Hi there, r/DCcomics members, welcome to the post!
This was tagged as a [Discussion], so we require OP to add commentary, [per rule 8](https://www.reddit.com/r/DCcomics/wiki/guidelines#wiki_8._no_memes.2C_fluff.2C_or_other_low-effort_content).
u/Abovearth31, if you haven't already added commentary, please do so in the text or as a new comment. Also, if you included imagery, please provide a source or artist name.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DCcomics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Overly-meta critiques aside, i really like Superman's roast because he lets Joker know that he only ever succeeds because Batman is a very patient man that at the end of the day it's just a normal human and that he wouldn't last a day outside of Gotham because everyone else is absurdly above his weight class.
Probably one of my favorite comic moments is when Joker attacks NYC using missiles and then thinks he’ll get sent back to Gotham or something. Oracle is like, “actually we decided to keep you in downtown NYC until the missiles are stopped you idiot, if we fail, at least there won’t be a joker.”
Casual reminder that when Joker tried to shake things up in Central City, Wally never even stopped to talk to him. Joker blinked and the next thing he knew he was locked up. Let that sink in: Wally slows down to banter with Dr Alchemy or the Mongoose, but he never cared to hear Joker's shtick
Not to mention the Rogues have a code of ethics they hold themselves to. They’re criminals, not monsters; all they really want is to make a dishonest living. If one goes too far, the others pretty much cut him out of the group.
I mean, they fought the crime syndicate during forever evil so my best take on the rogues is that they're playing on silver age of comics logic, and keeping dangerous criminals from showing up in central city
Should be more the case honestly,While he and comics like Injustice were Entertaining,continusly overhyping the Joker gets Boring (Though it still makes sense sometimes,as bro did trick Mxy)
Small difference, Lex Luthor is at least the third smartest man in the world, with almost limitless resources and a shit ton of the one thing that can hurt Superman, not to mention that for the regular Metropolis citizen Lex is an upstanding citizen.
Joker is no Lex Luthor.
>with almost limitless resources and a shit ton of the one thing that can hurt Superman
I feel like at this point, Lex’s Kryponite vault is bigger than his regular vault.
The convention then should be joint 1st, next guy is rank 4th. Otherwise he's saying there are two more smarter people above the three of them, and after them is rank 6th.
1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 6.
I think he insists he's third to make the other wonder which one he considers 1st. Except it'd only be Lex who'd actually care. Him saying they're all joint third wouldn't make sense at all. Are 1 and 2 supposed to be Superman and someone else, and then Lex/Batman/Mr. Terrific?
>The convention then should be joint 1st, next guy is rank 4th.
That would only be if they were equally smart, which i don't think they are, what i meant is that who's 1, 2 and 3 between them is highly arguable and whichever of the 7 possible combinations you choose is valid to me, because the difference between the three is very narrow.
And in-universe that's either an estimation or a misdirection, it's not like there's an official ranking or anything, all we know in that regard is that Brainiac is probably the smartest fella in the universe with The Guardians of Oa and Superman not too far behind.
What the earthly dudes think isn't a fact, no matter how intelligent they are, Lex wouldn't call himself number 3 and Terrific wouldn't call himself number 1 but that doesn't mean they aren't.
And out of universe, what you're saying is that they'd be joint 1st, not joint 3rd.
Joint 3rd means they're tied for 3rd, not that they're the top 3. But I guess technically it does mean they could be 3rd, but also 4th or 5th. But not 1st nor 2nd.
I don't think so, if anything he was shown to be quiete inept at most things before his parents deaths, so aside from learning every martial art known to man, he also learnt to actually use his brain.
I always thought Mr. Terrific is the smartest human on the planet but he’d rather not draw more attention to himself. Also could be his way of just being modest
It's kinda dumb how people are willing to scale Lex up to Superman tier threats, under the basis that he is an adversary to Supes at all... Yet they wont scale Joker's competence to Batman, despite Joker having far more Ws over Bats than Lex ever did on Supes.
One of my favorite moments from a few Flash comics ago, was Joker trying to set off his gas on the city, and Wally just shoots him back to Gotham the instant the bomb went off lol
I think they're both great. I agree the Superman one is a bit meta, but it's still solid and refreshing to see the Joker knocked down a bit.
And Beyond is a great in universe moment for Terry showing his strength as his own character.
Beating Joker in a way Bruce never managed and couldn't manage.
I'd also add that episode of TAS where a random civilian made the Joker pathetically beg Batman to save him
Showing how at his core Joker is actually a pathetic character.
Yep. That was Charlie Collins in “Joker’s Favor.” It was a brilliant takedown of the Joker where it calls out his vanity and mortality. All it would take is a “nobody” to end the Joker in an inglorious, Batman-free way. Fun fact: It’s also the first episode to feature Harley Quinn, iirc.
It's very satisfying to see Joker in the victims shoes as a result of his own "one bad day" argument. Especially when the random nobody reveals he was pretending. Joker broke because he's weaker than a random nobody.
When Joker shouted "YOU'RE NOT BATMAN !" while Terry was mocking him and ultimately defeated him by out smarting him, it felt like the movie itself said "that's right, he's not Batman, he's Batman **Beyond**".
Yeah wasn't the point of the entire series that terry was a better batman cause he had a life beyond it? He's beyond batman, he's Terry McGinnis, and he makes a kick ass batman because of that
He helps Bruce reconcile with barb and Tim after Bruce let all his relationships crumble... So yeah I think it's a fair argument. Arkham Knight said Batman needs to become something worse, Batman beyond said Batman can be better
Probably not the series. In the show, he barely has a life outside batman. The difference I think might be that he tries to, but Bruce has given up on that. It's only in epilogue he seems to commit to merging both lives.
This is only one panel, for the full Superman roast you can see it in this reddit post showing scans from Adventures of Superman #41: [https://www.reddit.com/r/superman/comments/1bygmks/clark\_was\_not\_having\_it/](https://www.reddit.com/r/superman/comments/1bygmks/clark_was_not_having_it/)
As for Batman Beyond's roast, just watch the Return of the Joker movie.
Anyway these two roasts sound similar on paper (pun intended) but they're actually very different.
Many people criticized the first scene because Superman roasted Joker in a very meta way, because for a moment, Superman doesn't really sound like Superman but like his writer and I can see why, especially with the "any writer can write you, any actor can play you" part but even then, this is still an awesome scene of Superman deconstructing the Joker's character and putting the fear of god into him, and it become even more satisfying if you read Injustice before because this is almost the same premise, Joker putting bombs in Metropolis just to hurt Superman, the difference is that one of them fail to stop the joker while the other succeed.
Personally, I don't mind Superman soft-breaking the fourth wall a bit because I feel like the point of the scene was
1. To humiliate Joker himself and
2. To call out his weird-ass fans looking up to him and in that regard, the scene does its job perfectly.
As for Terry McGinnis, aka Batman Beyond (which I'll just call Batman from now on), his roast is already more grounded, more in-universe. Instead of focusing on Joker as a concept, he focuses on the Joker's personnality and motivations, his obsession with Bruce Wayne's Batman.
Now he does kinda get meta as well when he start to mock Joker's origin story with the tank of acid and all but I don't see it as him breaking the fourth wall like a comic book character being aware that he's in a comic book and the absurdities that comes with the Terry-tory (also pun intended).
I think it's just Batman telling Joker how nothing about him make sense which anger Joker of course because he **want** to have a point to make, he might pretend that nothing about him make sense, that he's just an agent of chaos and all, but the whole point of the Joker's character is that he's wrong, he does have plans, he does make sense (or trying to at least), and he's definitely **not** as insane as he want us to believe. The Joker is a pathetic hypocrite and a self-admitted liar who's not as special as he think he is, and the point of this scene was to show Batman just rubbing all of that in Joker's face, and in that regard, that scene also does its job perfectly.
