I agree with your thoughts on The Killing Joke. Additionally, and in an earlier time, I didn't like the Batman graphic novel where he had sex with Talia (out of wedlock even! I don't count Ras' marrying them) and having a child. Was happy to hear that it was later declared non-cannon....until pulled back in by Grant Morrison. Though the introductory Damian stories were interesting, and I loved the young Damian/Superboy stories, I still think there are too many Robins and think that they really should stop putting Batman in "adult" situations. I feel that it takes the character away from the "all ages" character that Batman should be when he is rolling around naked on the rooftops with Catwoman. Knock it off, arrest that thief and get back to solving mysteries and fighting crime!! I also have an issue when the violence moves beyond all-ages action. The Joker cutting off his own face and making it a mask and making the Riddler just another crazy murderer have taken these characters down an overly dark and disturbing road.
You are talking about Son of the Demon and it wasn't supposed to be canon. But... I actually like the story, minus romance aspect and its dark tone. But I guess at that point, darkness was seen as new, refreshing and sophisticated. That impact of which lasted for quite some time. Even in Batman and Son, Damian beheads someone and shows it to Batman. Joker skins someone alive and Bane also can be a pretty dark character.
Per your story about young creators telling Denny O'Neil what Batman is: A mainstream comics creator friend of mine sat with Will Eisner and some artist who did a very low-selling Indie. Instead of soaking in the wisdom of Eisner, the Indie creator kept interrupting with the delusion that he and Eisner were peers. My friend said: I wanted to punch this dude!"
It's so sad that some people lack humility to this extent. I get that people should be confident and proud of their accomplishments, but you don't talk over Will fucking Eisner. When that man talks, you listen and take notes. I'm an aspiring writer, and I would be trying memorize every single syllable coming out of that mfers mouth if I ever had the honor of talking to him when he was alive. I'm curious: was it ignorance or arrogance? Did this up and coming artist know what Eisner means to the medium, or did they think he was some random old guy?
@@spheremode3271 this person knew it was Eisner. Similarly, in 1995, I and several creators (at the San Diego Co circled Gil Kane and simply listened to him as he spoke of art and the medium of comics. Nobody saw him as an equal, just an old Wiseman
@@andrewgeraci8798 , I tend to view things like this, learn from those people that have experience, but never learn from those people that confuse experience with arrogance in their lives. This lesson not only applies to writing, but also to all aspects of life.
Will Eisner is probably one of the biggest cases of smoke and mirrors in comics. Everyone praises him and acts like he is the king of comics, but what did he really do that's any good... The spirit? Come on now. The king is Jack Kirby.
The Killing Joke was NOT a Batman story, it was a doujinshi using Batman characters. That it became canon is awful, I consider it one of the downfalls of modern Batman. In a retcon I would eliminate it and make it non-canon.
I can see why you don't like it: the main point of TKJ was the meta-joke. And the writers who tried to replicate this kind of story didn't do any better to the comic book industry. Tom King's One Bad Day series is about Bat's villains having a bad day which broke them and made them become the villains they are now. It's like he wanted to find something he never understood about that graphic novel. If TKJ harmed the comic book industry, it's because of hacks like Tom King not understanding it was never meant to be canon. It was just a smelly, nasty meta-joke.
Well, there is a certain way of interpreting The Killing Joke. Batman is laughing with the Joker on the final page of the story as the police sirens come closer. He has his arms on the Joker's shoulders and then we pan down to the ground. The laughter abruptly ends on the sixth panel. If this book is indeed non-canon, this is the point where Batman snaps the Joker's neck, ending him once and for all. Batman's laughter was just an excuse to get close enough to the clown to do the deed. I know I'm not the only one who saw it that way.
Yes but Alan Moore already confirmed that it's just the interpretation of some fans (pushed by Grant Morrison who's an @ssh0le)and it's not what he represented in his novel. He said that the novel ended with the two laughing together because they find a little connection, and also the scene should suggest that the future writers should decide what to do. It was like asking "So you really want to keep these two in an infinite loop? Can't we change the situation?" He said he wrote TKJ to point it out how much wrong the excessive violence of the comics in last years was. Some people didn't understood, I don't know why, but I guess it's up to personal vision.
The Killing Joke was the first graphic novel I ever read, it was a few years before I really started getting into comics, and as much as I used to like it, I barely read it nowadays and can see why Alan Moore dismissed it as one of his lesser works. Probably the only reason I do occasionally go back to read it is the attention to detail in the art and the little scene transitions that are kind of clever. The plot is paper-thin and mean spirited.
@m1lst3r89 really? I figured it was because of how nasty it was and how DC made it canon. Not to mention people taking an unreliable narrator, like Joker, as telling the truth.
@@AceLM92nah Moore didn’t care that much. Usually he made fun of people for caring too much But he’s a bit of a hypocrite and I don’t think he made the smartest decisions. Not saying he deserved the shit he got but some of it was avoidable like him putting way to much trust in a company know for doing shady deals to get the rights to characters
@@AceLM92 I think he hate everything he did for DC that got much traction. But yeah, he said he hates that storytelling device (I forgot what exactly it's called).
I didn't love Moore's story, but I always liked TKR because it allowed John Ostrander to turn Barbara Gordon into Oracle over in Suicide Squad. That run was a favorite of mine. The Breyfogle cover with Babs holding a gun on the Joker and saying "Smile" was awesome.
Thanks for another great video. I loved the killing joke, but by that time I had read the great Dick Sprang Joker, and the Jim Aparo joker, and the wonderful Steve englehart joker, so I never thought 🤔 killing joke was canon joker. I almost felt like it had an elseworlds feeling to it.
@@mikerude5073 I can definitely see people thinking that. For it's time it was a pretty radical take on the joker for sure. Nothing like that before. Like I said before I always felt it was elseworlds because of that departure. I certainly see your point though.
Batman is a detective. I remember the Mystery Solvers of Gotham stories. They were as much of a mystery story as Ellery Queen or Agatha Christie. They were great, a nice twist to the usual action stories.
