• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Batman #641 SPOILERS ALERT

Started by Hobgoblin,

69 posts in this topic

Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
Posted

I can't remember where I read it (my guess is newsarama.com) but Winick said something to the effect of-- Go back and re-read "Hush". There are instances in the Clayface/Batman fight where it just might be Jason fighting, not Clayface. Jason has been around.

 

Jason specifically mentions in Batman 641 that he was in the graveyard (in Hush) and that he was replaced by Clayface during the fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shrunkenhead

shrunkenhead

Posted
Posted
Frankly, I think that Winick's explanation is there is total garbage. The whole deal is that Jason started the fight and Clayface finished it? Well I think it's Winick who needs to reread that -- there's no point where the switch could have been made... and why would Jason team up with the other villians (when his supposed goal is take them down using the methods Bats won't?) to mess with Bats. Doesn't make sense.

 

This seems like a major stretch to me as well, but I guess we'll just have to see where future issues take us. If we don't get some explaining within another 4 or 5 issues, though, I'll likely get seriously annoyed by the whole thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Member
plitch

plitch

Posted
  • Member
Posted

Yeah, Jason teaming up with Bat villains that he is going to take out doesn't make too much sense. On the other hand, finding common ground with Tommy Elliott is slightly more plausable. Hopefully it will be flushed out better (pun intended). acclaim.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shrunkenhead

shrunkenhead

Posted
Posted
Yeah, Jason teaming up with Bat villains that he is going to take out doesn't make too much sense. On the other hand, finding common ground with Tommy Elliott is slightly more plausable. Hopefully it will be flushed out better (pun intended). acclaim.gif

 

He could be playing both sides against the middle in order to take out the baddies unawares. I think mention of this strategy was made somewhere in one of the recent Red Hood issues...?

 

A team-up with Hush could be neat, though..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
Posted

I know winick has Jason saying that, but do you find it even remotely plausible?

 

Plausible? I would have to revisit the actual issues. But this is a comic book, and Winick is a lazy writer. He thinks Jason was there without needing to fact check, thus Jason was there for the purposes of this story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hobgoblin

Hobgoblin

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I know winick has Jason saying that, but do you find it even remotely plausible?

 

Plausible? I would have to revisit the actual issues. But this is a comic book, and Winick is a lazy writer. He thinks Jason was there without needing to fact check, thus Jason was there for the purposes of this story.

 

This is what we get for giving people who are on MTV sitcoms real jobs. None of them will ever be good for anything, except making appearances on Real World/Road Rules challenges.

 

I miss music videos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
Posted

Actually, knowing Winick's fondness for re-using some of his favorite plots it's going to turn out that not only is Jason Todd BACK but he's also OUT and he's HIV positive...."Batman and Me"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

I would think Jason would be Joker's love beyatch at this point, not Bruces... Joker would like to have stolen away Batmans ward's 'love' as Cap'n Hook did with Robin Williams' (Robin Hood) son.

 

But heres the perfect DC story arc to the return of Jason... too bad its so obvious they wont do it. Jason comes back and is a Punisher-like Batman as he says, unafraid to kill bad guys. But what he really wants is to kill Joker for what he did to him. It doesnt make sense to blame Batman for Joker's crime and beating he took. It was all the Jokers fault and must be avenged! So we eventually get a showdown between Jason and Joker and Jason kicks the 'cr@aap out of Joker and is about to kill him and Batman saves Joker. Then when Batmans back is turned, Joker kills Jason again for good. Jason dies in Batmans arms and says he's sorry and understands...... Or--- forget Jason dying --- Joker goes to Arkham badly beaten up and Jason either changes costumes and is a hero again, or goes back to being a Punisher-hero killer for good cause hes not ready to reconcile with Batman yet...(until he takes over the Outsiders or forms a new group with Batman's blessing next year sometime.

 

Either way, if Jason never goes after avenging himself against the Joker, somethings wrong.