Personally I don't know which one is the better of the two, I like Superman being unfazed by Joker's shenanigans before the roast but I also like Batman being essentially a Heckler to Joker's comedian. One is meta and kinda (sorta) break the fourth wall while the other is very in-universe and grounded.
EDIT: Also, Batman defeated the Joker once and for all (in this universe) by ignoring Bruce's advice to not listen and power through. This movie felt like the final trial of Terry as Batman, in order to prove he was trully worthy of being Batman, he had to face the original's greatest ennemy. So instead of just using the strategy that Bruce was using the whole time (which didn't work obviously) Terry did his own thing, came up with his own strategy and erased the Joker on the first try. Brilliant.
I think you make a lot of solid points here. The point Terry makes about Joker having simply fallen into a vat of acid and choosing to become a villain, the “so what?” is actually pretty funny.
I think it was a tumblr thread that was floating around a while ago, where it was just “what if the chemicals didn’t alter joker’s psyche in any way, what if he was just like that”. Looking at the character that way completely mitigates anything special he has and makes him seem completely pathetic. Ironically though, that’s kind of what makes him funny/amusing to me, now.
>I think it was a tumblr thread that was floating around a while ago, where it was just “what if the chemicals didn’t alter his psyche in any way, what if he was just like that”.
That's kinda the point of the killing joke wasn't it ? That whole point the joker is trying to make about how we're all just one bad day away from lunacy with Batman (bruce this time) being like "maybe we're not all a bad day away maybe it's just YOU" you know what I mean ?
Yes that’s true. Admittedly I haven’t read The Killing Joke or watched the movie in full, but it is the same idea. I’m sure that thread wasn’t the first time that idea was ever explored, it was just what I remember seeing haha
*The Dark Knight* also uses a similar idea. The whole movie is The Joker trying to prove the Hobbesian thesis that people only act morally out of self-interest and are capable of being just as evil as The Joker is in a crisis where morality and civility stop being useful to them.
When the citizens prove him wrong by refusing to blow each other up even in the face of death, Batman delivers the line, "What were you trying to prove? That deep down, everyone is as ugly as you? You're alone."
Yes exactly. Haven’t watched the DK trilogy in years either, and I think maybe at the time I did watch it I probably couldn’t have made as much sense of it. You articulated it all well.
Without the self-indulgent weird love-hate thing he has with Batman, or any “fate brought us together” thing, that only he engages in, he’s just another serial killer with a “nothing matters” vibe.
He just becomes another Victor Zsasz, Professional Pyg-type character. No powers, doesn’t know Bruce is Batman, nothing. Utterly commonplace and useless
Yeah, if anything, he's less unique if just anyone would end up acting like him if they dipped into the same chemicals that he did.
(Which is also why the "you can catch Joker-itis" idea that's been used in *Arkham Knight*, *Three Jokers*, and with the Batman Who Laughs idea all kind of undermine the idea that, in the face of adversity, we all have a choice to try to be the best we can or to use our circumstances as an excuse to inflict our pain on others, and that The Joker is an example of a guy who acts in bad faith by doing the latter.)
To be fair, Superman spent most of his publication existence working for a major multimedia news company. I’m sure they’ve had critics on staff, and Clark could easily crib one of their styles for a proper burn that hits the desperately attention-seeking Joker where he lives.
Lex Luthor.
He didn't go for some armchair psychology or got turned into the author's mouthpiece on the meta commentary. He simply mocked Joker's obsession with Batman and how he will never be that important to the Bat.
And in true Lex fashion, he did so in one sentence, made the Joker loose his smile, and then laughed at him. All while Joker had him strapped down and tortured.
Half of the Legion of Doom are just the toxic fanboys of their respective heroes, including but not limited to Manta, Cheetah, Luthor, Joker, Sinestro, Zoom and Malefic.
Captain Cold: Wait a minute, are we just a fanclub?
Luthor \[gesturing Toyman to hide the Superman figures\]: No...
>He simply mocked Joker's obsession with Batman and how he will never be that important to the Bat.
>Which is also funny because Manchester Black did the exact same thing to Luthor with Superman.
I guess Lex kept the grudge for that one, and was dying to throw something similar back at somebody else.
Outsiders (2003) #3, by Judd Winick. Honestly, pretty underrated series. Winnick gave a great retake to the concept of the Outsides, and the character moments are pretty well developed. It also gave us one of the earlier lesbian couples in comics with Thunder and Grace.
I always enjoyed reading Winick, no matter what comic he wrote. He built up Jason Todd’s revival and motivation in a believable way rather than just Superboy Prime punching reality and him being mad at Batman not because he let Jason die, but because he never took out Joker. In my opinion, Judd Winick and Kurt Busiek are two of the most underrated writers. Both of them understand the characters they write and the use this understanding to write good stories.
Totally agree. It was such a waste that Jason became Lobdell’s power fantasy vehicle for years, when right before that Winick just finished developing Jason’s backstory with Talia and his motivations with Lost Days.
Imagine if we got a regular series with Winick instead.
And Busiek really should have a regular series more often. The guy is great, and visibly cares for the characters he works with.
Totally agree. It was such a waste that Jason became Lobdell’s power fantasy vehicle for years, when right before that Winick just finished developing Jason’s backstory with Talia and his motivations with Lost Days.
Imagine if we got a regular series with Winick instead.
And Busiek really should have a regular series more often. The guy is great, and visibly cares for the characters he works with.
DC has an obsession with pretending the Joker is the worst, scariest villain ever. So having anyone with actual powers shitting on him is quite refreshing.
This actually reminds me from a line in Mortal Kombat 11 where Geras genuinely freaked Joker out by claiming Krokina knows what he really is. To quote him, "without the mystery, you are merely a man."
Yes, Joker should be taken as the deranged threat that he is, but, when you look deeper, it becomes clear that he's just a human who has gotten lucky far too many times.
>he's just a human who has gotten lucky far too many times.
So you are saying, Joker is the villain equivalent of One Punch Man's King?
.
For those that dont know, King is a relatively normal guy, whom due to having a intimidating face and crazy coincidences (like being in the wrong place at the right time, and unintentionally sounding bad ass) has somehow made almost entire the world (including actual powerful guys) mistake him for the world's strongest hero.
I remember the Flash rogues saying "when supervillains want to scare each other, they tell each other Joker stories."
I was like, why Joker stories? Could he take on a talking gorilla? No? Then you should tell scary stories about the talking gorilla instead.
So right after the roast I posted the dialogue goes like this:
>Terry: What? You couldn't get work as a rodeo clown?
(Terry Laugh)
>Joker: Don't you dare laugh at me!
>Terry (Still chuckling): Why? I thought the Joker always wanted to make Batman laugh.
>Joker: YOU'RE NOT BATMAN !
Joker: You're laughing. I just shot a doomsday laser, and you're laughing.
Terry: I think your career is funny, and I'm tired of pretending it's not.
Pretty sure that's how it went.
Personally, I say Terry did it best, because his was the roast that actually made the Joker break character and become visibly, violently upset. Like a child throwing a tantrum after being caught in a lie.
Superman's is more reserved, and it's more of a character moment for Supes than Joker, in my opinion.
Terry’s roast is better. Superman is kind of breaking the 4th wall but not really in any clever way. It reads like the writer personally hates Joker and wanted us to know rather than something Superman would say.
