154: Why No Punisher?

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Wow managed to find this in Google, was wondering about it myself.

Think the thread got derailed though to about morality instead of the practicality of having a Punisher.

Someone who may be a private detective, IT guy, marine who can use GPS, Google Earth, iPhones, credit reports to find any person on Earth.

Someone who has a strong sense of justice and is against crooked politicians taking money from lobbyists, against gangsters in the neighborhood.

Someone who can easily buy weapons from a store and has time to isolate their targets one by one.

Someone who lives in a world with so many crime dramas that a perfect crime is not too hard to plan out.

Someone who doesn't simply complain on the internet.

Why no Punisher indeed?

Pseudonym2:

TheUnbeholden:

But by now, somebody - Batman, Robin, Alfred, somebody - should have figured out that it doesn't work.

The only reason it doesn't work is because the Joker is popular characters and writes are too lazy to come up with new characters so they install a revolving door in Arkham Asylum. Obviously, there is no possible way he could escape so many times.

Other than Ennis's version, I never liked the Punisher. He's too one note. I find it easier to believe that a spider bite could give someone superpowers than Punisher being able to escape police detection (He runs around in busy public restaurants without a mask on!) and avoid killing an innocent person (or an undercover cop) with all the bullets flying everywhere.

Also the marvel universe version of him makes no sense. With so many shape shifters, illusionists, psychics, and people from other dimensions running around, how can the Punisher be sure who is guilty? The first issue he showed up in, he tried to kill Spiderman! That's why Batman doesn't kill people and I oppose the death penalty. What if you're wrong about someone being guilty?

The Slavers and Kitchen Irish arc was good though.

it would be an interesting story arc if he ended up killing a bunch of innocent people he thought were guilty and had to deal with it, really thats what I was hoping from death note

Osloq:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
You have to remember that the Punisher and Batman have two different modus operandi.

The Punisher is simply avenging the death of his family on anyone who gets in his way. He's like the Count Of Monte Cristo, in that his vengeance is in order to make himself feel better. He is, when you come down to it, a little self-obsessed in his goal.

Batman, however, fights crime out of a sense of justice. His parents death was crucial in shaping his future, but his crusade isn't simply based on revenge. Rather, it's based more around helping Gotham City and its citizens, a city that deep down he loves. And this is where the crucial difference lies.

Castle, in his pursuit of vengeance, is free to choose whatever means of 'justice' he deems necessary. In most cases, this involves lots of guns. He answers only to himself, so why should he worry about death and murder?

Batman, on the other hand, has to accept responsibilities in his role as protector. He answers not only to himself, but to the city of Gotham as well. In order to fulfil his role as the city's 'Dark Knight' he needs to rise above fascist murder in the streets, and show the citizens of Gotham that he is above the monsters he fights against. Murder can have just as many unforeseen repercussions as letting someone live.

Killing the Joker may save lives. However, it would also cause the inhabitants of the city, both criminals and the innocent, to live in fear of Batman. And that isn't why he donned the cape and cowl.

You also have to remember that if either the Punisher's or Batman's methods did work, comic writers would soon be out of work.

I disagree, I think Batman, in a lot of ways, is self indulgent in his war on crime. The way I've always interpreted him as a character was as someone who hates the criminal fraternity that murdered his beloved parents. He inherited his love of Gotham from his father but didn't have the courage to explore the way of peace so instead he turned to the martial option.

He has no responsibility to anybody in Gotham. He answers to no one except for his own sense of self worth and conscience. While he does not kill anybody his methods are brutal and panic inducing. The original idea behind the bat as a symbol was Bruce Wayne's terror of them as a child. He would become an entity that the criminals of Gotham would fear and they would feel what it was like for the normal citizens. I love Batman but he's a thug who preys on the strong (criminals) out of a need to do something.

That's my personal interpretation anyway.

OT: That was a great read, one of the best I've gone through on this site. I'm definitely going to have to see if I can dig up Ennis' punisher somewhere around here and get into the character again.

not really oslq its quite the opposite (chiming in a bit late but hey better then never) batman invest heavily in Gotham as Bruce Wayne using his inheritance, he feels a responsibility to the people of Gotham,hes the main source of funding for arham when ever it gets destroyed he uses his influence in Washington to try and help the people of Gotham (he tried to stop them from closing off Gotham during no man's land and helped to reopen it)

castle on the other hand dos not invest in anyone or new york(true he don't have as much as Wayne but he dos have an impressive amount from all his busts)he hates the criminal fraternity that murdered his family its frank He answers to no one except for his own sense of self worth and conscience.

there was one batman story in particular shows exactly this. batman is chasing a thief all over Gotham on christmas eve and when he finley catches him in his house he reveals that he did it to support his kids who are right there with him and that hes obviously repent(he returned the goods before batman caught them) and was prepared to go to jail for his crimes batman just looks at him sternly and says not to to it again, and as he leaves he leaves a large amount of cash (enough to keep his family fed for quite some time). the punisher would have just shot the guy in front of his kids and left it at that.
this shows that the punisher is the " thug who preys on the strong (criminals) out of a need to do something" while batman punishes the criminals but works with the system and care for his charges(Gotham and its people)

don't get me wrong i love the punisher as much as i love batman, and your interpretation of batman is probably the right one for you but i myself feel that its the opposite that's true for batman and vice versa the punisher.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here