TKJ is my favorite comics specifically because it showed that we could have an happy ending if only writers and dc allowed Batman to heal the Joker, stopping to show more and more violence. I love the scene where they finally have a connection and laugh together despite the dark situation, because it's like they both realized how bad the loop they where chained in was, and simply reacted in a laugh of themselves like saying "haha, we're fcked up". I love the fact that Batman didn't hurt Joker too much, because Gordon asked him to not to do it, because he survived and wanted to show to Joker that justice rules worked well. Batman simply respected Gordon request and acted like the real hero. He's not victim of his own vengeance, he's above of that. He's the example, he's the hope. It's a great story that wanted to criticize excessive darkness in comics. Talking about the part with Barbara Gordon and his father, both undressed and humiliated just to drive Gordon crazy: Joker doesn't rape Barbara in TKJ novel, but he certainly scared her and taking photos of her in pain and also injured her for life. It was enough as a psychological and physical violence, I honestly don't understand why the animated movie pushed even more the idea of the rape, showing that disgusting scene in the first half of the movie where Barbara and Batman have sex. 🤢 But it wasn't the idea in the actual novel. Also I must say, as a female reader, that TKJ Barbara Gordon is probably my favorite Barbara ever represented. For once she's not showed as the loving interest.. For once someone pointed out that she's almost always used as a fetish.... For once it's being pointed out that she's more than the "Batman female version". She really passed over the violence she faced, and she only asked for his father safety. She's so strong, her first though is to save someone else, like a real hero should do. Being tortured and humiliated was normal for male characters, but Batman always showed how strong he was, ignoring such stuff, fighting back and thinking about people safety. Barbara kinda does the same in TKJ. She's scared, she's in pain, not for herself, but for her father, exactly the same reaction that Batman and other male hero always have. She's also beautiful and I love her dressing style in TKJ, simple and serious, totally different by other representation where she was always forced in being hypersexualized. The first thing Bolland shows of her is a beautiful smile and yellowish and red colors to suggest a luminous image, a positive person. And she still bright after the injury, showing how strong her sense of justice, of altruistic desire for other safety is, how strong her hero heart still is. She doesn't ask for vengeance, she doesn't ask to kill the Joker, she only wants to save an innocent. So brave! Best Barbara, imo. She has more character writing here than every other infinite serie dedicated to her. She's at the same level of Batman and Robin. Also her father is so brave too. Barbara and Jim are the best and positive characters of the novel. They don't change their idea, they keep fighting against crime like two unbearable rocks. And Batman keep his control specifically because he's pushed forward by their positivity! They represent Batman's hope. And Joker himself is shocked and defeated by that. There's no need to be even more violent at the end. Batman is the good one. Joker at the end is defeated both in mind and in body. And that's the moment he starts to change a bit his mind. You can see it by his tears while he's talking about the joke (basically saying "I'm not good, I don't think I can be helped. You want to help me but we're both broken, and I'm scared you will let me fall just when I'll start to trust you). It's almost the total victory of Barbara, Jim and Batman. It was a way to suggest that there were other ways to continue their stories. If Joker changes his mind, it's the total victory of Batman, Barbara and Jim. I always hoped that, because they demonstrated to the evil one that the good way is the right one. Shouldn't be it the goal of an hero story? To win over the bad? Isn't the good route the best one? Aren't we enough with all that ultra violence? Unfortunate nothing changed after TKJ. I hated that writers and dc developed a love story between Talia al ghul and Batman, since I considered her a worm and Batman was OK to have a loving affair with her just because she was sexy, ignoring she was a criminal. That wasn't my idea of an hero. That's cheap porn, exactly like showing Batman and Catwoman having sex on a building... That's cheap porn to me. I hated that they turned out Jason Todd into an assassin because he was just a kid and they brutally retconned him just to see if someone was interested in. I hated when they showed Joker killing Jason Todd, because it was way too dark and terrible. He literally assassinated a kid. I hated when Morrison decided that Batman was sexually raped under drugs by Talia to push a terrible character into the story, just to try to keep new generation into comics (Damien and the sexual raping stuff is why I dropped the comics years ago). I hated when they showed Nightwing being pushed on having sex with a girl that pretended to be his girlfriend, and I hate the victim blaming on him. I hated when they wrote that story where he goes to Barbara to invite her to his wedding, and she casually assaulted him and he didn't say a thing and accepted to have sex with her JUST THE DAY BEFORE HIS FRIGGING WEDDING! I hate how DC treated Starfire, basically a sex doll obsessed with Dick 😢. I hated how they downgraded Catwoman, she was so cool in the old stories. 🤔 I hated Harley Quinn, she was one of the dumbest ideas they ever had (seriously they thought that a female version of Joker would have improved Batman universe?) She's just an edgy fetish. Obviously I hated when they wrote that story when there was a sexual rapist in justice league stories, because nothing positive was shown there.. I hate a lot of stories that are super violent and sexualized and stuff.. Unfortunately all of this was accepted as canon. I deal with it, but TKJ is by far the less problematic story of all.
One of my favorite artists (and his comic) I discovered in my freshman year of high school was Vincent Locke of Deadworld. A few years back, i watched Walking Dead and saw that comic. I was immediately angry that it was a direct rippoff of Deadworld. There are about 4 plot devises they didnot use but the main premise is obviously lifted from it. How do you feel about creators blatantly stealing from independent creators?
Mr. Dixon, thank you for another great video and all the work you've done and continue to contribute to the world. Where's the art that you used for your thumbnail from? I love the designs.
you mentioned Tightrope should have been a Dirty Harry movie and change settings to SF Ironically it was to be set in San Francisco, but because that city was associated with the "Dirty Harry" movies, they decided to change setting to New Orleans
Mr. Dixon I’ll say why I liked The Joker (his campy humor mixed with his complete homicidal murderous rage) Joker using henchmen dressed as The Three Stooges, Marx Brothers, Chaplin, him and Harley having pet Hyenas named bud and Lou for Bud Abbot and Lou Costello, the word play (After Joker hits Batman over the head with a wrench “Meanwhile Back At The Wrench Since My Side Splitters Won’t Tickle You How About A Skull Splitter” from Laughing Fish TAS episode or in Batman 89 after he shakes hands with the gangster with his joy buzzer that burns the mobster to a cinder Joker starts talking to the burned corpse and acting as if the corpse is responding to his questions. Or where jokers commercial comes on and has a scared man tied up and words flash on the screen “NOT AN ACTOR” like how in commercials they say not a paid spokesperson when they are, joker is at least honest that guy wasn’t an actor he just happened to cross jokers path at the time he needed someone to test his Smylex gas on.
I am glad I am not the only one that disliked Joker movie. Yes, Joaquin is amazing, camerawork is stellar, and the theme is provocative (albeit ultimately redundant), but as a movie as such, it lacks point (main character goes mad, wow, big deal), and pace so slow that sometimes is a bear to watch. And I hate how it is turned into a DC adaption with R rating! The money it reaped and praise it got is unbelieavable. I cannot even believe that Todd Phillips directed it.
it's a very mediocre movie that does go for a style closer to author movies but there's no substance, and the main problem is that they didn't try to give it more substance cause they relied on the main character being such a big pop culture icon. the whole movie attempts to make something completely detached from the comic books it's derived from, which is completely ruined by the ending where they show the Waynes getting murdered, which doesn't mean anything to the story and it's just a way to make a pop culture reference. this makes it just another comic book movie that exists as a derivation of something people are familiar with, but at the same time it doesn't have anything of what makes the comics or the Joker unique. And as a standalone movie, the character itself isn't interesting and there's nothing going on thematically or anything unique stylistically. It's a story about a random crazy guy that by the end of the movie kind of looks like a popular character and nothing more the real pity for me is that when I heard Scorsese was tied to the project years before the release, I hoped they were going for a Goodfellas/Casino/Wolf of Wall Street type of movie with the story of the Joker becoming the biggest criminal in Gotham, instead they just turned into a loser that finds his own virility and sense of self by killing a bunch of people
I didn't like it because it was a waste of good actors and good visuals since it lacks a good plot. It needed a good comic book fan to write the movie since they didn't get joker right.