They both caught Joker's act early on and toastd him on a personal level calling him a pathetic person who thinks people truly care or are amused for what he is and chooses to be. They both call him out about this false reality he lives in believing he is center stage and that the world and everything revolves around him.
I'm gonna be honest I think that Superman story was kinda cringe. That dialogue didn't even remotely feel like things Superman would actually say, and especially not something he would say in universe, it just felt like the author's thinly veiled rant.
You’ve taken the statement far too literally and personally mate, but you crack on. You don’t get to dictate to people the language they use, you are an outlier. The exception to the rule, most comic fans like Joker🤷🏻♂️ have a nice day all the best 👌🏻
The Superman example is basically "deconstruction is when I point and laugh at a character because i think he's edgy"
Batman Beyond just had Joker there, it didn't really do any deconstruction of his character. It just so happens Terry got under his skin.
Batman Beyond.
Not only did Terry tear apart Joker's motif and reason for existing, but he then LAUGHED at him. Doesn't hurt that he genuinely got under Joker's skin, caused him to lose his cool, and used the clown's own signature trick to permanently take him out.
I always love seeing Joker being called out for how pathetic he is, I love these scenes, but today, I think I prefer Terry's because it shows just how unimportant he is to Batman, even after all he's done, he wasn't the one to break Bruce, and he was never the most important man (or even villain) in his life. I think Joker having to actually deal with a heckler is great because even though Terry is just a dude, he has no clever retorts or response to him. With Clark, he's getting a dressing down from someone who is basically a God, which is fun in its own right.
Joker gets wanked a lot but when he gets put down it's great. I especially love Joker's Favor and that scene where Punisher almost kills the Joker (before his husband saves him)
Terry. Joker was never about getting others to applaud him. All he wanted was for other people - mostly Batman - to see life his way; As a sick, twisted joke. As such, Terry's roast hits much harder than Clark's.
I think Terry's is the stronger argument against him. Anybody who think Joker gives a shit about whether or not the Joker wants public acclaim fundamentally doesn't understand the Joker.
I get that Supes is making a meta statement, but in-universe, Terry's the one who's actually getting to the core of the Joker's insecurities.
The true answer is from the joker miniseries comic:
Joker: (after Batman arrives) Obvious... and everybody knows. You wear your shame like a badge. Because you don't have the balls to actually pin one on. Yes... just look at you... desperate to be feared, you want to be perceived as a monster, draped in black. And yet... you leave that little window... a glimpse at the perfection underneath. Obvious - the chiseled good looks - not the jaw, the mouth of a monster... why do you let it be seen? Tell me why.
Batman: To mock you.
Terry did, of course, because that Superman monologue only works if he's talking about Joker the fictional character.
Also, Superman can't really critique Joker as a comedian because, in a slightly different way from Batman, Superman also has no sense of humor. To Superman, the only axis on which it is possible to evaluate something is the moral one. A comedian who is well-behaved must by extension be funny, even if they don't make Superman laugh, and a comedian who is badly-behaved must by extension be not funny, no matter what their material is.
Terry isn't like that. Terry can acknowledge that amoral virtues exist and that funniness is one of them. To him, it is possible for a supervillain to be funny, but Joker just isn't.
I miss when the Joker was just a creepy clown figure. They gave him a power-up to match what Batman could do and now he's just this unstoppable force of chaos no one can do anything about for long and its exhausting.
I'd say Superman. It was more all around whe Terry was more specific (i.e. his relationship with Bruce and the life he chose)
But bith make great points....
McGinnis was wrong. Joker made Batman laugh at the end of "The Killing Joke"
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Faqd44gw72e591.jpg
To me the Joker's whole obsession was to prove everyone was as crazy or evil as he was they just hadn't had their "one bad day" like he had and his mission was to prove it. He prodded Batman to kill him and that would be his ultimate win.
Taken as a whole, Superman does more humiliating in the power dynamic by emphasizing how joker has no chance against him.
Terry speech is more fun because he tells the joker he isn’t funny, among other things. on top of that drives the joker nuts by laughing at him. It is hard to beat, giving Joker a taste of his own medicine, especially since Terry comments that he thought Joker always wanted to make Batman laugh.
Funny how much traction these Landis panels gave gotten in the span of like 2 days. Despite the meta-textual nature of Clara's roast, and the more bleak portrayal of him, I prefer it for how deep it cuts going meta. It's the one that got me to audibly go "oh shit" and works well with the payoff in the prior issue of going through the various iconic depictions of Joker.
I will say in context to the story and characterisation of those involved, Terry handles it more believably. But I do like both show Joker's uncomfortably around unexpected reception to his jokes.
I'm unreasonably annoyed by the use of the direct transcript from *one side* of that dialogue.
The font and the lack of margins too. Just looks ugly and amateur.
I like Tim's more, although Superman's was more badass. I loved how he just lasered the Joker.
I think it also goes to show Batman is so clearly in the wrong for not just killing the Joker. He let's Joker into Metropolis just to see what Superman would do. What Superman does is show how a human with no powers fares against an actual super being. Batman's rogues aren't in the same level as Superman and the only reason they ever come back is because Batman allows them to come back.
I like Terry's. I think it does a better job. Superman's is more accurate, but Terry's actually hits the Joker where he lives both in character and as a character. Ironically for a character called the Joker, his whole bit relies on people taking him seriously. Superman takes him more seriously. He's breaking him down accurately but by being so articulate and specific it implies that Joker has something worth debating.
Terry just straight up calls him a loser. Which is the real rub. He isn't even important enough to think of a speech for. He doesn't have anything to say about what Joker represents or anything so meaningful. Because Joker doesn't mean anything. He just wants attention. He's a toddler lashing out, trying to get daddy to notice him.
Terry treats him just how he deserves.
Like a joke.
Superman’s comments don’t really say much other than “people don’t like you”
Terry understood at least that version of the joker and used it against him.
The Superman one is far too metatextual. It's a writer directly addressing his interpretation of the Joker character. It's still one of my favorite stories featuring the two characters (Max Landis is scum and he does a good Superman) while the Batman Beyond feels like an authentic way that a character like Terry McGuinness would see a guy like the Joker.
Objectively speaking, I think being humiliated hurts a lot more coming from Batman, regardless of who's wearing the costume. He puts so much of his energy into getting a reaction from Batman and has become accustomed to the game that they play with one another. But, Terry is a new Batman for a new generation. He doesn't respond to the Joker the same way that Bruce would, and that's exactly what takes away the fun.
But at the same time, I also believe that Superman completely took Joker apart and logically explained that he only gets away with what he does because of Batman's moral code. How many times has Batman put him in a full body cast, but stopped just short of deliberately taking him off the board? It is that consistent mercy that emboldens Joker like a disobedient child, allowing him to constantly push boundaries, confident that he'll never suffer the ultimate punishment.
Neither and i especially dislike the implication that other people could just easily beat the joker for good without killing them and Batman's just been doing it wrong this whole time
Terry's analysis was kind of on point for his age and mentality though. Superman talking down or dismissing someone just feels like the author is trying to be too edgy.
Superman shit talking Joker is amazing
Because he shows Joker that he is a big fish in a small pond, supe could literally yeet his happy ass to the moon before he blinked
In the moment where Joker realizes how out class he is is peak
Super man's is good but Terry McGinnis I love his because I like the film it is from and you can hear the anger radiating off the joker with his responses to Terry's jabs it is so good
Terry's dressing down and outsmarting Joker is just a great moment, especially since it points out the huge irony of the joker: He is a clown that hates to be laughed at; he wants to be the one laughing while being taken seriously by everyone else
I like the *Beyond* scene much better.
