Why DC had the Joker cut off his own face

...

...

Stick to what you know, I guess.

Is it me or is he trying to imitate the Heath Ledger Joker. Also, Kid Joker vs Kid Batman is just weird to me.

Every single fucking Joker since Heath Ledger has been trying to do the same thing. It's the only thing normies can stomach.

Actually now that I think about it he reminds me a bit of Jack Nicholson a bit too.

But user, he totally grew up! look at how disturbing his joker is!

He is, and sadly it's so damn cringey, and don't watch Gotham, it's retarded after the first season and just rapes the entire Batman mythos, and Jim Gordon is a literal cuckold for letting his wife cheat on him with a dyke.

Disturbingly awful.

Eh, two women. Nobody takes that seriously

It was edgy as fuck, and the main issue it presented was the fact that they did it in an absurd silly gore sense, they didn't patch Joker's face up with the medical equipment given to situate faceless people, and the idea that given the Joker's horrible fixture in that he has little to no nerve endings anymore, on account of the vat of chemicals, the constant beatings, burnings, and uncontrollable smiling, getting his face taken off WOULD feel like a massive relief give or take.

...

Nor will Groundskeeper Ivy calmly humming while cutting the blooms off the flowers.

Can anyone see the video that's supposed to be there? Because I can't. Dailymotion embeds my ass, Firetires.
>dailymotion.com/video/xp8ff6

When Chuck Dixon was fired by dildo, the Batman universe went straight to piss.

Wow that show is bad. I never watched it for a reason. But sweet lord that is some stupid shit.

He's dead, user.

Nah, it went to piss before that. It's Denny O'Neil's retirement that precipitated it. Denny O'Neil was the last Batman editor to truly understand Batman, having redefined him in the late '60s/early '70s. And he hired Dixon, Grant, Moench and all those others.

Sauce of panty flash?

I think O'Neil was also one of the last true comics editors. He oversaw all the Batman books and made sure they worked together. He kept it coherent and consistent.

Why do things have to be this way?

This! Him and Archie Goodwin, and Cat Yronwode. I never realised how much the editors were responsible for maintaining standards, until the last generation of good editors retired and everything went to shit.

I've always loved the ventriloquist as my favorite non-superhuman Batman villian.

I hate how normal faggots think Clown prince of crime = blow everything up and self mutilate like some angsty preteen girl.

Can somebody post some Brave and the Bold Joker? Just need to offset how much "ow the edge" Jokers bum me out.

What this anecdote tells me more than anything is that Scott Snyder is retarded. A) because the self-mutilation was his idea and B) because I guess he thinks The Joker just wears make-up?

...

I don't have any Brave and the Bold stuff, but I do have stuff from the BTAS segment that inspired it.

I never noticed before but that Joker is pretty much the same design

(HEIL)

The problem is they got a bunch of fanboy autists in to write Batman who thought The Joker was a "agent of chaos". They started ascribing a bunch of pretentious bullshit to a joke themed gimmick villain.

Which really the best description of everything wrong with cape comics. You've got a bunch of assholes writing children's characters as if they're the deepest fucking shit on earth and trying to be something they clearly aren't.

The problem evidently is that the people writing comics don't actually read comics. Fucking everyone knows that The Joker's face isn't make-up. Unless you've only seen The Dark Knight. And if you've only seen The Dark Knight, you damn sure shouldn't be writing DC's flagship character.

That's because both of the designs were based on the work of Dick Sprang, the quintessential Batman artist.

Also, it's because James Tucker was involved in both the short and was a producer/character designer for Batman the Brave and the Bold. Tucker is such a fan of Sprang that his Deviantart handle is "Spawn of Sprang".

Yeah but they look exactly the same. The Batman from that short doesn't look exactly like the Brave and Bold Batman. Leads me to believe that Tucker just straight up reused his old design

Oh they read comics, just not enough comics.

As shitty as full/co/ can be, some of the oldfags here get it. They've read a lot of comics, seen a lot of shit, and are hip to the truths of the cape genre. They know it's silly and stupid, but completely embrace it and revel it in. It's the appeal of the genre.

The fucks DC and Marvel gets writing for them? They're entry level fags. They've dipped their toes in just enough to call themselves "comic nerds" but are still completely casual. They write shit to appeal to their normie friends. They're not hip to truths of capes. Their shit is phony and self-conscious.

DC and Marvel would be better off hiring writers who knew nothing about any of their properties than those entry level faggots. They'd produce far better stories too.

No they wouldn't. They get people like this all the time and, for the most part, they consistently produce nothing but crap. Snyder himself was a short story writer before he got into comics in 2009.