Love the comment about 'dark having no bottom', or 'start going dark there's no end to it'. We've seen the truth of that over and over the last few years, in comics and other genres and media as well. It tends to turn into a race to 'top' the previous nastiness, and it's a race to the bottom, so to speak. Superhero comics, in specific, absolutely _have_ to maintain certain unrealistic but utterly necessary breaks from reality, and I don't mean about being able to fly or bounce bullets. The storyline has certain places it can't go without shattering the settings. Superman _must_ be a paragon of virtue, for ex, because otherwise that much power in one place becomes a waking nightmare. It's pretty much either/or. Certain natural consequences of the existence of superpowers can't be explored without breaking the setting. Part of that is that there is a limit to how 'dark' things can be permitted to go, if you want the storyline and setting to survive at all.
Many people think that Batman kills Joker at the end of The Killing Joke. Was that the original intent? Hard to say, but another argument that it shouldn't be canon.
I don't think it was. While the script was clear that Batman and Joker will kill each other one day and they are laughing at it, it wasn't meant to be THAT day.
No, it wasn't the intent. Alan Moore said he never thought about representing a murder. He only wanted to criticize the fact that Batman serie was becoming more and more dark and he didn't liked it, and he wanted to suggest that writers and dc should think about the possibility of an happy ending, maybe even with Joker as a partner. Turns out they did it with Harley Quinn instead of the Joker. Sad.
I agree that Killing Joke is a well done story but not a good Batman story. I like what he was trying to do: show the Joker at his worst trying to make someone break like he did, and failing. And I agree that both Killing Joke and Dark Knight should not be canon, for a wide variety of reasons not the least of which neither was ever intended to be.
I remember when killing joke came out originally. As far as i remember it was an alternative one shot comic. Definately not inside the regular Batman canon.
At this point, Callahan doesn't have to resemble Clint Eastwood any longer, right? So on with the Batman/Dirty Harry crossover? Just get Hugh Jackman to agree to portray Harry, then draw him to look like Jackman.
Love the Angel and the Ape panel. Anybody know which issue it is from? As for TKJ, it was way too dark, and while I did get it; it wasn't a story I particularly cared for. The only thing I liked was that homage to the late fifties Batman family which the Dark Knight took a quick look at during the story.
Hello, Mr. Dixon (or "Chuck," if you prefer)...another good show...regarding KILLING JOKE, I find myself agreeing with your assessment. Though I enjoy it enough for what it is as an intended stand-alone story, I sympathize with Alan Moore in that it should never have been folded into the main continuity/canon. There is a fan theory about the ending, though, which I find intriguing and more-or-less agreeing with: that Batman finally kills the Joker after the mutual laughter at the joke, as the police sirens are approaching (though this can certainly be debated); just curious if you'd heard of this theory, and what you might think of it. Anyway, thanks for a great podcast!
Alan Moore only wanted to create a dark comic to criticize the growing violence of Batman stories in those years. The intent was to push the future writer to ask themselves "what should we do? Isn't bad all this violence? Can't we give to these guys another way to end it up? Can't Joker be changed, can't Batman win? Can't they be a team instead of eternal enemies with even darker stories?" The end was just a way to make you think about it, but definitely didn't represented a murder. First of all because Alan Moore idea of Batman was far way from being an assassin. Batman is the hero, he doesn't kill because he's different, and he should be able to change people's minds, including the criminals. Or at least some of them. The final scene only represents two person that suddenly find a connection, for the first time in their relationship. Everything else it's fantasy of that Morrison, who likes to put death, sexual violence and other perversions in his Batman comics. .-.
I've always felt like the "Joker" movie could've easily been called "Clown", have had nothing to do with Batman, and been a better movie for it. But then probably no one would've seen it, either.
Thanks for answering my question and What are your thoughts on Batman 1989, and The Dark Knight (2008) as someone who wrote Batman and knew these characters inside and out what do you think they got right, and wrong in each film ? I saw The Dark Knight when I was 10 and I remember asking my mom (where’s the wit, laughing fish, Smylex, etc etc) there are moments in dark knight I like Joker spray painting an S in front of Laughter to spell out slaughter I thought was funny, the fire truck literally on fire was also funny but ledger was just so edgy and angsty. And BTW did you ever in your punisher run ever do a punisher vs jigsaw story really liked Punisher War Zone from 2008 it wasn’t a great film but embraced that it was from a comic book unlike dark knight where Nolan was so embarrassed to be making a comic book film (joker can’t fall into chemicals or have party gag themed weapons acid flowers, razor edged playing cards, laughing gas, and Batman wants to retire and let Harvey dent clean up Gotham
In previous videos chuck has said that he didn't like the Tim Burton batman movies since batman is bearly able to move in the suit. He does not like any Christopher nolan movies since he thinks that nolan is the most over rated director. He thought the dark knight was decent. For jigsaw say he said that it doesn't work since punisher kills all his villains.
@@michaelcarter266 ok thanks Joker being this angsty dark representation of how messed up society that's really starting to get on my nerves (Joker should have stated a whacky homicidal maniac who loves comedy and like freddy krueger has no regard for human life and makes everyone he hurts die in funny way or say a quippy pun,word play, wit, humor are all things Alan Moore, Miller, Nolan, Goyer, Todd Phillips, Scott silver all miss with this character and turning in to just another run of the mill psycho who just happens to call himself Joker and wear clown makeup THATS ALL NO CLOWN THEMED MOTIF, PLOTS, SCHEMES WHERE HE THAT JOKER GO ?
I never knew that about the joker movie. I strongly suspected it was not originally a joker story but never had any confirmation. It explains why Thomas wayne and others were completely different from the books
My read of it wasn't that Thomas Wayne was different, as changing such things is standard with every film interpretation, but that the Wayne connection seems entirely tacked on. Save that they're attempting to connect the story to the Batman setting, you could drop all of that and be better for it. With the odd way things got twisted around to make Bruce an early Millennial or late Gen-Xer in the '80s, I got a feeling that, contrary to going _darker,_ this was kind of setting up an Adam West type of Batman, perhaps (in our enlightened age with Wertham far in the rear-view mirror) with a _different_ relationship with Robin; the film that shaped his vision, after all, is now Zorro: The Gay Blade.
The Iron Maiden’s story was in Savage Sword Of Conan #179 and the follow-up story is in Conan The Savage #7. I urge people to seek these out because the story and the art are exceptional.
The reason Tightrope wasn’t a Dirty Harry film is because Eastwoods character was fighting his own sexual deviancy while pursuing a sexual deviant. Wouldn't fit with Harry’s stoic, self-assured personality.
@@Dixonverse The Rookie should have been a send off for Harry where Sheen takes Harry's place at the end. The main character is a variation on Callahan, and it's better than DH 4 and 5. It's fallen down the memory hole, but I remember it being entertaining. All of Eastwood's cop movies after Magnum Force have become obscure, though I liked The Enforcer when I was a kid.
There's a (largely discredited) fan theory that Batman kills the Joker at the end of The Killing Joke while sharing a laugh, hence the name of the story. Ignoring for the moment that the creators deny that was the intent, if you look at the story that way, does that make it a better story for you?