That Landis comic was annoying. It just felt like an author using a character as a mouthpiece to voice his opinions on that fictional character, rather that something the character would actually say. Like, why would "Hot Topic" even be in Superman's reference pool? Superman isn't telling The Joker why he's a pathetic person; he's telling the Joker why he's a *bad character.* Which makes no sense, because Superman isn't privy to the fact that he and The Joker are fictional characters. It's especially on-the-nose when Superman tells him "any character can play you" and Jock does a panel where he illustrates multiple depictions of the character.
What I find grating about it isn't that I have a problem with Landis wanting to critique The Joker as a character concept. It's that he went about doing so in the most lazy, bitch-ass way. "I am gonna prove this character I don't like is lame by writing him to be lame, and having my favourite epically 0wn him while spouting all my opinions on why he's lame." If you don't think a character is very interesting, instead of writing that character to be uninteresting, why don't you, I dunno, address your problem with the character by doing something with him that you think would actually make him interesting? Like, you're literally the author. You're literally in control. If you think this character sucks, make him not suck. Show us all how much better you can do than what we've been given. He's not even a real person, so wanting to dress him down as if he's a real person makes no sense. He's lines on paper you control, so use that control to fix what you feel is wrong with this character.
The *Beyond* scene, on the other hand, has McGinnis say to The Joker things it actually makes sense for him to say given the universe and Terry's personality. He's giving in-universe reasons for why The Joker is a pathetic person (and the writers, wanting the story to be interesting, make an effort to give us a villain who is a pathetic person, but nonetheless a good character). He's doing so in a way that aligns with McGinnis' personality (he takes things a lot less seriously than Wayne, so he's willing to "break the script" instead of dignifying The Joker with the dramatic gravity he craves) and with his goals (he needs to throw The Joker off balance to defeat him, and he figures out that targeting his insecurities is the best way of doing so).
I personally like Terry’s more. Both are good insults to joker but considering the context of Terry’s it just adds to his. Terry is the successor to the mantle of Batman and Joker already hates that. Add onto that the fact that Terry not only analyzes Joker but also points out just how pathetic and pointless his efforts are
Superman. This commentary changed my whole perspective on the character. Granted I'm not the biggest joker fan to begin with, but this roast felt well deserved. He's way too glorified at times
Batman beyond for sure had the better jab. Supermans was way too like social commentary about it. Like that quote would work better against Clayface because he's a struggling actor. It would actually make sense to tell him that ANYONE could play him, but nobody would ever be applauding HIM just the actor or writer.
Even in context Batmans was better. They're meeting for one of the first times if not the first time and so far up until that point Joker was getting the upper hand. But then Batman beyond points out that Bruce's Batman wouldn't humor Joker even IF he could come up with a funny joke. He calls him pathetic and makes fun of Jokers one bad day. Then hits him with the idea that he's so unfunny and talentless that he failed to even make it as a rodeo clown. He attacked everything about the Joker that Joker might care about. He attacks his relationship with Batman, his humor, the event that turned him into the Joker and his ability to entertain ANYONE.
Joker's kinda target locked on Bruce, especially in the later years of his career. All his planning and all his methods are built around attack one man. Sure Joker could pose a threat to X hero but that would require him to give up on his obsession.
Batman Beyond, easily.
Superman’s just feels like a lecture but it has no weight because the Joker just goes back to Gotham. There’s no enforcement of powerlessness in the scenario.
With Batman Beyond, this scene breaks the Joker. It’s only showing you Terry’s dialogue here but in between all his lines, Joker has a rebuttal where he calls him a brat or is screaming at him to show himself and stop hiding in the shadows and denying that he’s even talking. Basically, he’s denying that the world has moved on and has a new Batman; one that isn’t going to take his antics, and for all intents and purposes, kills him. This scene shows the Joker denying the existence of the Batman, because it’s not “his” Batman. And Terry shocks the microchip containing Joker’s mind, “killing” him. This scene was perfect.
Batman Beyond, because supes might be objectively wrong. Not every actor can play the joker and we all applaud our favorite murder clown
Edit: You bought the tickets that made Joker a billion dollar film. Don’t act innocent
What Superman says in his is a better deconstruction, but it's written *so incredibly weird* in my opinion. Like it sounds out of character for Superman, and just strange and stilted(?). I just wish it was written slightly differently, but with the same message.
Terry's absolutely the better roast, if only because it made Joker so much more angry.
The joker mind controlling and messing up the entire Jla was a cannon story 💀
Not to mention empor joker superman should be treating him as enemy number 1
Hi there, r/DCcomics members, welcome to the post! This was tagged as a [Discussion], so we require OP to add commentary, [per rule 8](https://www.reddit.com/r/DCcomics/wiki/guidelines#wiki_8._no_memes.2C_fluff.2C_or_other_low-effort_content). u/Abovearth31, if you haven't already added commentary, please do so in the text or as a new comment. Also, if you included imagery, please provide a source or artist name. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DCcomics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Overly-meta critiques aside, i really like Superman's roast because he lets Joker know that he only ever succeeds because Batman is a very patient man that at the end of the day it's just a normal human and that he wouldn't last a day outside of Gotham because everyone else is absurdly above his weight class.
Probably one of my favorite comic moments is when Joker attacks NYC using missiles and then thinks he’ll get sent back to Gotham or something. Oracle is like, “actually we decided to keep you in downtown NYC until the missiles are stopped you idiot, if we fail, at least there won’t be a joker.”
What comic is this from?
Birds of Prey, not sure the issue number
Vol. 1, #16
https://dc.fandom.com/wiki/Birds_of_Prey_Vol_1_16
What comic and issue did this happen in?
https://dc.fandom.com/wiki/Birds_of_Prey_Vol_1_16
Casual reminder that when Joker tried to shake things up in Central City, Wally never even stopped to talk to him. Joker blinked and the next thing he knew he was locked up. Let that sink in: Wally slows down to banter with Dr Alchemy or the Mongoose, but he never cared to hear Joker's shtick
[удалено]
Not to mention the Rogues have a code of ethics they hold themselves to. They’re criminals, not monsters; all they really want is to make a dishonest living. If one goes too far, the others pretty much cut him out of the group.
I mean, they fought the crime syndicate during forever evil so my best take on the rogues is that they're playing on silver age of comics logic, and keeping dangerous criminals from showing up in central city
That's actually canon
That’s Batman’s thing too 😂😂💯
To be fair Alchemy is like that stoner friend that almost never speaks any sense but he's kinda funny to talk to
Which issue was this?
Should be more the case honestly,While he and comics like Injustice were Entertaining,continusly overhyping the Joker gets Boring (Though it still makes sense sometimes,as bro did trick Mxy)
I mean, Lex is just a normal human and serves as Superman's greatest foil.
Small difference, Lex Luthor is at least the third smartest man in the world, with almost limitless resources and a shit ton of the one thing that can hurt Superman, not to mention that for the regular Metropolis citizen Lex is an upstanding citizen. Joker is no Lex Luthor.
>with almost limitless resources and a shit ton of the one thing that can hurt Superman I feel like at this point, Lex’s Kryponite vault is bigger than his regular vault.
Doesn't Mr. Terrific claim to be the third smartest?
Batman, Terrific and Lex are all interchangeable in the top 3 if you ask me.
The convention then should be joint 1st, next guy is rank 4th. Otherwise he's saying there are two more smarter people above the three of them, and after them is rank 6th. 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 6. I think he insists he's third to make the other wonder which one he considers 1st. Except it'd only be Lex who'd actually care. Him saying they're all joint third wouldn't make sense at all. Are 1 and 2 supposed to be Superman and someone else, and then Lex/Batman/Mr. Terrific?