I should clarify. They should get freelance writers. As in people whose job it is to write stories about characters for money. The people who churn that shit out.

Not guys who submit short stories for publication. The guys who work in producing product.

These people don't exist any more. The kind of infrastructure that would turn out people like that just doesn't exist any more.

The stupid thing is, they had Joker take his face off, but they dropped the "unrecognizable" idea with the face and instead added a completely different setup for that, which, after the face thing, barely made sense and required a convoluted story about an invincible Joker or something.

Buuut…
I liked the design of New 52 Joker, both versions.
I liked his backstory (it was a bit too much and took away the mythology of the Joker, but I see each interpretation seperately).
I even liked the twist that the whimp guy working at Arkham was the Joker all along, so fitting.

In the real world, the (((gallery owners))) would quadruple the price and sell them as "Joker Originals."

Thanks to Kate Leth and Erica Henderson, we know this is not true.

Jesus Christ, how can you be so new?

You can't argue with a cuckchan refugee

How gay? And how much of a threat?

Well if it makes you feel better Penguin is a major threat in the Telltale games. Though he is skinny and has an obnoxious cockney accent.

He had that in the Arkham games too.

Yeah but he was more of a joke character in those games. Though I do like in Arkham Knight where Joker makes fun of Penguins cockney accent.

...

Some people have a learning disability that makes them confuse puns and wordplay with each other user.

A pun is a play on words. They're exactly the same thing. Look it up

>Truth be told, strings never were my section. I'm much better on the keys
>Oh, very good! I'll have to make a note of that
>I'm not done fiddling with them yet
It's okay user. I understand it's hard living with a hearing difficulty.

That's pretty high up there on the scale.

That wasn't in the thing

I would watch hours of any other Joker taking a weed whacker to Wigger Leto until he is a mass of quivering pulp and bones

That sounds awesome.

Who's your favourite superhuman Batman villain?

Speaking of the Joker, I finally got around to seeing The Killing Joke.

Can someone please tell me why the fuck they added that whole thing in there about Barbara Gordon?
Nooooo. No, of course not. Why the hell would it mean anything when you practically forced yourself on your father's best friend?

So Moore gets fucked by DC yet again. Big surprise. There WAS, however, this little gem:

>"Batman created by Bob Kane with Bill Finger"

So at least there's SOME kind of justice in this rotten ol' world.

Oh, looky-loo at this shit I just found on kikepedia.
Guess that explains why they felt they needed to make Barbara a slut instead of a victim. If they didn't, the feminists would have cut their balls off. The irony, of course, is Babs was much stronger and more effective as Oracle than she ever was a Batgirl.

No, Moore isn't getting fucked. V for Vendetta didn't credit him and Watchmen didn't either. Alan Moore specifically requested that DC not give him any credits on any adaptations of his works. He's washed his hands of his DC work and wants nothing to do with them. He will not lend his name to promoting works he got screwed out of.

Moore doesn't like to be credited for work he doesn't own. While his name is still on the DC books, a condition of Marvel reprinting Miracleman was that they take his name off it. Same condition for all film adaptations of his work post-League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.

Moore is kinda an Anarcho-Commie Wiccan faggot, he doesn't like adaptations of his work not because of creative differences, but he doesn't like people messing with his "Art" or Capitalism.

Ah. Fair enough, then.

He is an Anarchist. He's not a commie or a wiccan.
He hates most adaptations of his work because they're shit. He stopped selling film rights because of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen specifically
He hates the Watchmen and V for Vendetta films specifically because DC stole them from him, particularly V for Vendetta.

...

What would you consider semi experienced? Like, the water is up to your torso level.

Killer Croc
I know it varies on whether he's just deformed, or a powerful mutation depending on the series

I always considered a pun to be a quip that utilizes combining two similar sounding words or replacing one with a similar word relevant to the situation at hand. Whereas regular worldplay just uses double meanings without altering or replacing words.

(HIEL)

Somewhat. In the aging Holla Forumsfag stage, you questioning what is true. Like some fag starts going off about how The Joker was a mass-murderer in his first appearance, and you start wondering if that's a fact. So you start digging, going to the actual source, and in the process, you discover the truth.

You'll know when you become an oldfag when your friends are arguing about who'd win in a fight, Superman or the Hulk, and you realize you can't even relate to what they're arguing about. It is then your journey to the dark side will be complete.

He's pretty cool, user.

I'm all about Ivy, before all this Sirens bullshit.

