Red Hood and the Outlaws #25 Preview/Discussion

[G-Potion]

Do you Recommend this issue as a Jumping on point

As good as it is by itself, it's the climax of everything that has been building up since #1 so if you want the full experience, start from the beginning or at least mid-point. However jumping on at this point will give you context for #26 which is where it goes completely new direction, to which the reactions have been divisive so far, mind you.

[G-Potion]

Unfortunately, not many people are able to see this. I'm tired of arguing with some batman fans, and at this point, I just give up on trying to make them understand what the actual issue is and why Bruce did wrong. Some even insist in that Jason was trying to fight back. Fighting back, Jason, in this issue. Yeah...

This is a tricky thing to argue because even in the camp who says Bruce messed up horribly, there are still at least two sides, one cursing Lobdell to oblivion and the other conceding that it is unfortunately also consistent with how Bruce has been written many times in modern comics, the crap he used to throw at his kids (Jason in Ethiopia cough).

[Zaresh]

This is a tricky thing to argue because even in the camp who says Bruce messed up horribly, there are still at least two sides, one cursing Lobdell to oblivion and the other conceding that it is unfortunately also consistent with how Bruce is written many times in modern comics, the crap he used to throw at his kids (Jason in Ethiopia cough).

It's nuts. He has been written like that on (65%) and off (35%) more than, what? 15 years by now? One of the reasons I dislike Batman nowadays. Not that is something wrong: it gives him flaws, just flaws I'm not going to like to read in a character that is supposed to be more... heroic? Or at least, a role model good enough to inspire other vigilantes.

Edit: It's like Dick not messing up and choosing the wrong choice (relationship wise, emotional wise, whatever. Not in his job, I mean) in the most delicate moment. It's kind of a thing since the 90's, or even a bit earlier, I think.

[Rise]

Unfortunately, not many people are able to see this. I'm tired of arguing with some batman fans, and at this point, I just give up on trying to make them understand what the actual issue is and why Bruce did wrong. Some even insist in that Jason was trying to fight back. Fighting back, Jason, in this issue. Yeah...

Is this for real? It's so painfully clear and you have to read the issue with eyes closed to think he was. Are you sure they aren't just trolling?

[Rise]

This is a tricky thing to argue because even in the camp who says Bruce messed up horribly, there are still at least two sides, one cursing Lobdell to oblivion and the other conceding that it is unfortunately also consistent with how Bruce has been written many times in modern comics, the crap he used to throw at his kids (Jason in Ethiopia cough).

To fair, it's really not consistent with how Lobdell has been writing Batman. A lot of people (fans and non fans) felt that Batman was overly violent and super harsh with Jason in this issue.

I myself not sure how to feel about it.

[G-Potion]

To fair, it's really not consistent with how Lobdell has been writing Batman. A lot of people (fans and non fans) felt that Batman was overly violent and super harsh with Jason in this issue.

I myself not sure how to feel about it.

To be honest with you I didn't expect Lobdell to write Bruce that way either because usually his guest characters are on the nicer spectrum. But then again, other times he wrote Bruce, the factors that caused Bruce to fly off the handle were absent. It could have been shown a little more, but I do think that amid the rage and irrationality, there's some anguish and helplessness in there with the "You could stay free". Possibly if it were in Bruce's POV, we could have seen that more clearly.

[G-Potion]

It's nuts. He has been written like that on (65%) and off (35%) more than, what? 15 years by now? One of the reasons I dislike Batman nowadays. Not that is something wrong: it gives him flaws, just flaws I'm not going to like to read in a character that is supposed to be more... heroic? Or at least, a role model good enough to inspire other vigilantes.

The thing is, of the two extremes I'd rather Lobdell write it as he did instead of making it a Feel Good moment. Not because I hate the latter, but because DC really needs to see that this is the culmination of how they've been handling Bat Dad, especially when it comes to his adopted children, and fans are not happy with it. Lobdell didn't pull this out of nowhere.

[JasonTodd428]

To fair, it's really not consistent with how Lobdell has been writing Batman. A lot of people (fans and non fans) felt that Batman was overly violent and super harsh with Jason in this issue.

I myself not sure how to feel about it.

True enough, however it is pretty consistent with the way Batman has been written by other writers and I doubt very much that most fans aren't aware of some of the things Bruce has done to his children over the years. Just some recent examples: Tomasi had Batman take Jason to the place were he died without thinking of how it would effect him on a psychological level. Snyder had Batman punch both Dick and Harper (the first in order to see if Dick had the same electrum tooth other Talon's had and the second just because he wanted to keep her off the streets.) and those were not "love taps" either and he was also emotionally overwrought both times as well. I'm sorry but if you take things like this into account then Lobdell is writing Bruce exactly the way others have down when his emotions are running high. Honestly it's really Lobdell that's been writing him inconsistently compared to everyone else when he writes those Batdad moments. I love those but to be frank no one else has really written Bruce like that with any of his other children overmuch in recent years.

Honestly it was overly brutal and unnecessarily harsh to Jason. I doubt that Bruce would have done this to ANY of the others.

[Sergard]

I remember that analysis of Jason being stressed and therefore making bad decisions. The same should be factored into Bruce' outburst of rage. Recently his family seems to be in constant danger of falling apart:
- Batwoman killing Clayface
- the ruined wedding with Catwoman
- Duke being hurt in an explosion
- Damian "being" the son of Deathstroke

There is probably more I don't know about. Jason is only the last straw to make Bruce snap. But I don't want to defend Bruce. I'm still surprised that he went straight for Jason and said that he killed the Penguin (although the Penguin is still alive and in "critical condition"). And there are similarities to issue 1 when Jason "shot" the mayor live on TV - but Bruce doesn't seem to doubt the attempted assassination on the Penguin for a second.