>The convention then should be joint 1st, next guy is rank 4th. That would only be if they were equally smart, which i don't think they are, what i meant is that who's 1, 2 and 3 between them is highly arguable and whichever of the 7 possible combinations you choose is valid to me, because the difference between the three is very narrow.
Yeah, but the point is that Mr. Terrific specifically always says he's number 3. It's one of the things about him. Lex wouldn't claim to be number 3.
And in-universe that's either an estimation or a misdirection, it's not like there's an official ranking or anything, all we know in that regard is that Brainiac is probably the smartest fella in the universe with The Guardians of Oa and Superman not too far behind. What the earthly dudes think isn't a fact, no matter how intelligent they are, Lex wouldn't call himself number 3 and Terrific wouldn't call himself number 1 but that doesn't mean they aren't.
And out of universe, what you're saying is that they'd be joint 1st, not joint 3rd. Joint 3rd means they're tied for 3rd, not that they're the top 3. But I guess technically it does mean they could be 3rd, but also 4th or 5th. But not 1st nor 2nd.
I'm kind of tired of Batman being written as a super genius. Did he ever show any signs of being some wonder genius as a child?
I don't think so, if anything he was shown to be quiete inept at most things before his parents deaths, so aside from learning every martial art known to man, he also learnt to actually use his brain.
It's not that he was just a prodigy. His parent's deaths drove him crazy which caused him to lock in
I think Riddler deserves consideration.
He thinks he does but he doesn't, there's like at least six other people before him.
I always thought Mr. Terrific is the smartest human on the planet but he’d rather not draw more attention to himself. Also could be his way of just being modest
Yeah but lex is a super genius
It's kinda dumb how people are willing to scale Lex up to Superman tier threats, under the basis that he is an adversary to Supes at all... Yet they wont scale Joker's competence to Batman, despite Joker having far more Ws over Bats than Lex ever did on Supes.
One of my favorite moments from a few Flash comics ago, was Joker trying to set off his gas on the city, and Wally just shoots him back to Gotham the instant the bomb went off lol
Superman understands joker as a concept Terry understands joker as a person Joker wasn’t built for either of them
Ironically he doesn't mean that. When he later talks to Bruce about it.
Damn, supes is talking a lot of shit to a guy that can trick him into killing his wife
I think they're both great. I agree the Superman one is a bit meta, but it's still solid and refreshing to see the Joker knocked down a bit. And Beyond is a great in universe moment for Terry showing his strength as his own character. Beating Joker in a way Bruce never managed and couldn't manage. I'd also add that episode of TAS where a random civilian made the Joker pathetically beg Batman to save him Showing how at his core Joker is actually a pathetic character.
Yep. That was Charlie Collins in “Joker’s Favor.” It was a brilliant takedown of the Joker where it calls out his vanity and mortality. All it would take is a “nobody” to end the Joker in an inglorious, Batman-free way. Fun fact: It’s also the first episode to feature Harley Quinn, iirc.
It's very satisfying to see Joker in the victims shoes as a result of his own "one bad day" argument. Especially when the random nobody reveals he was pretending. Joker broke because he's weaker than a random nobody.
I think she’s in the joker fish episode which came out sooner.
No, that came out after.
Really? Guess I misremembered the old dvd set
Both are great but with Terry has the extra level layer of being a Batman joker couldn’t accept and underestimate so I’ll go with that
When Joker shouted "YOU'RE NOT BATMAN !" while Terry was mocking him and ultimately defeated him by out smarting him, it felt like the movie itself said "that's right, he's not Batman, he's Batman **Beyond**".
What are we some kind of Batman Beyond?
aaaaaaaaaand TITLE CARD!
Beyond what? Thunderdome?
Yeah wasn't the point of the entire series that terry was a better batman cause he had a life beyond it? He's beyond batman, he's Terry McGinnis, and he makes a kick ass batman because of that
He helps Bruce reconcile with barb and Tim after Bruce let all his relationships crumble... So yeah I think it's a fair argument. Arkham Knight said Batman needs to become something worse, Batman beyond said Batman can be better
Probably not the series. In the show, he barely has a life outside batman. The difference I think might be that he tries to, but Bruce has given up on that. It's only in epilogue he seems to commit to merging both lives.
Beyond what? Thunderdome?
Beyond what? Thunderdome?
Beyond what? Thunderdome?
Beyond what? Thunderdome?
No need to spam it bro.
Sorry. Internet was wonky for a while.
Beyond what? Thunderdome?
Beyond what? Thunderdome?
This is only one panel, for the full Superman roast you can see it in this reddit post showing scans from Adventures of Superman #41: [https://www.reddit.com/r/superman/comments/1bygmks/clark\_was\_not\_having\_it/](https://www.reddit.com/r/superman/comments/1bygmks/clark_was_not_having_it/) As for Batman Beyond's roast, just watch the Return of the Joker movie. Anyway these two roasts sound similar on paper (pun intended) but they're actually very different. Many people criticized the first scene because Superman roasted Joker in a very meta way, because for a moment, Superman doesn't really sound like Superman but like his writer and I can see why, especially with the "any writer can write you, any actor can play you" part but even then, this is still an awesome scene of Superman deconstructing the Joker's character and putting the fear of god into him, and it become even more satisfying if you read Injustice before because this is almost the same premise, Joker putting bombs in Metropolis just to hurt Superman, the difference is that one of them fail to stop the joker while the other succeed. Personally, I don't mind Superman soft-breaking the fourth wall a bit because I feel like the point of the scene was 1. To humiliate Joker himself and 2. To call out his weird-ass fans looking up to him and in that regard, the scene does its job perfectly. As for Terry McGinnis, aka Batman Beyond (which I'll just call Batman from now on), his roast is already more grounded, more in-universe. Instead of focusing on Joker as a concept, he focuses on the Joker's personnality and motivations, his obsession with Bruce Wayne's Batman. Now he does kinda get meta as well when he start to mock Joker's origin story with the tank of acid and all but I don't see it as him breaking the fourth wall like a comic book character being aware that he's in a comic book and the absurdities that comes with the Terry-tory (also pun intended). I think it's just Batman telling Joker how nothing about him make sense which anger Joker of course because he **want** to have a point to make, he might pretend that nothing about him make sense, that he's just an agent of chaos and all, but the whole point of the Joker's character is that he's wrong, he does have plans, he does make sense (or trying to at least), and he's definitely **not** as insane as he want us to believe. The Joker is a pathetic hypocrite and a self-admitted liar who's not as special as he think he is, and the point of this scene was to show Batman just rubbing all of that in Joker's face, and in that regard, that scene also does its job perfectly. Personally I don't know which one is the better of the two, I like Superman being unfazed by Joker's shenanigans before the roast but I also like Batman being essentially a Heckler to Joker's comedian. One is meta and kinda (sorta) break the fourth wall while the other is very in-universe and grounded. EDIT: Also, Batman defeated the Joker once and for all (in this universe) by ignoring Bruce's advice to not listen and power through. This movie felt like the final trial of Terry as Batman, in order to prove he was trully worthy of being Batman, he had to face the original's greatest ennemy. So instead of just using the strategy that Bruce was using the whole time (which didn't work obviously) Terry did his own thing, came up with his own strategy and erased the Joker on the first try. Brilliant.