There are arguments by people smarter than me who say A.I. will "never" replace human creativity and that we can "always" identify an A.I. created piece. However, I disagree. Like you said, A.I. will saturate the creative world with worthy pieces that will be indistinguishable from a blood-sweat-and-tears-created made-in-the-membrane piece. This is because software developers/computer engineers are perfectionist who will tweak and adjust an automaton, like A.I. and robotics, until it is as close to human as possible. Case and point: A.I art has issues drawing hands and fingers on the first go-around. Now-a-days that has been improved and nearly fixed. CamelMoon, a CG creator, presents on his UA-cam show a series of pictures where the guests need to identify if they are A.I.-generated or a photo. You can barely tell the difference, now. So yeah, not long from now, the market will be saturated with A.I.-created material, effectively drowning out the human-created arts and most definitively tanking cost of services and salaries of artists.
Have you not been paying attention to the trends in technology over the last century. Perfectionism quickly loses out to the lowest common denominator and engineered obsolescence, and consumers invariably favor the better-marketed but inferior tech, skewing the direction of development ever after. What we're calling AI, these generative transformers, isn't even a product of programmer design: they're effectively the product of selective mechanisms -- so they'll be even more prone to this trend of shit being what floats. Which is not to say that the technology is bad or not useful, or even that it won't have an impact on creative production. It's just that we need to put it into perspective better as a relatively incremental advance in available _tools._ For some purposes, it _will_ eliminate the need for human labor: people who just crank out empty copy all day for a paycheck will probably lose those jobs. Those who do more valuable work will not be displaced, though they may leverage such new technology to increase their workrate, if need be (in fields like game design, fi, the generation of dialog trees could be sped up, allowing for more dynamic options), it can't _replace_ their experience and direction.
I like the first three Dirty Harry movies. The other two have not aged well. The Rookie should have been a Dirty Harry send off movie. It's better than DH 4 and 5. It's obscure but entertaining. Eastwood plays a variation of Callahan in it. (Woo's Silent Night looks like the best Punisher style movie, though Wick 1 also qualifies.) I don't think Joker should be Batman's main villain. (Riddler could be a better archenemy.) He makes Batman and crew look weak. The Killing Joke is good but pretentious and cringe. Born Again and Kraven's Last Hunt are much better (and earlier). It implies Batman kills Joker at the end. (The Joker movie is pretentious and extremely overrated.) I like the Bronze Age Batman (and Superman and Wonder Woman) better than modern versions, though he should be darker. If they use Robin, I think the character should be female and connected to Batman's ninja past. (Modern Catwoman is lame. I love the Julie Newmar version, and she should be a stewardess with a head injury.) Also, Batman should have some magic enemies. They aren't magic yet, and they need development, but the Court of Owls was a good modern addition. Batman needs stronger villains. King Snake was cool but neglected. The issue where Green Arrow dies is cool, though it would have been better if he lost an arm.
Well, I like TKJ, I like it a lot. Despite Moore insistence that it wasn't written well, but psychological ramifications on the DC's most iconic hero/nemesis duo is nothing short of a treat. And I find the joke actually quite funny. Ofcourse, despite Moore's misgivings (who cares about the creator), it had to be canonized. Just as they did the same to Arkham Asylum, and in a more offbeat manner, Son of the Demon. Personally, I don't buy that Batman killed Joker, it was meant to be ambiguous and repetitive. The script implies that. Additionally, Moore was known by open endings. Joker...like Batman, Joker went thru many revisions. From eccentric prankster, with anti social disorder, to mass murderer, psychotic, physical manifestation of pure evil, or just madman who cannot help himself, suffering from supersanity (quote from Arkham Asylum). Try and read Azzarello's Joker. Arguably, the darkest description of the character to date. I am surprised that TDKR remained practically an Elseworlds story.
I also dislike The Killing Joke. Not that great and highly overrated for the “shock” value. Don’t “shock” me. I just want a solid entertaining story aka Chuck Dixon comic! I do like Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller.
Wait. Does Mr. Dixon not realize that THE KILLING JOKE ends with Batman killing Joker? That's (one reason) why Alan Moore says it's not canon. Re-read that last page again, it should become pretty clear. Not to mention the title. No disrespect.
O'Neal did for comics something very similar to what Alan Moore did. If you have a positive or negative view of it, that's a personal view, but I wish O'Neal didn't went the way he did.
Never understood you guys who don't like dark edgy torture porn. That's what life is, so anything that isn't like that, just seems unrealistic. You know?
Dirty Harry is franchise that to me went down after Magnum Force. All subsequent movies failed at repeating the fun of first two movies. I see The Gauntlet and The Rookie as unofficial Dirty Harry movies. And I Know Dead Pool gets the major dislike, but to me, that goes to Sudden Impact. Too cynical, bleak and it's not even about Harry in the first place (which probably is because it used the script intended for Sondra Locke as basically rape revenge vehicle).
arkhavencomics.com/product/caravan-of-the-damned/
Perversity, fetishism and misery porn? In an Alan Moore story? The Devil you say.
I didn't know that Chuck Dixon had a channel. Loved a lot of his Work, so I will definitely subscribe. This will be good👍
Welcome aboard!
I agree with your thoughts on The Killing Joke. Additionally, and in an earlier time, I didn't like the Batman graphic novel where he had sex with Talia (out of wedlock even! I don't count Ras' marrying them) and having a child. Was happy to hear that it was later declared non-cannon....until pulled back in by Grant Morrison. Though the introductory Damian stories were interesting, and I loved the young Damian/Superboy stories, I still think there are too many Robins and think that they really should stop putting Batman in "adult" situations. I feel that it takes the character away from the "all ages" character that Batman should be when he is rolling around naked on the rooftops with Catwoman. Knock it off, arrest that thief and get back to solving mysteries and fighting crime!! I also have an issue when the violence moves beyond all-ages action. The Joker cutting off his own face and making it a mask and making the Riddler just another crazy murderer have taken these characters down an overly dark and disturbing road.
You are talking about Son of the Demon and it wasn't supposed to be canon. But... I actually like the story, minus romance aspect and its dark tone. But I guess at that point, darkness was seen as new, refreshing and sophisticated. That impact of which lasted for quite some time. Even in Batman and Son, Damian beheads someone and shows it to Batman. Joker skins someone alive and Bane also can be a pretty dark character.
Per your story about young creators telling Denny O'Neil what Batman is: A mainstream comics creator friend of mine sat with Will Eisner and some artist who did a very low-selling Indie. Instead of soaking in the wisdom of Eisner, the Indie creator kept interrupting with the delusion that he and Eisner were peers. My friend said: I wanted to punch this dude!"
Cannot blame the dude. When you are an active creator anyone is your peers (from the same field).
It's so sad that some people lack humility to this extent. I get that people should be confident and proud of their accomplishments, but you don't talk over Will fucking Eisner. When that man talks, you listen and take notes. I'm an aspiring writer, and I would be trying memorize every single syllable coming out of that mfers mouth if I ever had the honor of talking to him when he was alive. I'm curious: was it ignorance or arrogance? Did this up and coming artist know what Eisner means to the medium, or did they think he was some random old guy?