 

Or they do it the 60s way: this is all a plan by Bats and Jason to trap some heretofore unseen new villain into revealing himself. And maybe Jason isnt really Jason at all but really Superman or Aquaman (or even Alfred!) in disguise to fool Batwoman!!! or Batmite??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
Posted

Jason Todd, as the Red Hood, has already confronted the Joker... he beat the [embarrasing lack of self control] out of him but didn't kill him. The beating was intentionally similar to the fatal beat down the Joker gave Todd back in "Death in the Family".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Member
plitch

plitch

Posted
  • Member
Posted
Actually, knowing Winick's fondness for re-using some of his favorite plots it's going to turn out that not only is Jason Todd BACK but he's also OUT and he's HIV positive...."Batman and Me"...

893whatthe.gif

sign-funnypost.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif

 

Well, Jason Todd did come from " 'da streetz."

Winick did give us Exiles, though. thumbsup2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted
Jason Todd, as the Red Hood, has already confronted the Joker... he beat the [embarrasing lack of self control] out of him but didn't kill him. The beating was intentionally similar to the fatal beat down the Joker gave Todd back in "Death in the Family".

 

yer kidding!!?? I read each issue and I forgot already?

 

dammnn thats gooood writing!! Or am I just getting too old to care? sorry.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
Posted

It was in Batman #638.

 

batman638.jpg

 

Here's a synopsis:

 

http://www.comicreaders.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1411

 

The issue caps off with the Joker (hiding out in the ruins of an old carnival since recent events in Batman: Gotham Knights) being paid a visit from the Red Hood, who savagely beats him with a crowbar. The Red Hood removes his mask…revealing his true identity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Durden08

Durden08

Posted
Posted
Jason Todd, as the Red Hood, has already confronted the Joker... he beat the [embarrasing lack of self control] out of him but didn't kill him. The beating was intentionally similar to the fatal beat down the Joker gave Todd back in "Death in the Family".

 

Aren't we as the reader left to wonder if the Joker is dead or not? I obviously don't believe DC would kill off the Joker this way, but was there any definitive evidence he was still alive as you say? I kind of remember the Joker just laying there motionless on the last page.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
Posted

I think he's on the cover of one of the "War Crimes" crossover books in the fall.

 

That being said, we are talking about the cash-cow known as the Joker here, and there's no possibility that he's dead. Maybe Jason thinks he is...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hobgoblin

Hobgoblin

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I think he's on the cover of one of the "War Crimes" crossover books in the fall.

 

That being said, we are talking about the cash-cow known as the Joker here, and there's no possibility that he's dead. Maybe Jason thinks he is...

 

From what I'm getting out the of upcoming Batman issue solicitations, a MAJOR Batman villain may be "dying" in the War Crimes arc. Now, Jason could have left the Joker clinging to life by a string, in order to see if Batman has what it takes to completely take him out for good. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

But I doubt that if a villain dies, that it would be the Joker. I'm sure it'll be someone much less widely known.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lazyboy

Lazyboy

Posted
Posted
Jason Todd, as the Red Hood, has already confronted the Joker... he beat the [embarrasing lack of self control] out of him but didn't kill him. The beating was intentionally similar to the fatal beat down the Joker gave Todd back in "Death in the Family".

 

Aren't we as the reader left to wonder if the Joker is dead or not? I obviously don't believe DC would kill off the Joker this way, but was there any definitive evidence he was still alive as you say? I kind of remember the Joker just laying there motionless on the last page.

 

This is comics. Unless you see the dead body, he's not dead. And even then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shrunkenhead

shrunkenhead

Posted
Posted

From what I'm getting out the of upcoming Batman issue solicitations, a MAJOR Batman villain may be "dying" in the War Crimes arc. Now, Jason could have left the Joker clinging to life by a string, in order to see if Batman has what it takes to completely take him out for good. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

I think you're onto something here, but here's my prediction: A major villain will die, and that villain will be Jason Todd. This current story arc will conclude with Todd's 2nd death, thus hitting the reset button on Bat-continuity. The Todd costume will stay in the cave, all's well that ends well, rinse, wash, repeat, go to bed.

 

 

But I doubt that if a villain dies, that it would be the Joker. I'm sure it'll be someone much less widely known.

 

Of course the Joker won't die. Don't be silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing