Remember the time Alfred turned out to be the Joker? (i.imgur.com)

{batman}

1456 ups - 339 downs = 1117 votes

145 comments submitted at 17:37:50 on Jan 22, 2013 by I_know_nothing_atall

  • [-]
  • D4rthkitty
  • -112 Points
  • 20:59:29, 22 January

You are confusing genius with idiocy

  • [-]
  • rusty73581
  • 19 Points
  • 21:10:01, 22 January

Thats like going into an art subreddit and saying davinci was a moron.

Do you even know who Gaiman is you fuckwit?

Edit: also in this context it would be idiot, idiot.

  • [-]
  • Ingenium21
  • 6 Points
  • 21:29:21, 22 January

not really, you can love Neil Gaiman and still think WHTTCC was retarded. Which I thought it was.

  • [-]
  • rusty73581
  • 10 Points
  • 21:38:12, 22 January

Reasonable. Gaiman is still a genius and arguably the most prolific/game changing comic book writer of our generation.

My qualm is not with his batman book being subpar. It is specifically with Gaiman being called an idiot.

  • [-]
  • wieners
  • -13 Points
  • 21:57:31, 22 January

He may write well but if you've ever met him in person he's a pompous ass who thinks everyone is below him.

  • [-]
  • neubi
  • 10 Points
  • 22:30:56, 22 January

That's weird, he seems to take time to answer lots of question on his blog, and he even does signing tours, and everytime he post he does it with a lot of respect and humility. I didn't meet him, but he appears to be pretty chill, it's actually weird that you say he is a pompous ass.

Or maybe, what is happening is that what you are saying is the biggest lie since someone said that Bruce Wayne isn't Batman.

  • [-]
  • Ultra-ChronicMonstah
  • 3 Points
  • 22:02:26, 22 January

To be fair, so are a lot of talented people, both alive and dead. I try not to let the person behind the words affect how I enjoy the story too much.

  • [-]
  • eisinger2
  • 5 Points
  • 22:45:52, 22 January

I've met him multiple times. This could not be further from the truth. He's quite humble.

  • [-]
  • wieners
  • -7 Points
  • 22:55:59, 22 January

I guess that's why his Mall of America book signing I worked was "beneath him" and why he left early. But then again it was a book signing and not a comic book signing.

  • [-]
  • eisinger2
  • 6 Points
  • 23:07:08, 22 January

Would that be the signing in 2005 at Sam Goody? The one that had terrible "rules" and was terribly organized?

  • [-]
  • wieners
  • -2 Points
  • 00:53:46, 23 January

I've said too much.

  • [-]
  • eisinger2
  • 1 Points
  • 01:00:59, 23 January

What does that even mean?

  • [-]
  • fench
  • 3 Points
  • 01:36:43, 23 January

This I can agree with

  • [-]
  • rusty73581
  • 1 Points
  • 22:19:15, 22 January

Thats fucking unfortunate. I believe you but damn...why...

  • [-]
  • theworldbystorm
  • 2 Points
  • 02:48:17, 23 January

I've met him and he's quite nice. Though kind of shy and absent-minded.

  • [-]
  • omasque
  • -11 Points
  • 21:29:51, 22 January

That's like saying the president deserved the Nobel peace prize because he's the president. I'm a huge fan of Gaiman, but Alfred being the Joker is slightly too much douchebaggery for me to swallow.

  • [-]
  • Stormwatch36
  • 20 Points
  • 21:41:39, 22 January

Did you guys even read the fucking comic? It sure doesn't seem like it. The Joker is at the funeral, as a separate character. Immediately after Alfred finishes talking, Batman even directly says:

>Do you know how much of that story is impossible? Alfred couldn't have been The Joker. I mean, I can see The Joker, sitting there...

You know you have to actually read the words on the book in front of you, right? You can't just look at the pretty pictures and expect to understand it.

  • [-]
  • omasque
  • -18 Points
  • 21:53:15, 22 January

I didn't read the comic sir, merely participated in the reddit thread dedicated to its existence. And having only thin sliced the sample available here, can safely say that it feels like Gaiman attempting to tell a story that doesn't strike me as true to the character of Alfred, even if, as you say, I've wasn't legitimately revealed as The Joker here.

  • [-]
  • neubi
  • 6 Points
  • 22:32:39, 22 January

At least read the comic if you want to voice your opinion.... Whatever happened to the caped crusader's even on the recommended reading sidebar....

  • [-]
  • omasque
  • -6 Points
  • 23:18:45, 22 January

I'm prohibited from commenting on the one scrap of it that I have seen, despite my unqualified disclosure that I'm commenting purely on those few panels? Gosh.