Every time Batman #1 gets mentioned here, I re-read it and I've got to tell you; The Joker killed a lot of people in his first two appearances. I don't know what the cap is for 'mass-murderer', as opposed to 'ordinary murderer' but he killed seven people, pretty much all his targets. If people want to say he was a mass murderer in his first appearances, I wouldn't argue.

I wouldn't say seven people makes him a "mass" murderer.

Gassing a whole building full of people would make him a mass murderer. Blowing things up for no reason, shootings in the streets, sinking ships and crashing planes all for the sake of "CHAOS LOL" is mass murder, and edgy as fuck. And that's what the Joker seems to be these days when he used to be a criminal. Yeah of course he killed people, he was a bad guy, he was insane, a villain, obviously he killed people. But it wasn't the only thing he did, and it wasn't the only thing he was interested in doing.

These days it's just murder and torture for the sake of murder and torture. Like an Eli Roth movie.

Young Justice

He killed a lot of people within a relatively short space of time, that's a mass murderer. The fact that he robbed them too is irrelevant.
Semantic argument.

Whose panties are they though?

Cheshire's.

And they got away with this?

Yep.

It is not irrelevant. it is completely relevant. The real argument here isn't that The Joker shouldn't kill people. The real argument is that these days, The Joker kills people for the sake of killing them and hardly does anything else. This is a supervillain who used to rob, steal, trick, lie, manipulate, prank, and of course kill. Now all he does is the killing because he's been reduced to a Saw-esque death-and-torture-obsessed loony that you could find in any average generic slasher movie.

And we already had Victor Zsasz for shit like that.

Personally, I wish the comics would go back to a Joker more like the one from Batman TAS where he did kill people but had all these crazy schemes. It seemed like a good balance in that show.

Do you think Harley would go back to that Joker?

I heard this was cancelled. I suppose i was wrong.

I heard about that one. Honestly I would prefer it as its own thing or as a fan comic.

You mean the Harley in the comics right now? Probably not since she seems to have moved on from him apparently.

Solo Harley is in a Hellcat situation where nothing in her book is really considered canon.

Ah ok then. I guess its fair game. Glad to see Kate Leth's Hellcat isn't canon.

Jesus Christ. I can't unsee.

It is irrelevant. If you read the story the stuff The Joker stole is almost an afterthought.
He killed them for the sake of killing them then. If you look at his first victim, he claimed the victim would die at midnight. He managed to sneak into his house undetected, steal his shit and then inject him with venom that breaks down in the body within 24 hours, killing him at midnight the next night as promised. He already stole the shit. Why did he kill this person? For the lulz
Zsasz came after they did Killing Joke and Death in the Family, after they'd sort of reinvented Joker. If anything it's Zsasz that's redundant.

You idiots are forgetting the most important part: The Joker was supposed to die after Batman #1. The entire story was written with that in mind, until editor Whitney Ellsworth stepped in to save him last minute. This changes the context of both stories and why The Joker goes through a lot of growing pains from 1940 until 1942 as Bill Finger worked to define the character.

With that in mind, while it can be argued he was a mass-murderer in his first appearance, first appearance Joker could be considered a separate character. A character that was supposed to die at the end of the story(like multiple murderers did in Bill Finger Batman stories). This would make appearances after Batman #1 more significant, especially Detective Comics #64 "The Joker Walks the Last Mile" (June 1942), as it tells us more about how he became the popular villain he is, far more than his first appearance.

Only if you're big into mental gymnastics

honestly i prefer it the way it is now , dead

You do know the Joker is a fictional character, right? Prone to first drafts or complete alterations because he's not real?

The Joker in Batman #1 was written to die at the end of the comic. After he was saved by editorial, The Joker was written to be a reoccurring villain. This means The Joker we've known for 77 years isn't really represented in Batman #1 and only comes into being after he was spared death.

smh fam

Romero Joker is the best Joker. Prove me wrong. Pro-tipo: he has a mustache, so you can't

it was user.

Was not

What's that got to do with shit
The argument was What. was. his. original. characterisation. All that shit you wrote had fucking nothing to do with the argument whatsoever.

Nothing worse than a chinless fog-breather critiquing Clapistani comic books.

He does it all the damn time as an excuse. He's a real elitist. Ignore him.

Dixon did have solid work though. His work with arcs such as Legacy and the way he handled Bruce not always being angry and also being a mentor really did a lot to sell the idea of Robin, Nightwing, and others being able to branch out of the Batcave.

No disagreement. His work may not have been revolutionary but he did solid, consistent monthly stories.

I thought the argument was that writing The Joker as an edgy serial killer was stupid and boring

That is one of the lamest Batman villains I've ever seen.

Agreed.

Test.