@@spheremode3271 this person knew it was Eisner. Similarly, in 1995, I and several creators (at the San Diego Co circled Gil Kane and simply listened to him as he spoke of art and the medium of comics. Nobody saw him as an equal, just an old Wiseman
@@andrewgeraci8798 , I tend to view things like this, learn from those people that have experience, but never learn from those people that confuse experience with arrogance in their lives. This lesson not only applies to writing, but also to all aspects of life.
Will Eisner is probably one of the biggest cases of smoke and mirrors in comics. Everyone praises him and acts like he is the king of comics, but what did he really do that's any good... The spirit? Come on now. The king is Jack Kirby.
The Killing Joke was NOT a Batman story, it was a doujinshi using Batman characters. That it became canon is awful, I consider it one of the downfalls of modern Batman. In a retcon I would eliminate it and make it non-canon.
It should be non canon. I never liked the idea that DC tried to incorporate it into the main Batman canon.
Ditto this. So many dittos.
Your videos have become priority listening for me. Thank you so much. The book recommendations alone have been quite exciting.
I can see why you don't like it: the main point of TKJ was the meta-joke. And the writers who tried to replicate this kind of story didn't do any better to the comic book industry. Tom King's One Bad Day series is about Bat's villains having a bad day which broke them and made them become the villains they are now. It's like he wanted to find something he never understood about that graphic novel. If TKJ harmed the comic book industry, it's because of hacks like Tom King not understanding it was never meant to be canon. It was just a smelly, nasty meta-joke.
I like the cut of your jib.
@@Dixonverse Heh, I can improve on that. One question: what do you think about Joker: Going Sane?
@@francorota8638 solid idea, but mediocre book. The art is quite solid though, although the framing is often awkward.
I'd love to hear your take on what DC has done to Tim Drake.
Well, there is a certain way of interpreting The Killing Joke. Batman is laughing with the Joker on the final page of the story as the police sirens come closer. He has his arms on the Joker's shoulders and then we pan down to the ground. The laughter abruptly ends on the sixth panel. If this book is indeed non-canon, this is the point where Batman snaps the Joker's neck, ending him once and for all. Batman's laughter was just an excuse to get close enough to the clown to do the deed. I know I'm not the only one who saw it that way.
Yes but Alan Moore already confirmed that it's just the interpretation of some fans (pushed by Grant Morrison who's an @ssh0le)and it's not what he represented in his novel.
He said that the novel ended with the two laughing together because they find a little connection, and also the scene should suggest that the future writers should decide what to do. It was like asking "So you really want to keep these two in an infinite loop? Can't we change the situation?"
He said he wrote TKJ to point it out how much wrong the excessive violence of the comics in last years was.
Some people didn't understood, I don't know why, but I guess it's up to personal vision.
The Killing Joke was the first graphic novel I ever read, it was a few years before I really started getting into comics, and as much as I used to like it, I barely read it nowadays and can see why Alan Moore dismissed it as one of his lesser works. Probably the only reason I do occasionally go back to read it is the attention to detail in the art and the little scene transitions that are kind of clever. The plot is paper-thin and mean spirited.
For some reason, those scene transitions are one of the reasons why Moore dislikes TKJ.
@m1lst3r89 really? I figured it was because of how nasty it was and how DC made it canon. Not to mention people taking an unreliable narrator, like Joker, as telling the truth.
@@AceLM92nah Moore didn’t care that much. Usually he made fun of people for caring too much
But he’s a bit of a hypocrite and I don’t think he made the smartest decisions. Not saying he deserved the shit he got but some of it was avoidable like him putting way to much trust in a company know for doing shady deals to get the rights to characters
@@AceLM92 I think he hate everything he did for DC that got much traction. But yeah, he said he hates that storytelling device (I forgot what exactly it's called).
@pickedceasar1216 interesting.
Yeah I like his work, but he has some inconsistencies.
I didn't love Moore's story, but I always liked TKR because it allowed John Ostrander to turn Barbara Gordon into Oracle over in Suicide Squad. That run was a favorite of mine. The Breyfogle cover with Babs holding a gun on the Joker and saying "Smile" was awesome.
Thanks for another great video. I loved the killing joke, but by that time I had read the great Dick Sprang Joker, and the Jim Aparo joker, and the wonderful Steve englehart joker, so I never thought 🤔 killing joke was canon joker. I almost felt like it had an elseworlds feeling to it.
I wasn’t a fan of THE KILLING JOKE. In fact, it was where I jumped off the title/character.
@@jdc4483 I cam totally understand how some folks would be done after that story. It was dark for sure
@@kennytodd7192 There is dark and then there is straight up character destruction.
@@mikerude5073 I can definitely see people thinking that. For it's time it was a pretty radical take on the joker for sure. Nothing like that before. Like I said before I always felt it was elseworlds because of that departure. I certainly see your point though.
@@kennytodd7192 Sad how tame this Joker seems compared to modern examples.
I really enjoyed this video. Fan of your Conan work.
Batman is a detective. I remember the Mystery Solvers of Gotham stories. They were as much of a mystery story as Ellery Queen or Agatha Christie. They were great, a nice twist to the usual action stories.
TKJ is my favorite comics specifically because it showed that we could have an happy ending if only writers and dc allowed Batman to heal the Joker, stopping to show more and more violence. I love the scene where they finally have a connection and laugh together despite the dark situation, because it's like they both realized how bad the loop they where chained in was, and simply reacted in a laugh of themselves like saying "haha, we're fcked up". I love the fact that Batman didn't hurt Joker too much, because Gordon asked him to not to do it, because he survived and wanted to show to Joker that justice rules worked well. Batman simply respected Gordon request and acted like the real hero. He's not victim of his own vengeance, he's above of that. He's the example, he's the hope.
It's a great story that wanted to criticize excessive darkness in comics.
Talking about the part with Barbara Gordon and his father, both undressed and humiliated just to drive Gordon crazy:
Joker doesn't rape Barbara in TKJ novel, but he certainly scared her and taking photos of her in pain and also injured her for life. It was enough as a psychological and physical violence, I honestly don't understand why the animated movie pushed even more the idea of the rape, showing that disgusting scene in the first half of the movie where Barbara and Batman have sex. 🤢 But it wasn't the idea in the actual novel.
Also I must say, as a female reader, that TKJ Barbara Gordon is probably my favorite Barbara ever represented. For once she's not showed as the loving interest.. For once someone pointed out that she's almost always used as a fetish.... For once it's being pointed out that she's more than the "Batman female version".
She really passed over the violence she faced, and she only asked for his father safety.
She's so strong, her first though is to save someone else, like a real hero should do.
Being tortured and humiliated was normal for male characters, but Batman always showed how strong he was, ignoring such stuff, fighting back and thinking about people safety.
Barbara kinda does the same in TKJ. She's scared, she's in pain, not for herself, but for her father, exactly the same reaction that Batman and other male hero always have.
She's also beautiful and I love her dressing style in TKJ, simple and serious, totally different by other representation where she was always forced in being hypersexualized.
