Jim Gordon prepares to hunt down the Joker, as forces align against the Clown Prince of Crime, in The Joker #2, with a lead story written by James Tynion IV, drawn by Guillem March, colored by Ari Prianto and lettered by Tom Napolitano.
And in a much less somber corner of DC’s publishing line, Batman asks Mystery Inc. to help solve a case that stretches back to the earliest days of his career in The Batman and Scooby-Doo Mysteries #1 written by Ivan Cohen, drawn by Dario Brizuela, colored by Franco Rieso and lettered by Saida Temofonte.
Matt Lazorwitz: I found the two books we’re discussing this week enjoyable, but boy, they could not have been more different. Joker remains this intense character piece, while Batman and Scooby-Doo Mysteries is … Batman and Scooby-Doo. It really shows how malleable the character of Batman is, as he works in both of these settings.
Will Nevin: I guess we could split the difference and include the Punchline backup, but that would require us to talk about said backup that I find revolting in terms of what a shock it is to read such a good story like Joker and then turn a page to find … whatever that is. But, yes, to your point, Batman is open to so many different interpretations, from Batman ’66 (a marvelous comic series and a fun television show until the production budget got seriously crunched) to Dark Knight Returns, and most of them have some redeeming quality. (Unless we’re talking Kevin Smith’s Widening Gyre.) These ones this week? Oh yeah, they were the good stuff.
The Family Gordon
ML: Listen, I’m going to be up front here: To me, Jim Gordon is probably one of the best non-costumed supporting characters in comics, up there with Alfred, J. Jonah Jameson and the Kents. There have been more than a handful of stories over the years that have focused a spotlight on him, and this one, if it keeps up at the quality level, will be remembered as one of the best. This series takes us into Jim’s mind and world, and while large amounts of narration don’t always work, with this dark, almost noir feel to this book? It really works for me here.
WN: I can’t help but compare this series to Batman/Catwoman and Tynion’s main Batman — the former is tripping over itself to be the prestige series Joker so clearly and cleanly is, while the latter is so focused on introducing trite new characters, it can’t seem to focus on anything. (Apparently we’re in the minority on that last point, but that’s OK; people can be wrong about stuff.) This book, though, simply hits all the right spots — at one point (I kid you not), I literally sighed in contentment. I was that satisfied with this read. Gordon is the heart and the soul of this series, and every moment to this point has felt in line with the decades of characterization we’ve gotten on him.
ML: We’ll talk a little bit more about new characters in the next section of this review, but to the point you just made, it absolutely does. This book is doing what Infinite Frontier has promised: It’s looking at all those decades of continuity and taking what matters and streamlining it down. Jim’s rage at Batgirl throughout so much of the past decade due to her interactions with James Jr. has always struck me as off note, especially with how hard he was on the kid, and it was a major retcon, as it was revealed in the early ’90s he knew Barbara was Batgirl. So directly addressing all that continuity tangle was a smart move, but was done in a way that didn’t bog the story down and talked about the characters in a smart way.
I love dad Jim Gordon. He’s one of comics’ most realistic fathers. He isn’t perfect, like Jonathan Kent or Uncle Ben, and he’s not an S.O.B. who’s a plot device. He’s a realistic and well-rounded father.
WN: I absolutely agree with your point about not getting stuck in a continuity quagmire; this issue addresses history without being obsessed with it, dealing with Barbara’s shooting, both of her secret identities, Bruce Wayne’s money troubles and the A-Day attacks in an incredibly smooth way. To me, not only does it represent the sum of Gordon’s character, but by bringing up the Infinite Frontier-era status quo changes, it solidly grounds the series in the current line. Therefore, not only is it better than Bat/Cat — it’s also more indispensable.
ML: This issue tells us so much about who Gordon is. This is a guy who is clever enough to lie, or at least obfuscate, to Batman, and he absolutely knows how to do it. There are members of the Justice League who can’t do that!
WN: And this is the best version of Gordon, a guy who could say to either Batman or Batgirl, “Yeah, I know who the hell you are. Don’t insult my intelligence.”
What’s So Funny, Joker?
ML: So we’ve given Tynion a hard time about all of his new characters he’s introducing in Batman, yes?
WN: Because many of them are shit, yes. And the execution is shit.
ML: I’ve been thinking about this, and the problems, when boiled down to the bones for me, are twofold: One is that we’re supposed to want more of these characters from the get-go, and that’s because of WHAT they are, not WHO they are. People can talk about what trope Ghost-Maker is, what makes the Unsanity Collective different from other Gotham villain groups, but we don’t have anything beyond those concepts for most of them. I like Clownhunter the best of the lot because we’ve had at least some depth to him; I know the Batman Annual from last year didn’t do much for you, but I’m a huge Leslie Thompkins fan, so you put most characters in conversation with her, and I think they come out better. With me so far?
WN: I only dinna care for the art style there; the story was great. Continue, sir.
