This is the thread to give your own pet theories--or ask other about their pet theorie--about unexplained mysteries in comics. Anything is up for grabs. Here's one of mine to get started:
* Why is Luke Cage so much stronger now than he was initially?
The experiment that gave Luke Cage his powers has continued to alter his body chemistry. Over time, he's become stronger and stronger and more and more invulnerable. His bones were also affected by the experiment, which is why his first super-powered act--punching through a solid brick wall at the prison where he was--didn't destroy his hands.
* Why has no one killed the Joker?
When the Batman first debuted, he was noticed by the lords of Chaos and Order. Order quickly claimed him as one of its agents. Chaos created the Joker to maintain balance, and to ensure that balance remained cast a spell of protection over the Joker so that the only one who could actually kill him would be the Batman--who of course, will never do so. Over the years, the Joker has fallen off of cliffs, waterfalls, bridges, been stabbed, shot poisoned, hung, etc. but continues to survive.
You need to be a member of Captain Comics to add comments!
Replies
Wow, I like your Batman/Joker explanation. I haven't heard squat about the Lords of Chaos and Order since reading about them in Dr. Fate and Justice League International and Hawk and Dove way back in the late 80's. That's something they need to bring back in the New DCU.
Peter Parker didn't really make a deal with Mephisto. What really happened was, an odd time effect had compressed his life like a spring, and he was living different phases of his life simultaneously. Now that spring has expanded again, so his marriage to MJ and the birth of their daughter May are back in his future.
I like your Batman/Joker explanation a lot, Randy -- with the caveat that I'd never actually want to read about it in a Batman book. I'd rather see it revealed in Justice League, with Batman dismissing it as hokum, and the Joker simply not caring... giving readers and writers an explanation if they crave one, but it ultimately not having any other effect on the dynamic of the characters.
But seriously -- it's like you channeled Bob Haney, there.
This is my personal theory on the the continiuty of Plastic Man and Blackhawk in the Silver & Bronze Ages.
Why did the original X-Men all get stronger away from Professor X?
Because the Professor knew about their potential and tried to keep them at lower levels so he could keep them as his task force. The stronger they got (the furry Beast, Archangel, morphing Iceman and of course Phoenix), the harder it would be to manipulate them. Deep down, Charles Xavier wanted them to remain his students and continue to obey his instructions. He also feared being abandoned if the truth was revealed and have no protection against Magneto and other evil mutants.
I've gone on record as rejecting the notion that Batman found his parents' killer -- one no-account thug by the name of Joe Chill -- as well as the idea that the murders were a targeted hit rather than a crime of opportunity. However, where's the justice if the killer got clean away?
Well, my pet theory is that, as often happens in life, he did get caught -- but years later, for another crime. Our killer committed a robbery at a TV station and got away after a masked wrestler chose not to stop him from getting on the elevator. Later that night, however, our crook broke into a home and killed an elderly man, someone near and dear to the masked wrestler, who gave chase and confronted our crook in his hideout at an abandoned warehouse.
What bothered me was the reasoning that, if Batman found his parent's killer, it would remove his reason for fighting crime. B***S***! He spent too many years turning himself into a crime-fighter to be that petty. As a victim of violent crime, Bruce Wayne saw a NEED and filled it. He fought crime not for revenge, but to HELP other people who were victims of violent crime, and to help put a stop to such things.
Unfortunately, you had certain writers who were obsessed with the foolish idea that Batman was mentally unbalanced, because why else would he dress up as a bat? Utterly stupid idea and question, because it failed to address EVERY OTHER member of the J.L.A.
Henry R. Kujawa said:
Exactly!
With a bit less vehement verbal punctuation, but fully on board with the spirit of it, I stated the same thing in a thread on the old board----which I believe was before your time, Mr. Kujawa. As I recall, it was a topic discussing the matter of the the pre-Crisis version in which the Batman eventually caught Joe Chill and the post-Crisis revision in which the Masked Manhunter never brought his parents' killer to justice.
I cannot remember whom took which side, but I do recall that a couple of posters in the Never-Caught-Him camp proffered the argument that, once the Batman caught his parents' killer, then he would have no reason to go on being the Batman.
The counter-point to that is precisely what you stated. Bruce Wayne's principal reason for becoming the Batman was to prevent the same tragedy from happening to others and to aid those who did become victims of crime. In the vow he made, he swore to avenge the deaths of his parents "by spending the rest of my life warring on all criminals!"
When the Masked Manhunter finally did bring justice upon Joe Chill---in Batman # 47 (Jun.-Jul., 1948)---it was a personal triumph, but it did not vitiate his vow. There were still plenty of criminals out there to stop.
As to the matter of catching Joe Chill, I understand the dramaturgical reasons CK sees in having the Batman never find his parents' killer. However, I believe that the Joe Chill story in Batman # 47 is more satisfying in terms of depicting the nature and character of the Batman.
Insisting that Batman never catches his parents' killer distorts the vow he took on their deaths and is the first step toward the "Bat-Psycho" character which he has eventually become. By showing Bruce Wayne continuing to fight evil as the Batman, after putting paid to Joe Chill, is in keeping with his original vow and emphasises his altruism.