The first thing Bolland shows of her is a beautiful smile and yellowish and red colors to suggest a luminous image, a positive person.
And she still bright after the injury, showing how strong her sense of justice, of altruistic desire for other safety is, how strong her hero heart still is. She doesn't ask for vengeance, she doesn't ask to kill the Joker, she only wants to save an innocent. So brave!
Best Barbara, imo. She has more character writing here than every other infinite serie dedicated to her.
She's at the same level of Batman and Robin.
Also her father is so brave too.
Barbara and Jim are the best and positive characters of the novel. They don't change their idea, they keep fighting against crime like two unbearable rocks.
And Batman keep his control specifically because he's pushed forward by their positivity! They represent Batman's hope.
And Joker himself is shocked and defeated by that. There's no need to be even more violent at the end. Batman is the good one.
Joker at the end is defeated both in mind and in body. And that's the moment he starts to change a bit his mind.
You can see it by his tears while he's talking about the joke (basically saying "I'm not good, I don't think I can be helped. You want to help me but we're both broken, and I'm scared you will let me fall just when I'll start to trust you).
It's almost the total victory of Barbara, Jim and Batman.
It was a way to suggest that there were other ways to continue their stories.
If Joker changes his mind, it's the total victory of Batman, Barbara and Jim.
I always hoped that, because they demonstrated to the evil one that the good way is the right one.
Shouldn't be it the goal of an hero story? To win over the bad? Isn't the good route the best one? Aren't we enough with all that ultra violence?
Unfortunate nothing changed after TKJ.
I hated that writers and dc developed a love story between Talia al ghul and Batman, since I considered her a worm and Batman was OK to have a loving affair with her just because she was sexy, ignoring she was a criminal. That wasn't my idea of an hero. That's cheap porn, exactly like showing Batman and Catwoman having sex on a building... That's cheap porn to me.
I hated that they turned out Jason Todd into an assassin because he was just a kid and they brutally retconned him just to see if someone was interested in.
I hated when they showed Joker killing Jason Todd, because it was way too dark and terrible. He literally assassinated a kid.
I hated when Morrison decided that Batman was sexually raped under drugs by Talia to push a terrible character into the story, just to try to keep new generation into comics (Damien and the sexual raping stuff is why I dropped the comics years ago).
I hated when they showed Nightwing being pushed on having sex with a girl that pretended to be his girlfriend, and I hate the victim blaming on him. I hated when they wrote that story where he goes to Barbara to invite her to his wedding, and she casually assaulted him and he didn't say a thing and accepted to have sex with her JUST THE DAY BEFORE HIS FRIGGING WEDDING!
I hate how DC treated Starfire, basically a sex doll obsessed with Dick 😢.
I hated how they downgraded Catwoman, she was so cool in the old stories. 🤔
I hated Harley Quinn, she was one of the dumbest ideas they ever had (seriously they thought that a female version of Joker would have improved Batman universe?)
She's just an edgy fetish.
Obviously I hated when they wrote that story when there was a sexual rapist in justice league stories, because nothing positive was shown there..
I hate a lot of stories that are super violent and sexualized and stuff.. Unfortunately all of this was accepted as canon.
I deal with it, but TKJ is by far the less problematic story of all.
One of my favorite artists (and his comic) I discovered in my freshman year of high school was Vincent Locke of Deadworld. A few years back, i watched Walking Dead and saw that comic. I was immediately angry that it was a direct rippoff of Deadworld. There are about 4 plot devises they didnot use but the main premise is obviously lifted from it. How do you feel about creators blatantly stealing from independent creators?
This is a very great video!
Mr. Dixon, thank you for another great video and all the work you've done and continue to contribute to the world.
Where's the art that you used for your thumbnail from? I love the designs.
That;s from Angel and the Ape, a shortlived series from DC in the 60s, Art by Bob Oksner
@@Dixonverse I'll need to look further into it! Thank you!
you mentioned Tightrope should have been a Dirty Harry movie and change settings to SF
Ironically it was to be set in San Francisco, but because that city was associated with the "Dirty Harry" movies, they decided to change setting to New Orleans
Mr. Dixon I’ll say why I liked The Joker (his campy humor mixed with his complete homicidal murderous rage) Joker using henchmen dressed as The Three Stooges, Marx Brothers, Chaplin, him and Harley having pet Hyenas named bud and Lou for Bud Abbot and Lou Costello, the word play (After Joker hits Batman over the head with a wrench “Meanwhile Back At The Wrench Since My Side Splitters Won’t Tickle You How About A Skull Splitter” from Laughing Fish TAS episode or in Batman 89 after he shakes hands with the gangster with his joy buzzer that burns the mobster to a cinder Joker starts talking to the burned corpse and acting as if the corpse is responding to his questions. Or where jokers commercial comes on and has a scared man tied up and words flash on the screen “NOT AN ACTOR” like how in commercials they say not a paid spokesperson when they are, joker is at least honest that guy wasn’t an actor he just happened to cross jokers path at the time he needed someone to test his Smylex gas on.
Well
Too bad the Dirty Harry/ Batman book never happened.
But maybe a Lethal Weapon/ Batman ?!
I am glad I am not the only one that disliked Joker movie. Yes, Joaquin is amazing, camerawork is stellar, and the theme is provocative (albeit ultimately redundant), but as a movie as such, it lacks point (main character goes mad, wow, big deal), and pace so slow that sometimes is a bear to watch. And I hate how it is turned into a DC adaption with R rating! The money it reaped and praise it got is unbelieavable. I cannot even believe that Todd Phillips directed it.
it's a very mediocre movie that does go for a style closer to author movies but there's no substance, and the main problem is that they didn't try to give it more substance cause they relied on the main character being such a big pop culture icon. the whole movie attempts to make something completely detached from the comic books it's derived from, which is completely ruined by the ending where they show the Waynes getting murdered, which doesn't mean anything to the story and it's just a way to make a pop culture reference. this makes it just another comic book movie that exists as a derivation of something people are familiar with, but at the same time it doesn't have anything of what makes the comics or the Joker unique. And as a standalone movie, the character itself isn't interesting and there's nothing going on thematically or anything unique stylistically. It's a story about a random crazy guy that by the end of the movie kind of looks like a popular character and nothing more
the real pity for me is that when I heard Scorsese was tied to the project years before the release, I hoped they were going for a Goodfellas/Casino/Wolf of Wall Street type of movie with the story of the Joker becoming the biggest criminal in Gotham, instead they just turned into a loser that finds his own virility and sense of self by killing a bunch of people
I hate it. It's pretentious and extremely overrated.
I didn't like it because it was a waste of good actors and good visuals since it lacks a good plot. It needed a good comic book fan to write the movie since they didn't get joker right.
I didnt like it either. Taxi Driver and King of Comedy are much better films that Joker shamelessly rips off but its called "homage".
@@tomcruisenukedmyaccount5388 hey man. I always wait when you'll post.
Love the comment about 'dark having no bottom', or 'start going dark there's no end to it'. We've seen the truth of that over and over the last few years, in comics and other genres and media as well. It tends to turn into a race to 'top' the previous nastiness, and it's a race to the bottom, so to speak.
