins as Ra's possible successor during the years he was suppodedly dead. Ra's idelogy could have easily rubbed off on him, so taking this as a radical approach to crime and fueled by wanting to punish Bruce for "abandoning him," Todd leaves the League of Assassins with a group of his own followers and form a splinter cell in Gotham. He dubs this group "The Red Hoods," in which each of Todd's followers wears the helmet of the Red Hood, while Todd wears the "Hush" garb along with a simple red domino mask (a mystery could have been generated out of this in that, initally, it's suspected there was only one Red Hood and then reveal there's more than one with Jason as their leader). And there goal would be to cause such discord and chaos in Gotham by causing gang wars between the criminals to take place and commit acts of terrorism than Todd would then use this to his advantage and take over.

Finally, he could try and romance the Huntress, who would know little to nothing about him since Batman has kept her out of the loop often enough, and she, at first, wouldn't know he's the leader of the Red Hoods. She would think he was just some guy she met while they were out of costume and hooked up with. And of course, considering Helena has a harder edge to crime-fighting, Jason Todd's ideas could prove very seductive.

[Sn4tcH]

The people who called for Jason Todd's death are no better than the people who call for Damian's death now. Let a character develop for goodness sake. Jason probably wasn't even Robin for a year post-crisis.

[Red Lotus]

He can become an Anti-Hero, still at odds with the Bat-Family, but I want that to tie in with him being their enemy.

I want him to be put into Nightwing's rogues gallery.

[Sandy Hausler]

The people who called for Jason Todd's death are no better than the people who call for Damian's death now. Let a character develop for goodness sake. Jason probably wasn't even Robin for a year post-crisis.

I didn't think he should die. But he did die. And I stand by my statement that he should have stayed dead. (I feel the same about Bucky at Marvel. I enjoy Brubaker's stories, but I still think Bucky should not have come back from the dead.)

Sandy Hausler

[Sn4tcH]

(I feel the same about Bucky at Marvel. I enjoy Brubaker's stories, but I still think Bucky should not have come back from the dead.)

Sandy Hausler

I TOTALLY disagree with that. Bucky is exactly the sort of thing that I wish could have happened to Jason Todd. (Not that he becomes the new Batman, but as in the quality of the stories that Brubaker's written)

If the writing is quality, I can forgive anything.

[the-wolf]

Brubaker did do a MUCH better job (and so did Marvel editorial) with Bucky than than DC did with JT.

That said, the medium as a whole would be far better served by having left them dead. Sorta like how people in the real world die and stay dead.

[Buried Alien]

If Jason Todd's resurrection had been up for a vote as his death had been, I do not think I would have voted for his revival.

That said, because he *has* in fact been revived, I expect much more than killing him again, because that would be redundant and unimaginative.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Sandy Hausler]

I TOTALLY disagree with that. Bucky is exactly the sort of thing that I wish could have happened to Jason Todd. (Not that he becomes the new Batman, but as in the quality of the stories that Brubaker's written)

If the writing is quality, I can forgive anything.

You are free to disagree. If Marvel had told Brubacher that he could NOT bring back Bucky, do you think Bru would then start writing crummy stories? Of course not. Given a choice, I would prefer good stories with Bucky still being dead over good stories with Bucky being alive.

Of course, I would prefer good stories with Bucky being alive over bad stories. But good stories does not depend on Bucky being alive.

Sandy Hausler

[Sandy Hausler]

Brubaker did do a MUCH better job (and so did Marvel editorial) with Bucky than than DC did with JT.

That said, the medium as a whole would be far better served by having left them dead. Sorta like how people in the real world die and stay dead.

What he said.

Sandy Hausler

[Ziggy Stardust]

Other:

Death was a good fit for him.

[Will.S]

I accidentally hit the "Stay an Enemy" vote but I say the "Become an Anti-Hero, still at odds with the Bat-Family" option.

Mostly because I dug what Winick did with him and what Morrison is doing with him now which is pretty much a continuing of that so I think he works in that role.

[invisiboy]

Jaosn Todd should get gender re-assignment surgery and become Batgirl. Hey, as far as I know, it would be a story DC's never done, as opposed to the ones they've done over and over and over.

[Earl of the RCs]

We find out he has dissociative identity disorder (thanks to the trauma Tony Daniel hinted at) but that ALL his alters are named `Jason' which is why every time he turns up somewhere he seems to have a different personality. All his different personalities get new super-hero (or anti hero, or super-villain or ordinary joe) personas and he gets a limited series where his less violent personalities have to clean up after his more violent ones.

And then he turns himself in to the proper authorities. And then either: a. Amanda Waller offers him a position as field commander of the Suicide Squad. b. he joins the secret six c. he joins checkmate d. he joins the outsiders or any other team book for characters of less-than-squeaky-clean morality.

[BloodOps]

What would I prefer they did with Jason?

Kept him dead.

[nepenthes]

the question asked what would you do from this point on

unless you mean kill him again....