  • [-]
  • ggg730
  • 2 Points
  • 01:08:01, 23 January

You're not prohibited from doing anything much like we are not prohibited for thinking you're a bit of a dingus for voicing your uninformed opinion.

  • [-]
  • omasque
  • 1 Points
  • 01:21:59, 23 January

It's worth pointing out that my original comment addresses the fallacy that this was good storytelling because it came out of Neil Gaiman. Having said that, I also can't get behind the notion that Alfred would become the Joker as a foil for Bruce, regardless of the context. As an aside, now that I have some of that context through the comments here, I still wouldn't anticipate enjoying that particular story, but leave room for the possibility that I could be proven wrong.

  • [-]
  • canuckfanatic
  • 1 Points
  • 01:36:25, 23 January

You don't know whether or not it's good story telling unless you read the full comic. It's like if I sat in a room full of doctors and then tried to open a clinic because I heard all the other doctors talking about their practice. You're entitled to your opinion, obviously, but you will downvoted until you've read the full comic and have formed an opinion after reading the story.

Although, at this point you're probably going to biased while you read the story so that would affect how you receive the story.

  • [-]
  • easybuttonaddict
  • 4 Points
  • 22:00:48, 22 January

Think less Dark Knight, more silver age goofiness.

  • [-]
  • SirPringles
  • 1 Points
  • 22:37:27, 22 January

This particular story (about Alfred being the Joker) is one of many in the book. It spans perhaps four or five pages, while the rest is different stories about the Caped Crusader. I strongly recommend reading it, I think you might find the Alfred/Joker story more enjoyable than it is given here. And even though it is sort of spoiled already, the rest of the book is brilliant as well!

  • [-]
  • rusty73581
  • 11 Points
  • 21:36:26, 22 January

No...actually no its nothing like that at all. You can say you dislike him but to say he's an idiot is a vast overstatement and frankly untrue. Dude has forgotten more about comics than everyone on this subreddit combined has ever known.

Alfred being the joker and his reason for doing so is in its own way the ultimate demonstration of his commitment to Bruce. I apologize if it ruffled your close minded feathers.

Thats kind of Gaiman's thing.

  • [-]
  • jackofallhearts
  • 2 Points
  • 01:02:19, 23 January

And if you haven't read his Sandmam series yet... Shit is INTENSE.

I say it really feels like it feeds the soul it's so good.

  • [-]
  • rusty73581
  • 1 Points
  • 01:39:22, 23 January

Sandman has and probably always will be my favorite comic series. It is a testament to how completely crazy the genre can be and the amazing things its capable of in the right hands.

  • [-]
  • jackofallhearts
  • 2 Points
  • 02:17:30, 23 January

It really is pure genius. Just like... oh Lucifer? Yeah throw him in there, we'll have him watch a sunset and tell god it's beautiful AFTER HE LOCKS HELL AND LEAVES FOREVER... Yeah Neil loves gods and demons and ghosts and curses and when he is on it's true magic to read.

  • [-]
  • fench
  • 1 Points
  • 01:41:09, 23 January

Did you just quote a Dylan song in defense of Neil Gaiman?
http://i.imgur.com/E3W1E34.gif

  • [-]
  • D4rthkitty
  • -20 Points
  • 21:39:55, 22 January

I have read alot of Neil Gaiman's work, and some of it, like the Sandman, was phenomenal. However, the idea that Alfred was the joker was the biggest piece of shit I have ever read in the history of Batman, and there has been a ton of shitty Batman ideas over the years

If you are defending Joker as Alfred, you clearly don't care about things like plot holes and sheer stupidity, as long as there is an interesting 'twist'. Even if it makes absolutely no damn sense

  • [-]
  • Ghopper101
  • 12 Points
  • 21:47:55, 22 January

READ THE COMIC. That was the point!

  • [-]
  • D4rthkitty
  • -10 Points
  • 21:51:18, 22 January

I did read the comic, and it was not good. It was based off a quirky premise, and tried to get away with it by claiming it was an alternate universe and an one shot.

  • [-]
  • SirPringles
  • 4 Points
  • 22:41:52, 22 January

It wasn't one alternate universe, it was multiple. It tied together all different stories about the Batman, giving a somewhat (relatively) logical explanation to the many different kinds of Batman. It's nothing else than the usual Multiple-Comicbook-Universe gag put into one book, giving Batman a worthy ending and a reason for the differences over the years.

  • [-]
  • fench
  • 2 Points
  • 01:44:09, 23 January

Read the comic again then, because you clearly didn't understand what was going on.