Superhero comics, in specific, absolutely _have_ to maintain certain unrealistic but utterly necessary breaks from reality, and I don't mean about being able to fly or bounce bullets. The storyline has certain places it can't go without shattering the settings. Superman _must_ be a paragon of virtue, for ex, because otherwise that much power in one place becomes a waking nightmare. It's pretty much either/or. Certain natural consequences of the existence of superpowers can't be explored without breaking the setting. Part of that is that there is a limit to how 'dark' things can be permitted to go, if you want the storyline and setting to survive at all.
Many people think that Batman kills Joker at the end of The Killing Joke. Was that the original intent? Hard to say, but another argument that it shouldn't be canon.
I don't think it was. While the script was clear that Batman and Joker will kill each other one day and they are laughing at it, it wasn't meant to be THAT day.
No, it wasn't the intent.
Alan Moore said he never thought about representing a murder. He only wanted to criticize the fact that Batman serie was becoming more and more dark and he didn't liked it, and he wanted to suggest that writers and dc should think about the possibility of an happy ending, maybe even with Joker as a partner.
Turns out they did it with Harley Quinn instead of the Joker. Sad.
I agree that Killing Joke is a well done story but not a good Batman story. I like what he was trying to do: show the Joker at his worst trying to make someone break like he did, and failing.
And I agree that both Killing Joke and Dark Knight should not be canon, for a wide variety of reasons not the least of which neither was ever intended to be.
I remember when killing joke came out originally. As far as i remember it was an alternative one shot comic. Definately not inside the regular Batman canon.
At this point, Callahan doesn't have to resemble Clint Eastwood any longer, right? So on with the Batman/Dirty Harry crossover? Just get Hugh Jackman to agree to portray Harry, then draw him to look like Jackman.
Love the Angel and the Ape panel. Anybody know which issue it is from? As for TKJ, it was way too dark, and while I did get it; it wasn't a story I particularly cared for. The only thing I liked was that homage to the late fifties Batman family which the Dark Knight took a quick look at during the story.
I sat through the whole thing and I didn't get no Angel and the Ape :(
Hello, Mr. Dixon (or "Chuck," if you prefer)...another good show...regarding KILLING JOKE, I find myself agreeing with your assessment. Though I enjoy it enough for what it is as an intended stand-alone story, I sympathize with Alan Moore in that it should never have been folded into the main continuity/canon. There is a fan theory about the ending, though, which I find intriguing and more-or-less agreeing with: that Batman finally kills the Joker after the mutual laughter at the joke, as the police sirens are approaching (though this can certainly be debated); just curious if you'd heard of this theory, and what you might think of it. Anyway, thanks for a great podcast!
If I am not mistaken, that theory camé from Grant Morrison, who liked to take a piss at things.
Yeah, I imagine you're right about that
Alan Moore only wanted to create a dark comic to criticize the growing violence of Batman stories in those years. The intent was to push the future writer to ask themselves "what should we do? Isn't bad all this violence? Can't we give to these guys another way to end it up? Can't Joker be changed, can't Batman win? Can't they be a team instead of eternal enemies with even darker stories?"
The end was just a way to make you think about it, but definitely didn't represented a murder. First of all because Alan Moore idea of Batman was far way from being an assassin. Batman is the hero, he doesn't kill because he's different, and he should be able to change people's minds, including the criminals. Or at least some of them. The final scene only represents two person that suddenly find a connection, for the first time in their relationship.
Everything else it's fantasy of that Morrison, who likes to put death, sexual violence and other perversions in his Batman comics. .-.
Do you have any advice for someone persuing a career in comics?
I've always felt like the "Joker" movie could've easily been called "Clown", have had nothing to do with Batman, and been a better movie for it. But then probably no one would've seen it, either.
I always felt The Man Who Laughs by Brubaker was better.
I like There is no Hope in Crime Alley and Joker's Five Way revenge.
Gonna be sad when Clint passes. I wonder if he'd be more open to that crossover nowadays
Thanks for answering my question and What are your thoughts on Batman 1989, and The Dark Knight (2008) as someone who wrote Batman and knew these characters inside and out what do you think they got right, and wrong in each film ?
I saw The Dark Knight when I was 10 and I remember asking my mom (where’s the wit, laughing fish, Smylex, etc etc) there are moments in dark knight I like Joker spray painting an S in front of Laughter to spell out slaughter I thought was funny, the fire truck literally on fire was also funny but ledger was just so edgy and angsty.
And BTW did you ever in your punisher run ever do a punisher vs jigsaw story really liked Punisher War Zone from 2008 it wasn’t a great film but embraced that it was from a comic book unlike dark knight where Nolan was so embarrassed to be making a comic book film (joker can’t fall into chemicals or have party gag themed weapons acid flowers, razor edged playing cards, laughing gas, and Batman wants to retire and let Harvey dent clean up Gotham
In previous videos chuck has said that he didn't like the Tim Burton batman movies since batman is bearly able to move in the suit. He does not like any Christopher nolan movies since he thinks that nolan is the most over rated director. He thought the dark knight was decent.
For jigsaw say he said that it doesn't work since punisher kills all his villains.
@@michaelcarter266 ok thanks Joker being this angsty dark representation of how messed up society that's really starting to get on my nerves (Joker should have stated a whacky homicidal maniac who loves comedy and like freddy krueger has no regard for human life and makes everyone he hurts die in funny way or say a quippy pun,word play, wit, humor are all things Alan Moore, Miller, Nolan, Goyer, Todd Phillips, Scott silver all miss with this character and turning in to just another run of the mill psycho who just happens to call himself Joker and wear clown makeup THATS ALL NO CLOWN THEMED MOTIF, PLOTS, SCHEMES WHERE HE THAT JOKER GO ?
Damn! I wish Clint Eastwood was a good sport and participated in it. That would've been another classic Batman story!
15:00 The capsule belt isn't manly...because Bruce would have to be on top of his inventory? You alright dude?
Making almost all of Batman’s foes 1 dimensional Hannibal Lector knock offs was never a good idea
I never knew that about the joker movie.
I strongly suspected it was not originally a joker story but never had any confirmation.
It explains why Thomas wayne and others were completely different from the books
My read of it wasn't that Thomas Wayne was different, as changing such things is standard with every film interpretation, but that the Wayne connection seems entirely tacked on. Save that they're attempting to connect the story to the Batman setting, you could drop all of that and be better for it. With the odd way things got twisted around to make Bruce an early Millennial or late Gen-Xer in the '80s, I got a feeling that, contrary to going _darker,_ this was kind of setting up an Adam West type of Batman, perhaps (in our enlightened age with Wertham far in the rear-view mirror) with a _different_ relationship with Robin; the film that shaped his vision, after all, is now Zorro: The Gay Blade.
I definitely like the street level batman better. I never liked batman fighting in space and such.
They should have him fight magic threats though.
The Iron Maiden’s story was in Savage Sword Of Conan #179 and the follow-up story is in Conan The Savage #7. I urge people to seek these out because the story and the art are exceptional.