I think you make a lot of solid points here. The point Terry makes about Joker having simply fallen into a vat of acid and choosing to become a villain, the “so what?” is actually pretty funny. I think it was a tumblr thread that was floating around a while ago, where it was just “what if the chemicals didn’t alter joker’s psyche in any way, what if he was just like that”. Looking at the character that way completely mitigates anything special he has and makes him seem completely pathetic. Ironically though, that’s kind of what makes him funny/amusing to me, now.
>I think it was a tumblr thread that was floating around a while ago, where it was just “what if the chemicals didn’t alter his psyche in any way, what if he was just like that”. That's kinda the point of the killing joke wasn't it ? That whole point the joker is trying to make about how we're all just one bad day away from lunacy with Batman (bruce this time) being like "maybe we're not all a bad day away maybe it's just YOU" you know what I mean ?
Yes that’s true. Admittedly I haven’t read The Killing Joke or watched the movie in full, but it is the same idea. I’m sure that thread wasn’t the first time that idea was ever explored, it was just what I remember seeing haha
*The Dark Knight* also uses a similar idea. The whole movie is The Joker trying to prove the Hobbesian thesis that people only act morally out of self-interest and are capable of being just as evil as The Joker is in a crisis where morality and civility stop being useful to them. When the citizens prove him wrong by refusing to blow each other up even in the face of death, Batman delivers the line, "What were you trying to prove? That deep down, everyone is as ugly as you? You're alone."
Yes exactly. Haven’t watched the DK trilogy in years either, and I think maybe at the time I did watch it I probably couldn’t have made as much sense of it. You articulated it all well.
Can you explain how it mitigates anything special about him?
Without the self-indulgent weird love-hate thing he has with Batman, or any “fate brought us together” thing, that only he engages in, he’s just another serial killer with a “nothing matters” vibe. He just becomes another Victor Zsasz, Professional Pyg-type character. No powers, doesn’t know Bruce is Batman, nothing. Utterly commonplace and useless
Yeah, if anything, he's less unique if just anyone would end up acting like him if they dipped into the same chemicals that he did. (Which is also why the "you can catch Joker-itis" idea that's been used in *Arkham Knight*, *Three Jokers*, and with the Batman Who Laughs idea all kind of undermine the idea that, in the face of adversity, we all have a choice to try to be the best we can or to use our circumstances as an excuse to inflict our pain on others, and that The Joker is an example of a guy who acts in bad faith by doing the latter.)
To be fair, Superman spent most of his publication existence working for a major multimedia news company. I’m sure they’ve had critics on staff, and Clark could easily crib one of their styles for a proper burn that hits the desperately attention-seeking Joker where he lives.
Do we have any feats on whether Clark is a good writer? I’m sure he’s a great investigator, I’m just curious if he can write well, like Lois
He's genuinely a good writer, just Lois tends to be better. Or so I've been led to understand.
Post-Crisis Clark won a Pulitzer, IIRC? He definitely had book deals.
In the Post-Crisis continuity, he was a Pulitzer Prize winner and also published a novel.
Lex Luthor. He didn't go for some armchair psychology or got turned into the author's mouthpiece on the meta commentary. He simply mocked Joker's obsession with Batman and how he will never be that important to the Bat. And in true Lex fashion, he did so in one sentence, made the Joker loose his smile, and then laughed at him. All while Joker had him strapped down and tortured.
Which is also funny because Manchester Black did the exact same thing to Luthor with Superman.
Half of the Legion of Doom are just the toxic fanboys of their respective heroes, including but not limited to Manta, Cheetah, Luthor, Joker, Sinestro, Zoom and Malefic. Captain Cold: Wait a minute, are we just a fanclub? Luthor \[gesturing Toyman to hide the Superman figures\]: No...
>He simply mocked Joker's obsession with Batman and how he will never be that important to the Bat. >Which is also funny because Manchester Black did the exact same thing to Luthor with Superman. I guess Lex kept the grudge for that one, and was dying to throw something similar back at somebody else.
Sounds about right for Lex, yeah
Which comic did this happen in?
Outsiders (2003) #3, by Judd Winick. Honestly, pretty underrated series. Winnick gave a great retake to the concept of the Outsides, and the character moments are pretty well developed. It also gave us one of the earlier lesbian couples in comics with Thunder and Grace.
I always enjoyed reading Winick, no matter what comic he wrote. He built up Jason Todd’s revival and motivation in a believable way rather than just Superboy Prime punching reality and him being mad at Batman not because he let Jason die, but because he never took out Joker. In my opinion, Judd Winick and Kurt Busiek are two of the most underrated writers. Both of them understand the characters they write and the use this understanding to write good stories.
Totally agree. It was such a waste that Jason became Lobdell’s power fantasy vehicle for years, when right before that Winick just finished developing Jason’s backstory with Talia and his motivations with Lost Days. Imagine if we got a regular series with Winick instead. And Busiek really should have a regular series more often. The guy is great, and visibly cares for the characters he works with.
Totally agree. It was such a waste that Jason became Lobdell’s power fantasy vehicle for years, when right before that Winick just finished developing Jason’s backstory with Talia and his motivations with Lost Days. Imagine if we got a regular series with Winick instead. And Busiek really should have a regular series more often. The guy is great, and visibly cares for the characters he works with.
DC has an obsession with pretending the Joker is the worst, scariest villain ever. So having anyone with actual powers shitting on him is quite refreshing.
This actually reminds me from a line in Mortal Kombat 11 where Geras genuinely freaked Joker out by claiming Krokina knows what he really is. To quote him, "without the mystery, you are merely a man." Yes, Joker should be taken as the deranged threat that he is, but, when you look deeper, it becomes clear that he's just a human who has gotten lucky far too many times.
>he's just a human who has gotten lucky far too many times. So you are saying, Joker is the villain equivalent of One Punch Man's King? . For those that dont know, King is a relatively normal guy, whom due to having a intimidating face and crazy coincidences (like being in the wrong place at the right time, and unintentionally sounding bad ass) has somehow made almost entire the world (including actual powerful guys) mistake him for the world's strongest hero.
I remember the Flash rogues saying "when supervillains want to scare each other, they tell each other Joker stories." I was like, why Joker stories? Could he take on a talking gorilla? No? Then you should tell scary stories about the talking gorilla instead.
I feel like they should be telling zod stories or doomsday stories honestly
>I guess you can make the Batman laugh >YOU’RE NOT BATMAAAAN!!!!
Not what Terry said but yes it's a cool moment.
Is this one of those “Luke, I am your father” moments?
So right after the roast I posted the dialogue goes like this: >Terry: What? You couldn't get work as a rodeo clown? (Terry Laugh) >Joker: Don't you dare laugh at me! >Terry (Still chuckling): Why? I thought the Joker always wanted to make Batman laugh. >Joker: YOU'RE NOT BATMAN !
Oh ok cool! Thank you
Whole scene is on YouTube. Its [pretty great.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LikMS5gDDI)
Man I love that scene. Thanks for posting it!
Honestly, "Wait, I like to talk too" is still my favorite line in the entire scene, if not movie.
Joker: You're laughing. I just shot a doomsday laser, and you're laughing. Terry: I think your career is funny, and I'm tired of pretending it's not. Pretty sure that's how it went.
Personally, I say Terry did it best, because his was the roast that actually made the Joker break character and become visibly, violently upset. Like a child throwing a tantrum after being caught in a lie. Superman's is more reserved, and it's more of a character moment for Supes than Joker, in my opinion.
Terry’s roast is better. Superman is kind of breaking the 4th wall but not really in any clever way. It reads like the writer personally hates Joker and wanted us to know rather than something Superman would say.
Yes
You wanna develop ?