  • [-]
  • rusty73581
  • 5 Points
  • 21:47:15, 22 January

If you are really comparing Gaiman's alternate universe ideas to something along the lines of M Night Shymalans blatant hackery then I don't know where to go from here. It was meant as a thought experiment or a myth, a story to make you think.

Im sorry that all you could see it as was a bullshit twist. As if popular comics aren't rife with them.

You should probably avoid marvel 1602 as well then. Blatant plot holes in that too.

  • [-]
  • Navii_Zadel
  • 1 Points
  • 02:07:10, 23 January

You are right, Gaiman's Batman story was really only meant to add to the mythos. It was not a literal plot. It just plays with the Batman universe and lore. Therefore, there are no plot holes; just a series of ideas playing off Batman history, themes, etc.

  • [-]
  • bastardsnow
  • 5 Points
  • 21:57:22, 22 January

I do care about an interesting one-off take on a classic character that understands the malleability of mythology and storytelling and uses his vision to take 2 familiar characters and turn them into something completely different.

You lack imagination.

  • [-]
  • D4rthkitty
  • -5 Points
  • 22:11:31, 22 January

No, I do not lack imagination, I have standards. The entire concept of the story was the Bruce Wayne wants to be Batman, that it is some kind of reward for him, and that is not true.

It is like all of those bad writers who make Spiderman an emo little bitch, I don't dislike it because I lack imagination, I don't like it because it is not true to the character

  • [-]
  • bastardsnow
  • 6 Points
  • 22:15:18, 22 January

But this has nothing to do with Batman. It's being true to the character of Alfred in a really interesting way, showing what he's willing to do-what he's willing to sacrifice-for Master Wayne.

  • [-]
  • D4rthkitty
  • -5 Points
  • 22:31:40, 22 January

But Batman does not need the Joker. So that logic is flawed to begin with

  • [-]
  • bastardsnow
  • 2 Points
  • 22:33:41, 22 January

Since when?

  • [-]
  • D4rthkitty
  • -6 Points
  • 22:44:55, 22 January

Since when did Batman need the Joker?

  • [-]
  • Teth-Diego
  • -1 Points
  • 23:27:17, 22 January

Right from the start of batman's own title, otherwise they would have let the charqacter die as was originally planned.

  • [-]
  • jackofallhearts
  • 3 Points
  • 01:06:13, 23 January

Always. It's a VERY common theme throughout Batman's prolific comic history. It's said in like 4 or 5 episodes of the animated series and a ton of comics too. Batman being defined by his nemesises.

  • [-]
  • bastardsnow
  • 2 Points
  • 23:40:27, 22 January

Since when did a hero not need a nemesis?

  • [-]
  • easybuttonaddict
  • 2 Points
  • 21:59:39, 22 January

...You know this wasn't meant to be cannon, right?

  • [-]
  • jasonws
  • 2 Points
  • 22:45:16, 22 January

Yeah, anybody that thinks this is cannon should go read Flashpoint: Batman... Your mind will be abso-frickin-lutely blown after that one, lol.

  • [-]
  • zack10house
  • 2 Points
  • 01:23:57, 23 January

That is such a good book though.

  • [-]
  • jasonws
  • 1 Points
  • 02:26:32, 23 January

Oh it's a great book. One of my favorites.

  • [-]
  • D4rthkitty
  • -7 Points
  • 22:00:58, 22 January

Yes, but that is a crappy excuse for poor writing

  • [-]
  • easybuttonaddict
  • 2 Points
  • 22:09:05, 22 January

But how is it poor writing? Taking it out of the context of creating plotholes, it was a fascinating exploration of Alfred's relation to Bruce, and the dependency Bruce has on Batman to function.

  • [-]
  • D4rthkitty
  • -7 Points
  • 22:21:29, 22 January
  1. Because Batman does not have the need of a Moby Dick, or some other great Arch-villian. To sell comics, the writer needs to give Batman one, but Batman himself does not need to fight the most insane and unique criminals in existence to fight. He would be content on talking on the drug dealers and pimps. The murder of his parents is what made him, and drives him. He doesn't need anything else

  2. It was not about Bruce's dependency to Batman, rather it was more about the idea that he wants to be Batman. It even refers to being Batman as a reward for him

  • [-]
  • Killbert0
  • 1 Points
  • 02:08:25, 23 January

Please read the book, you might enjoy it and understand why, unless you already have read it then I'll just assume Neil Gaiman's genius (or idiocy) isn't just for you. Have a good day.

  • [-]
  • D4rthkitty
  • -1 Points
  • 02:12:23, 23 January

I read it, and I stand it is utter piece of garbage. He has good works, but this book was pure idiocy. It felt like a gimmick the entire time I read it

  • [-]
  • hett
  • 1 Points
  • 22:44:36, 22 January

so brave