[Rise]

To be honest with you I didn't expect Lobdell to write Bruce that way either because usually his guest characters are on the nicer spectrum. But then again, other times he wrote Bruce, the factors that caused Bruce to fly off the handle were absent. It could have been shown a little more, but I do think that amid the rage and irrationality, there's some anguish and helplessness in there with the "You could stay free". Possibly if it were in Bruce's POV, we could have seen that more clearly.

Batman being really upest is understandable. Jason really messed up with how he handled the situation with Penguin (and he himself acknowledged his mistake last issue), but Batman's reaction was so over the top and I find it hard to believe that he would still hit Jason like that after seeing him scream in anguish for his teammates when he saw them disappear.

Lobdell put himself in really hard situation here. How is he going to handle their relationship from now on? Is he going to throw that moment under the rug and pretend it never happened? Or is he going to have Jason sucking it up and easily forgive Batman for what he did?

[Rise]

True enough, however it is pretty consistent with the way Batman has been written by other writers and I doubt very much that most fans aren't aware of some of the things Bruce has done to his children over the years. Just some recent examples: Tomasi had Batman take Jason to the place were he died without thinking of how it would effect him on a psychological level. Snyder had Batman punch both Dick and Harper (the first in order to see if Dick had the same electrum tooth other Talon's had and the second just because he wanted to keep her off the streets.) and those were not "love taps" either and he was also emotionally overwrought both times as well. I'm sorry but if you take things like this into account then Lobdell is writing Bruce exactly the way others have down when his emotions are running high. Honestly it's really Lobdell that's been writing him inconsistently compared to everyone else when he writes those Batdad moments. I love those but to be frank no one else has really written Bruce like that with any of his other children overmuch in recent years.

I expected better from Lobdell and this is the problem. I always considered him one of few writers who wrote Batman decently and not as self-centred jerk.

[Zaresh]

Is this for real? It's so painfully clear and you have to read the issue with eyes closed to think he was. Are you sure they aren't just trolling?

Btw, with the revelation with last few pages. What do you think Solitary's plan was?

For real, truly. Just go to r/DCComics. Some user even tried to make a thread about how he wasn't fighting back and got backfired by the people that couldn't see it yesterday, if I didn't see mirages, I mean (because later on I lost that thread and couldn't find it). Apparently, Jason shooting and merely grazing Bruce leg with one bullet when he was at his side, or kicking-venting Bruce when Jason was about to be ambushed from behind is proof enough of how dangerous Jason was and how in the mood for a fight he was, for some users. I found the same reaction in other places. So... not so clear, it seems. It really seemed genuine.

Regarding Willis plans... No idea. Maybe throwing out of Gotham all the big names of the good and the bad guys, and putting Jason in charge. I mean, if he's a ghost-y person, he really cannot gain anithing from putting himself as the big fish, would be better to play his pawn: Jason.

But, wouldn't it be quite awesome if we end with a Hamlet scenario here?

[JasonTodd428]

I expected better from Lobdell and this is the problem. I always considered him one of few writers who wrote Batman decently and not as self-centred jerk.

To be honest with you I was waiting for the ax to fall because honestly Bruce acting like a "good dad" is not really how other writers handle him ever these days. While I love Lobdell for actually writing Bruce that way I also felt it wasn't really consistent with what every other writer was doing. To be honest I don't blame Lobdell for this half as much as I blame those who have, over the years, turned him into Batjerk. If those writer hadn't started Bruce down that road then maybe he wouldn't have been written as a grade A asshat here.

[Rise]

To be honest with you I was waiting for the ax to fall because honestly Bruce acting like a "good dad" is not really how other writers handle him ever these days. While I love Lobdell for actually writing Bruce that way I also felt it wasn't really consistent with what every other writer was doing. To be honest I don't blame Lobdell for this half as much as I blame those who have, over the years, turned him into Batjerk. If those writer hadn't started Bruce down that road then maybe he wouldn't have been written as a grade A asshat here.

I get what you are saying, but I never considered Bruce to be a good father (the only version of him that worthy of being called that is his early 80s self before the first crisis). I even agreed with Jason when he said that Batman isn't family in the way that matter and believe that he might not even see him as a father figure since the face off in UTRH (I remember arguing with our fellow users about it before in Jason's thread).

I just liked how Lobdell wrote him as a decent person at least.

[Aioros22]

For real, truly. Just go to r/DCComics. Some user even tried to make a thread about how he wasn't fighting back and got backfired by the people that couldn't see it yesterday, if I didn't see mirages, I mean (because later on I lost that thread and couldn't find it). Apparently, Jason shooting and merely grazing Bruce leg with one bullet when he was at his side, or kicking-venting Bruce when Jason was about to be ambushed from behind is proof enough of how dangerous Jason was and how in the mood for a fight he was, for some users. I found the same reaction in other places. So... not so clear, it seems. It really seemed genuine.

Regarding Willis plans... No idea. Maybe throwing out of Gotham all the big names of the good and the bad guys, and putting Jason in charge. I mean, if he's a ghost-y person, he really cannot gain anithing from putting himself as the big fish, would be better to play his pawn: Jason.

But, wouldn't it be quite awesome if we end with a Hamlet scenario here?

Reddit is that place where they demonize a character like Ted Mosby from himym as that unbearable sheeply standard of the Nice GuyTM while patting the character of Barney Stintson in the back. And the same goes for feminists uttering the show as rainbow sexism as well.

It's another Tumblr, there is pretty good content but you need to wade throught the symptomatic nature of inter-bullshit.