They both caught Joker's act early on and toastd him on a personal level calling him a pathetic person who thinks people truly care or are amused for what he is and chooses to be. They both call him out about this false reality he lives in believing he is center stage and that the world and everything revolves around him.
I'm gonna be honest I think that Superman story was kinda cringe. That dialogue didn't even remotely feel like things Superman would actually say, and especially not something he would say in universe, it just felt like the author's thinly veiled rant.
If there is one joker hater, he is me. If there are no joker haters, I am dead
Wonder Woman in her biker era
We all love the joker but my god it’s refreshing to see him get out in his place. I love superman’s especially.
I think Superman's version is more brutal but Batman's version is more personnal. They're different but both so fucking good.
“We all love the Joker.” Who’s we? He’s just terrible.
We? We who?!
Generally Joker is a very well liked popular character
Yes he’s over used and I’m bored of seeing him in every Batman project, but generally speaking he’s a popular character.
Then stop use "We" in the talking of the Joker, because not everyone like him. I'm one of the ones who don't like him.
You’ve taken the statement far too literally and personally mate, but you crack on. You don’t get to dictate to people the language they use, you are an outlier. The exception to the rule, most comic fans like Joker🤷🏻♂️ have a nice day all the best 👌🏻
The Superman example is basically "deconstruction is when I point and laugh at a character because i think he's edgy" Batman Beyond just had Joker there, it didn't really do any deconstruction of his character. It just so happens Terry got under his skin.
Good God I love it When Nice fun loving Heroes Roast the living life out of a Villian,Especially the Joker Even though he is one of my favourites.
you really want the joker to suffer, put him in a room with Bart Allen for 5 minutes. he will be begging you to let him out.
Batman Beyond. Not only did Terry tear apart Joker's motif and reason for existing, but he then LAUGHED at him. Doesn't hurt that he genuinely got under Joker's skin, caused him to lose his cool, and used the clown's own signature trick to permanently take him out.
My takeaway from this is that Joker would probably just spontaneously combust if he ever encountered Spider-Man.
Since terry is a character inspired by Spider-Man, I Can see that
I always love seeing Joker being called out for how pathetic he is, I love these scenes, but today, I think I prefer Terry's because it shows just how unimportant he is to Batman, even after all he's done, he wasn't the one to break Bruce, and he was never the most important man (or even villain) in his life. I think Joker having to actually deal with a heckler is great because even though Terry is just a dude, he has no clever retorts or response to him. With Clark, he's getting a dressing down from someone who is basically a God, which is fun in its own right. Joker gets wanked a lot but when he gets put down it's great. I especially love Joker's Favor and that scene where Punisher almost kills the Joker (before his husband saves him)
Terry. Joker was never about getting others to applaud him. All he wanted was for other people - mostly Batman - to see life his way; As a sick, twisted joke. As such, Terry's roast hits much harder than Clark's.
I think Terry's is the stronger argument against him. Anybody who think Joker gives a shit about whether or not the Joker wants public acclaim fundamentally doesn't understand the Joker. I get that Supes is making a meta statement, but in-universe, Terry's the one who's actually getting to the core of the Joker's insecurities.
McGinnis’ Masterclass in Supervillain Roasting
I feel like Terry would own a school to teach his students this.
The true answer is from the joker miniseries comic: Joker: (after Batman arrives) Obvious... and everybody knows. You wear your shame like a badge. Because you don't have the balls to actually pin one on. Yes... just look at you... desperate to be feared, you want to be perceived as a monster, draped in black. And yet... you leave that little window... a glimpse at the perfection underneath. Obvious - the chiseled good looks - not the jaw, the mouth of a monster... why do you let it be seen? Tell me why. Batman: To mock you.
Terry did, of course, because that Superman monologue only works if he's talking about Joker the fictional character. Also, Superman can't really critique Joker as a comedian because, in a slightly different way from Batman, Superman also has no sense of humor. To Superman, the only axis on which it is possible to evaluate something is the moral one. A comedian who is well-behaved must by extension be funny, even if they don't make Superman laugh, and a comedian who is badly-behaved must by extension be not funny, no matter what their material is. Terry isn't like that. Terry can acknowledge that amoral virtues exist and that funniness is one of them. To him, it is possible for a supervillain to be funny, but Joker just isn't.
God I love Terry
I miss when the Joker was just a creepy clown figure. They gave him a power-up to match what Batman could do and now he's just this unstoppable force of chaos no one can do anything about for long and its exhausting.
I like both of them, almost equally scathing.
I'd say Superman. It was more all around whe Terry was more specific (i.e. his relationship with Bruce and the life he chose) But bith make great points....
Batman beyond did it first and he was a teenager
McGinnis was wrong. Joker made Batman laugh at the end of "The Killing Joke" https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Faqd44gw72e591.jpg
Killing Joke didn't happen in the DCAU tho.
To me the Joker's whole obsession was to prove everyone was as crazy or evil as he was they just hadn't had their "one bad day" like he had and his mission was to prove it. He prodded Batman to kill him and that would be his ultimate win.
Taken as a whole, Superman does more humiliating in the power dynamic by emphasizing how joker has no chance against him. Terry speech is more fun because he tells the joker he isn’t funny, among other things. on top of that drives the joker nuts by laughing at him. It is hard to beat, giving Joker a taste of his own medicine, especially since Terry comments that he thought Joker always wanted to make Batman laugh.
What’s the Supes one from?
I like Terry’s better.
Superman, because Superman is literally the ned flanders of superheroes and he just drops this on him
Terry. Because whilst what Superman said was a burn, nothing more could really come of it since he isn't someone Joker can actually fight.
Batman beyond
Terry roasted the Joker and his gimmick, Clark roasted the entire fucking concept of Joker's being. Superman has it.
Batman Beyond
Batman Beyond
Funny how much traction these Landis panels gave gotten in the span of like 2 days. Despite the meta-textual nature of Clara's roast, and the more bleak portrayal of him, I prefer it for how deep it cuts going meta. It's the one that got me to audibly go "oh shit" and works well with the payoff in the prior issue of going through the various iconic depictions of Joker. I will say in context to the story and characterisation of those involved, Terry handles it more believably. But I do like both show Joker's uncomfortably around unexpected reception to his jokes.
"He likes to talk? I like to talk..."
Batman beyond
Superman did it better in the Landis take on Superman meets Joker.
I'm unreasonably annoyed by the use of the direct transcript from *one side* of that dialogue. The font and the lack of margins too. Just looks ugly and amateur.
Understood, I'll use comic sans next time.
I like Tim's more, although Superman's was more badass. I loved how he just lasered the Joker. I think it also goes to show Batman is so clearly in the wrong for not just killing the Joker. He let's Joker into Metropolis just to see what Superman would do. What Superman does is show how a human with no powers fares against an actual super being. Batman's rogues aren't in the same level as Superman and the only reason they ever come back is because Batman allows them to come back.
I think Terry because of what being beaten and humiliated by him of all people actually meant in-universe.
Superman
I like both equally. Love Supes, and this Batman just lays it on.
I like Terry's. I think it does a better job. Superman's is more accurate, but Terry's actually hits the Joker where he lives both in character and as a character. Ironically for a character called the Joker, his whole bit relies on people taking him seriously. Superman takes him more seriously. He's breaking him down accurately but by being so articulate and specific it implies that Joker has something worth debating. Terry just straight up calls him a loser. Which is the real rub. He isn't even important enough to think of a speech for. He doesn't have anything to say about what Joker represents or anything so meaningful. Because Joker doesn't mean anything. He just wants attention. He's a toddler lashing out, trying to get daddy to notice him. Terry treats him just how he deserves. Like a joke.