Now, I do agree with CK that National committed a thematic error in establishing that Chill was hired by mobster Lew Moxon to kill the Waynes---in Detective Comics # 235 (Sep., 1956). Cap pointed out the reason for that in his blog post "'Superman: Earth One' a Disappointment" and his subsequent commentary:
First, the arbitrary nature of Superman’s central tragedy, and how he transforms it into altruism instead of self-pity, is central to his heroism---as it is with Batman and Spider-Man . . . .
. . . [T]he randomness of the tragedies that struck Kal-El, Bruce Wayne and Peter Parker is a major part of their heroism. Fighting a conspiracy is virtually expected, but fighting random death? That's harder to do---much easier to slip into apathy, bitterness and self-pity . . . Also, having everything connected and explained doesn't look much like life, which is entirely unscripted.
I think DC itself figured this out some years after the fact and attempted what damage control it could. In the mid-1970's, DC felt it needed to bring the fans who came in late up to speed on the differences between the Earth-One and Earth-Two Supermen and Batmen---sometimes they did it with text pieces or in letter cols; other times, by just slipping the distinctions into the stories proper. At that time, one of the ways the Batmen of the two Earths were distinguished was by establishing that on Earth-One, Lew Moxon had hired Joe Chill to kill Thomas Wayne. Chill staged his hit on Dr. Wayne to look like a hold-up and he also gunned down Martha Wayne when she wouldn't stop screaming.
On Earth-Two, however, Chill was genuinely committing an armed robbery, and his selection of the Waynes was purely random. When Thomas Wayne attempted to thwart Chill, Chill shot Wayne and Martha Wayne, possessing "a weak heart", died from a heart attack induced by the shock of seeing her husband killed.
While I don't care for the "weak heart" explanation for Mrs. Wayne's death---having Chill gun them both down is a crueller, more savage act and more likely to inspire young Bruce to take the path he did---by having their deaths result from a random encounter is better, for the reasons Cap described above.
Originally both the Earth-Two/Golden Age Waynes were gunned down in the robbery. It was Batman #47 where Joe Chill was named that brought up the weak heart, most propably due to changing sensabilities and the toning down of violence in Post-WWII comics.
But I agree with Henry and the Commander. It wasn't mere vengeance that motivated Bruce Wayne to become the Batman but a higher calling, an almost sacred duty. The mantle of the Bat was/is a great burden but he bears it for the betterment of society and the protection of the innocent. And that no child becomes an orphan due to crime and no criminal can escape justice.
However I could have done without Bruce's housekeeper, Mrs. Chilton being Joe Chill's mother! Holy melodrama!
Commander Benson:
"The counter-point to that is precisely what you stated. Bruce Wayne's principal reason for becoming the Batman was to prevent the same tragedy from happening to others and to aid those who did become victims of crime. In the vow he made, he swore to avenge the deaths of his parents "by spending the rest of my life warring on all criminals!""
My very first exposure to Batman (in fact, to the whole whacky concept of costumed crime-fighters) was the very 1st episode of BATMAN (1966) with Adam West. It was one of the few TV shows that I managed to catch from the beginning (must have been those promos-- or the fact that I used to watch what was on in that slot before). And in his 1st scene, Bruce Wayne is having a meeting with some people at Wayne Manor, where, very briefly, he explains, "If only there's been an organization like the Wayne Foundation to help victims of violent crimes when my parents were killed..." It goes by so FAST, blink and you might miss it. But there it was. They explained his origin in a couple of sentences, then moved on (rather than harping on in endlessly as was done in the 90's) In fact, by my count, the TV series only ever touched on Batman's origin 3 times (once per season!) and the 3rd time, so obliquely I had to see the episode several times before I even caught it (it was very cleverly done-- and also kinda hilarious, if you see it). So the TV Bruce Wayne is working non-stop to make the world a better place-- with both The Wayne Foundation, and with Batman.
It's interesting to compare the 1943 and 1966 film versions of Bruce Wayne. In '43, he seems to exhibit 3 distinct personas-- the "bored playboy" act around his girlfriend (straight out of ZORRO), the "brilliant scientist" in his lab, and the "fun-loving daredevil crimefighter" in costume. The '66 version only seems to have ONE personality (kinda like George Reeves on SUPERMAN, heh). I'm not sure which I prefer. It is kinda funny when one of the villains accuses Wayne of being "almost as bad as Batman".
Much later, it's kinda ironic how Mike Barr's depiction of BATMAN (in THE OUTSIDERS) was attacked as being too one-dimensional and hard-lined. Because after the CRISIS, Barr's depiction seemed a nice guy by comparison what he became under editor Denny "drag 'em thru the mud" O'Neil. I found it ironic that just as BATMAN in the comics became more and more unlikable, the '89 Tim Burton movie came out and showed a far more likable, vulnerable Bruce (and Alfred once more a real sweatheart, just like on the '66 show). The 1st Burton film contained the best elements from almost every existing version of the character up to that point, but my favorite part were the ones most people didn't seem to realize were there-- the parts that came straight from the '66 show. (Tilted camera-angles when the baddies go into action, a Batmobile that shoots flames out of the back, etc.) I wish the 3 films that followed had been more like the style of the 1st one (except maybe with better writing-- instead of going completely the other way).
Philip Portelli said:
True, but when it came time for DC to definitively establish the differences between the Batmen of the two Earths, it arbitraily chose to ascribe the "weak heart" version of Mrs. Wayne's death from Batman # 47 to Earth-Two, even though the good woman was, indeed, gunned down next to her husband in the first telling of the Batman's origin, in Batman # 1 (Spring, 1940).
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next