How good is alpha corps for the rippaverse gonna be ? I just have some anticipation for this
The reason Tightrope wasn’t a Dirty Harry film is because Eastwoods character was fighting his own sexual deviancy while pursuing a sexual deviant. Wouldn't fit with Harry’s stoic, self-assured personality.
It could have with a few rewrites.
Yeah, I figure Harry is almost old fashioned, if not asexual when it comes to relationships. The deviancy wouldn't suit him well.
I agree, but The Rookie should have been a Dirty Harry finale.
@@Dixonverse The Rookie should have been a send off for Harry where Sheen takes Harry's place at the end. The main character is a variation on Callahan, and it's better than DH 4 and 5. It's fallen down the memory hole, but I remember it being entertaining. All of Eastwood's cop movies after Magnum Force have become obscure, though I liked The Enforcer when I was a kid.
@@m1lst3r89 I agree. Callahan is conservative. The Guantlet is a year after The Enforcer. The Rookie should have been a Dirty Harry conclusion though.
I also hate THE KILLING JOKE for the exact same reasons why Chuck hate it.
15:34 I miss *Savage Sword of Conan* so much. Modern Conan comics just aren't in the same league.
There's a (largely discredited) fan theory that Batman kills the Joker at the end of The Killing Joke while sharing a laugh, hence the name of the story. Ignoring for the moment that the creators deny that was the intent, if you look at the story that way, does that make it a better story for you?
There are arguments by people smarter than me who say A.I. will "never" replace human creativity and that we can "always" identify an A.I. created piece. However, I disagree. Like you said, A.I. will saturate the creative world with worthy pieces that will be indistinguishable from a blood-sweat-and-tears-created made-in-the-membrane piece. This is because software developers/computer engineers are perfectionist who will tweak and adjust an automaton, like A.I. and robotics, until it is as close to human as possible. Case and point: A.I art has issues drawing hands and fingers on the first go-around. Now-a-days that has been improved and nearly fixed. CamelMoon, a CG creator, presents on his UA-cam show a series of pictures where the guests need to identify if they are A.I.-generated or a photo. You can barely tell the difference, now.
So yeah, not long from now, the market will be saturated with A.I.-created material, effectively drowning out the human-created arts and most definitively tanking cost of services and salaries of artists.
Have you not been paying attention to the trends in technology over the last century. Perfectionism quickly loses out to the lowest common denominator and engineered obsolescence, and consumers invariably favor the better-marketed but inferior tech, skewing the direction of development ever after. What we're calling AI, these generative transformers, isn't even a product of programmer design: they're effectively the product of selective mechanisms -- so they'll be even more prone to this trend of shit being what floats.
Which is not to say that the technology is bad or not useful, or even that it won't have an impact on creative production. It's just that we need to put it into perspective better as a relatively incremental advance in available _tools._ For some purposes, it _will_ eliminate the need for human labor: people who just crank out empty copy all day for a paycheck will probably lose those jobs. Those who do more valuable work will not be displaced, though they may leverage such new technology to increase their workrate, if need be (in fields like game design, fi, the generation of dialog trees could be sped up, allowing for more dynamic options), it can't _replace_ their experience and direction.
Like Amiga vs PC or Beta Max vs VHS? yeah I paid attention.
I like the first three Dirty Harry movies. The other two have not aged well. The Rookie should have been a Dirty Harry send off movie. It's better than DH 4 and 5. It's obscure but entertaining. Eastwood plays a variation of Callahan in it. (Woo's Silent Night looks like the best Punisher style movie, though Wick 1 also qualifies.)
I don't think Joker should be Batman's main villain. (Riddler could be a better archenemy.) He makes Batman and crew look weak. The Killing Joke is good but pretentious and cringe. Born Again and Kraven's Last Hunt are much better (and earlier). It implies Batman kills Joker at the end. (The Joker movie is pretentious and extremely overrated.)
I like the Bronze Age Batman (and Superman and Wonder Woman) better than modern versions, though he should be darker. If they use Robin, I think the character should be female and connected to Batman's ninja past. (Modern Catwoman is lame. I love the Julie Newmar version, and she should be a stewardess with a head injury.)
Also, Batman should have some magic enemies. They aren't magic yet, and they need development, but the Court of Owls was a good modern addition. Batman needs stronger villains. King Snake was cool but neglected.
The issue where Green Arrow dies is cool, though it would have been better if he lost an arm.
Well, I like TKJ, I like it a lot. Despite Moore insistence that it wasn't written well, but psychological ramifications on the DC's most iconic hero/nemesis duo is nothing short of a treat. And I find the joke actually quite funny. Ofcourse, despite Moore's misgivings (who cares about the creator), it had to be canonized. Just as they did the same to Arkham Asylum, and in a more offbeat manner, Son of the Demon. Personally, I don't buy that Batman killed Joker, it was meant to be ambiguous and repetitive. The script implies that. Additionally, Moore was known by open endings.
Joker...like Batman, Joker went thru many revisions. From eccentric prankster, with anti social disorder, to mass murderer, psychotic, physical manifestation of pure evil, or just madman who cannot help himself, suffering from supersanity (quote from Arkham Asylum). Try and read Azzarello's Joker. Arguably, the darkest description of the character to date.
I am surprised that TDKR remained practically an Elseworlds story.
I also dislike The Killing Joke. Not that great and highly overrated for the “shock” value. Don’t “shock” me. I just want a solid entertaining story aka Chuck Dixon comic! I do like Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller.
What are your thoughts on Robert E Howard..the man? Do you think his mental imbalance could be attributed to an overbearing overprotective mother?
And I am assuming the lack of a positive father figure.....
Wait. Does Mr. Dixon not realize that THE KILLING JOKE ends with Batman killing Joker? That's (one reason) why Alan Moore says it's not canon. Re-read that last page again, it should become pretty clear. Not to mention the title. No disrespect.
O'Neal did for comics something very similar to what Alan Moore did. If you have a positive or negative view of it, that's a personal view, but I wish O'Neal didn't went the way he did.
whaddya mean? He revitalized the character and saved him from his campy stories.
Never understood you guys who don't like dark edgy torture porn. That's what life is, so anything that isn't like that, just seems unrealistic. You know?
I don't understand if that's a joke or you're serious...
@@krabkrabby Contemplate this on the Tree of Woe.
Dirty Harry is franchise that to me went down after Magnum Force. All subsequent movies failed at repeating the fun of first two movies. I see The Gauntlet and The Rookie as unofficial Dirty Harry movies. And I Know Dead Pool gets the major dislike, but to me, that goes to Sudden Impact. Too cynical, bleak and it's not even about Harry in the first place (which probably is because it used the script intended for Sondra Locke as basically rape revenge vehicle).
Gauntlet rocked. Locke was one of Eastwood's "conquests".
I agree with most of that, but I like The Enforcer. The Rookie should have been a Dirty Harry finale. The Guantlet was a year after The Enforcer.
In killing joke batman kills joker.
Animated version?
Facts, best decision he ever made.
Algoithm
"Break into" what? Marvel and DC are w0k3 as hell.