ML: So, here in Joker, we have three more new sets of characters: the Sampson family and the Santa Priscan Bane society with their new female Bane, not to mention The Network and their agent, Desmond. And I don’t mind these as much. And you know why? Because none of them has this artificial feeling, like they’re supposed to be the hot new thing. They feel more organic to the story.
WN: And, for the most part, they’re not entirely new creations. For example, our good friend Cori — who is of the opinion that all the business in Batman is Fine and Good — suggested before this issue that the woman who has hired Gordon is a new character. Well, guess what?!
ML: And let’s be clear here: New characters aren’t by definition bad. I could use a few years without another Two-Face story, or a Riddler story, and I like those characters. It’s the rapidity and focus on the new characters, to the detriment of the world of Gotham and frankly each other, that bugs me.
WN: It’s the meaningless new characters who are the bad ones.
ML: But this is a comic called Joker, so we should probably mention he’s in the book, right? This Joker is another distillation, another Infinite Frontier take, and I like it. He’s not the portentous weirdo of Grant Morrison, or the horrifying jester of Scott Snyder. He may contain those characters, which is fine because the Joker contains multitudes, but he’s a clever madman who does get his jollies killing people, but it’s not reasonless. I like the idea that, to quote the bard, “Though this be madness, yet there is method in’t.”
WN: Here’s a question that gets to the core of *this* Joker that’s going to play out across the line: Why did he orchestrate the A-Day attack? He seems to be simply an agent of chaos, reveling in the madness he creates. But there could be something more complicated here. And it might take us months to find out.
ML: I don’t think he did. I think this is someone trying to use the specter of the Joker to incite Gotham; maybe Simon Saint (a character who I think has potential), maybe another player. Joker is cagey in how he talks about the attack on Arkham: He never actually says he did it, just that the attack on Arkham “rubbed some people the wrong way.”
WN: And when he’s in the clutches of Lady Bane, maybe he cops to not being the guy. That’ll be fun.
Scooby-Doo and Time Travel, Too
ML: And now for something completely different. … Have you ever read Scooby-Doo Team-Up, the predecessor to this book?
WN: I have not. But as I previously mentioned, I’m a big fan of Batman ’66, which seems certainly spiritually related to what we have here.
ML: I believe all of that series is up on DC Universe Infinite, and it is well worth your time. Not only were there more than a couple Batman team-ups, but there were team-ups with most of the Justice League, together as a team and as solo heroes, most of the other Hanna-Barbera characters and a couple issues teaming up with some seriously obscure DC characters. There’s an all-DC ape team-up issue, and one with all of DC’s ’50s/’60s adventure teams: the Challengers of the Unknown, the Sea Devils, Cave Carson and his crew, and the Time Masters. It’s great fun, and while this issue wasn’t written by Sholly Fisch, Ivan Cohen has clearly done his homework and is digging into the past of DC Comics while making the story accessible.
WN: This was a hoot. I loved how we played with the time, setting this in 1960/2021, making it modern and old simultaneously. (“The chemical plants made the sky look different then.” Ha!) It was fun from start to finish, and something felt right — as a digital reader — getting the new chapters on Saturdays.
ML: Oh, that’s cool! Me as a physical reader, it’s a Wednesday thing, but I can appreciate the nostalgia factor of a Saturday drop. I really loved a couple of the Batman history nods: Dr. Carter Nichols was a regular Golden/Silver Age supporting character who helped Batman with sci-fi time travel adventures (and was referenced by Grant Morrison in his run, too), and Velma talks about the home lab of Alfred Stryker, who was the villain in the very first Batman story, “The Case of the Chemical Syndicate.” None of that is required knowledge, but boy it was fun for a fanboy like me to pick up those nods.
Dario Brizuela was the artist on most of the original Scooby-Doo Team-Up series, and his style just feels right for this book. Everyone is on model, and it has a lightness to it that works with the story, but it doesn’t talk (draw?) down to the story it’s working with. It’s cartoony while still having really strong storytelling. I’ve seen so many stories set around animated series that are stiff because the art tries to replicate the animation, forgetting comics are a different medium, but this gets it nicely.
WN: You’re right — everyone plays it absolutely straight here, and that’s the only way something like this works. You’re not doing a series like this to make fun of the absurdity of Batman working with teenagers and a sort-of talking dog. You’re putting out this book to celebrate that inherently funny insanity and what you can do in your universe.
Bat-miscellany
- The nod to cannibals in Hooper County, Texas? Badass Texas Chainsaw Massacre reference there, JTIV.
- If you hadn’t called that out, Brother Will, I would have. Great little moment there.
- Batman: The Detective #1 seemed unlike Tom Taylor’s work in Injustice or DCeased — not only because it was more of a main-universe take on the character, but it was also slower and more ponderous. Not necessarily better or worse, but certainly different.
Matt Lazorwitz read his first comic at the age of five. It was Who's Who in the DC Universe #2, featuring characters whose names begin with B, which explains so much about his Batman obsession. He writes about comics he loves, and co-hosts the creator interview podcast WMQ&A with Dan Grote.
Will Nevin loves bourbon and AP style and gets paid to teach one of those things. He is on Twitter far too often.