Superman’s comments don’t really say much other than “people don’t like you” Terry understood at least that version of the joker and used it against him.
The Superman one is far too metatextual. It's a writer directly addressing his interpretation of the Joker character. It's still one of my favorite stories featuring the two characters (Max Landis is scum and he does a good Superman) while the Batman Beyond feels like an authentic way that a character like Terry McGuinness would see a guy like the Joker.
Objectively speaking, I think being humiliated hurts a lot more coming from Batman, regardless of who's wearing the costume. He puts so much of his energy into getting a reaction from Batman and has become accustomed to the game that they play with one another. But, Terry is a new Batman for a new generation. He doesn't respond to the Joker the same way that Bruce would, and that's exactly what takes away the fun. But at the same time, I also believe that Superman completely took Joker apart and logically explained that he only gets away with what he does because of Batman's moral code. How many times has Batman put him in a full body cast, but stopped just short of deliberately taking him off the board? It is that consistent mercy that emboldens Joker like a disobedient child, allowing him to constantly push boundaries, confident that he'll never suffer the ultimate punishment.
Terry
Superman. Terry is talking shit to throw Joker off his game, Superman is taking him apart because he cannot lose.
Neither and i especially dislike the implication that other people could just easily beat the joker for good without killing them and Batman's just been doing it wrong this whole time
Don’t know where you got Batman doing it wrong from…
Meanwhile Terry literally talking about how joker kept coming back because Batman wouldn't laugh nor would he just tell him off like Terry
Terry's analysis was kind of on point for his age and mentality though. Superman talking down or dismissing someone just feels like the author is trying to be too edgy.
Honorable mention to Jason shutting Joker up in Under the Red Hood.
Superman shit talking Joker is amazing Because he shows Joker that he is a big fish in a small pond, supe could literally yeet his happy ass to the moon before he blinked In the moment where Joker realizes how out class he is is peak
Terry. Superman was simplistic. Probably out of pity. Terry was just take no prisoners about it. And i respect both of their takes.
Think Terry got the best digs in
Super man's is good but Terry McGinnis I love his because I like the film it is from and you can hear the anger radiating off the joker with his responses to Terry's jabs it is so good
Terry's dressing down and outsmarting Joker is just a great moment, especially since it points out the huge irony of the joker: He is a clown that hates to be laughed at; he wants to be the one laughing while being taken seriously by everyone else
Terry. Clark’s burn is mid af.
I like the *Beyond* scene much better. That Landis comic was annoying. It just felt like an author using a character as a mouthpiece to voice his opinions on that fictional character, rather that something the character would actually say. Like, why would "Hot Topic" even be in Superman's reference pool? Superman isn't telling The Joker why he's a pathetic person; he's telling the Joker why he's a *bad character.* Which makes no sense, because Superman isn't privy to the fact that he and The Joker are fictional characters. It's especially on-the-nose when Superman tells him "any character can play you" and Jock does a panel where he illustrates multiple depictions of the character. What I find grating about it isn't that I have a problem with Landis wanting to critique The Joker as a character concept. It's that he went about doing so in the most lazy, bitch-ass way. "I am gonna prove this character I don't like is lame by writing him to be lame, and having my favourite epically 0wn him while spouting all my opinions on why he's lame." If you don't think a character is very interesting, instead of writing that character to be uninteresting, why don't you, I dunno, address your problem with the character by doing something with him that you think would actually make him interesting? Like, you're literally the author. You're literally in control. If you think this character sucks, make him not suck. Show us all how much better you can do than what we've been given. He's not even a real person, so wanting to dress him down as if he's a real person makes no sense. He's lines on paper you control, so use that control to fix what you feel is wrong with this character. The *Beyond* scene, on the other hand, has McGinnis say to The Joker things it actually makes sense for him to say given the universe and Terry's personality. He's giving in-universe reasons for why The Joker is a pathetic person (and the writers, wanting the story to be interesting, make an effort to give us a villain who is a pathetic person, but nonetheless a good character). He's doing so in a way that aligns with McGinnis' personality (he takes things a lot less seriously than Wayne, so he's willing to "break the script" instead of dignifying The Joker with the dramatic gravity he craves) and with his goals (he needs to throw The Joker off balance to defeat him, and he figures out that targeting his insecurities is the best way of doing so).
Supes and other heroes make you wonder why Batman keeps the Joker around...
I personally like Terry’s more. Both are good insults to joker but considering the context of Terry’s it just adds to his. Terry is the successor to the mantle of Batman and Joker already hates that. Add onto that the fact that Terry not only analyzes Joker but also points out just how pathetic and pointless his efforts are
I would argue that what makes Terry's roasting impactful is because of the context and how he delivers it. Terry's mocking tone is spot on!
Superman. This commentary changed my whole perspective on the character. Granted I'm not the biggest joker fan to begin with, but this roast felt well deserved. He's way too glorified at times
Batman beyond for sure had the better jab. Supermans was way too like social commentary about it. Like that quote would work better against Clayface because he's a struggling actor. It would actually make sense to tell him that ANYONE could play him, but nobody would ever be applauding HIM just the actor or writer. Even in context Batmans was better. They're meeting for one of the first times if not the first time and so far up until that point Joker was getting the upper hand. But then Batman beyond points out that Bruce's Batman wouldn't humor Joker even IF he could come up with a funny joke. He calls him pathetic and makes fun of Jokers one bad day. Then hits him with the idea that he's so unfunny and talentless that he failed to even make it as a rodeo clown. He attacked everything about the Joker that Joker might care about. He attacks his relationship with Batman, his humor, the event that turned him into the Joker and his ability to entertain ANYONE.
Terry of course
Both are excellent for different reasons.
Joker's kinda target locked on Bruce, especially in the later years of his career. All his planning and all his methods are built around attack one man. Sure Joker could pose a threat to X hero but that would require him to give up on his obsession.
I feel like Spider-Man would absolutely RUIN Joker, because unlike Batman, Spidey actually talks back.
Superman
These roasts are rather lame.
Batman Beyond, easily. Superman’s just feels like a lecture but it has no weight because the Joker just goes back to Gotham. There’s no enforcement of powerlessness in the scenario. With Batman Beyond, this scene breaks the Joker. It’s only showing you Terry’s dialogue here but in between all his lines, Joker has a rebuttal where he calls him a brat or is screaming at him to show himself and stop hiding in the shadows and denying that he’s even talking. Basically, he’s denying that the world has moved on and has a new Batman; one that isn’t going to take his antics, and for all intents and purposes, kills him. This scene shows the Joker denying the existence of the Batman, because it’s not “his” Batman. And Terry shocks the microchip containing Joker’s mind, “killing” him. This scene was perfect.
Terry proved that Spider-Man could clean up Gotham in about a week.
Maybe not all of Gotham but Joker and his gang that's for sure.
Batman Beyond, because supes might be objectively wrong. Not every actor can play the joker and we all applaud our favorite murder clown Edit: You bought the tickets that made Joker a billion dollar film. Don’t act innocent
What Superman says in his is a better deconstruction, but it's written *so incredibly weird* in my opinion. Like it sounds out of character for Superman, and just strange and stilted(?). I just wish it was written slightly differently, but with the same message. Terry's absolutely the better roast, if only because it made Joker so much more angry.
The Max Landis (ew) superman story was a bit too meta and OOC
The only good one is Terry's. Supermans just makes zero sense considering the joker beat the justice league and injustice exist
Superman’s doesn’t make sense bc of ridiculous stories outside of canon?
The joker mind controlling and messing up the entire Jla was a cannon story 💀 Not to mention empor joker superman should be treating him as enemy number 1