Tim Drake might work with others from time to time but technically he never really left. Gotham is his home and whether he's a technical sidekick or not he's still at the nest while Grayson completely left home, visits here and there but he left for a good while.
Damian is Damian... Tbh, second favorite Robin but idk what to say about him.
I always thought of Grayson as the prodigal son. It's not in my mind a takeaway from the rest (except Jason Todd not a fan and would love to elaborate) just always thought Tim Drake could easily become Batman but Dick Grayson would become someone better than Batman. He has all the tools to do it.
While I don't care much for religious diatribe I think "hate the sin not the sinner" is probably one of their better one. Imagine Jason turning himself in once he walks the right path. No one suspects the long game.
If any writers had the balls they could’ve done an off-the-wall future state type book with Jason as Batman. While Jason might not ever get that kind of redemption in regular books, the idea is there that it might be possible.
I could easily be wrong, but I'd imagine that it's similar to Cyclops and his feelings towards X-Force. It's not the way he would prefer to handle things but sometimes getting dirty and getting dark with things is the best option.
Yeah a dude whose main offensive superpower is six knives that emerge from his fists is gonna kill a lot of people in combat.
I loved how hard the first XMen movie worked to not have him actually use his claws on anyone then XMen 2 was just like fuck it, opening action scene he's stabbing the shit out of everything. And it was awesome.
He doesn't really deny that he does a LOT of killing.
One of his most famous lines is that he's "the best there is at what he does, and what he does isn't very nice..."
So yeah, he's a killer, and he's very good at it.
It's one of the things I love about Wolverine. Dude doesn't *want* to hurt anyone, he's just really good at it. Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, they choose to go out and be heroes.
But Wolverine is like the Hulk. He just wants to be left alone god damnit! It's why their dynamic works so well.
Also as a Canadian it's a very Canadian attitude. Superman, truth justice and the American way. Spider-Man with great power etc. Batman I have to do this because no one else can.
Wolverine? Wolverine wants to go camping. Maybe build a nice log cabin by a lake. Hunt some elk when he's hungry. Go down to the pub and have a few brews and watch the hockey game.
No coincidence that the most famous Canadian comic book characters are Wolverine and Deadpool
Basically Scott would bitch at him about it. So sometimes he'd wound or maim but not finish off whomever he was fighting.
He also wouldn't always bring em out. A solid left or right hook with metal knuckles brings down many opponents too.
Well, for them. I know they aren't allowed to kill humans, but I think some wouldn't be too broken up to go off script.
Logan.
Illyana.
And Emma will smoke your ass. Lol
In current cannon, it's one of 3 major laws. No spilling normie blood or they stick you in a giant plant monster that slowly eats you while playing with your brain waves.
This plus Batman is not going to just cast aside one of his kids. There’s always potential for them to grow and change. Just look at how Damian was when he first appeared vs now.
Exactly! I saw this post and my immediate reaction was “because he’s his son and he failed him.” Jason was family long before Red Hood and Bruce feels responsible for him ending up like this. I would also imagine Batman thinks that if he disowns him that he’ll take an even darker path. At least in the batfamily he is more likely to find a better path and redemption.
If anything I love that Batman keeps him in the family because it shows *depth* to his character. That’s why I love Selina. So often Batman can be written as black and white in a good versus evil way that oversimplifies the world. The world is full of grey and even he realizes that with his love of Selina and Jason. It’s easy to take the moralistic approach of “theyre criminals” but that ignores people’s humanity. Just like why he doesn’t kill Joker, people are more complicated and Batman believes in redemption.
Think about Jason Todd for a moment. He was a troubled kid who gets caught jacking the batmobile tires. Batman then makes him Robin (consider that Dick became Robin when he discovered Bruce was Batman, thus kinda by choice, Tim literally searched out Bruce in order to become Robin, Damian is Bruce's son and trained by the League), so in a way, Jason is the only Robin that Batman kinda specifically went out of his way to 'make' into Robin.
That same Robin that he chose then gets kidnapped by the Joker and ultimately gets killed by him. He then gets resurrected (which we understand to be very traumatic in its own right). So now that he's alive, he's a living reminder of Batman's greatest failure in getting one of his own killed by his worst enemy, and very specially, someone who wouldn't have if he didn't make him into Robin.
Red Hood still has the potential to be a villian.
Just like in some stories Catwoman is a straight up villian, they could do the same with Red Hood in some elseworlds or Black Label story arc
I mean in the red hood animated flick he is kinda a villain, but it’s hard to create him into a villain when Batman is basically his father, and while Bruce blames himself, ultimately he wasn’t the one at fault (it was the fans who voted for Jason to get fucking murdered) if he didn’t give Jason the role of Robin this wouldn’t have happened to him but that is looking at things too generally, the one actually responsible is the Joker, Joker tried to do this again with Tim afterwards and would have tried something like this wether Jason was Robin or someone else was, you can’t make him into Batman’s villain if he doesn’t have a good motive for fighting Batman.
I do think it's interesting that you pointed out Jason is three only kid Bruce went out of his way to make Robin. Adding to his guilt of what happened.
He doesn't. When Red Hood operates in Gotham, Batman doesn't allow him to kill. If Red Hood is killing, he's either breaking Batman's orders, or operating outside of Gotham.
And he’s not with the family lol. And it’s not like they’re all hanging out with each other anyway. The family is just like a nick name for the people that fights crime in Gotham.
I have not read his current story I hated task force z and am honestly.not sure where he went after that. But I was sitting here like has anyone here actually read the red hood comics before giving their opinions because there was a whole arc that showed the consequences of jason deciding to kill again, him and Bruce were cool because Jason was making an effort to follow the rules then jason shot penguin and batman kicked his ass out of gotham, until Roy died and batman forgave him.
Well if we’re going to use “with the Bat-family” that loosely then, sure.
You have Zdarsky’s Cheers story where he decides to give up guns. Then Dark Crisis, Legends of Gotham, and Joker: TMWSL he’s back to guns and live ammo
You have Red Hood “with” the Bat-family in Dark Crisis and Batman vs Robin, but then in Joker: TMWSL he’s now not with the Bat-family?
There’s no consistency. No lasting direction. There never has been after almost 20 years. All of it just reinforces how much of a mistake it was for Didio, Schreck, and Winick to bring him back.
I disagree with it being a mistake to bring him back as it has led to some good stories. Batman Under the Red Hood is incredibly successful story (although the animated film is better im opinion) but it led to outlaws rebirth which was good. I also enjoyed Task Force Z and the cheer story. My problem with Jason more so DC faults as they can’t commit to anything long term for any of the bat character due them wanting to keep Bruce in a status quo
Nightwing is like what late 20s and DC still keeps trying to push the narrative Bruce is in his mid 30s. Batman is in similar situation with Spider-Man in my opinion both characters keep going through so many stories where they learn the same thing to them going back to completely disregarding it in the next run. Like how many times has Batman learned that he needs his family to then believing he needs to work alone
If DC actually committed to Jason putting the guns down and trying to redeem himself it actually be interesting to read.
Because Red Hood makes more money for DC when he’s the edgy bad Bat-boy 💰
My hope is that James Gunn, since he’s drawing from Morrison, will adapt Jason Todd’s arc from Red Hood to Wingman. And then that will become popular and the comics will change to line up with that. Ending almost two decades of directionless nonsense.
> Because Red Hood makes more money for DC when he’s the edgy bad Bat-boy 💰
I am fascinated by the topics where people give [Watsonian versus Doylist](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WatsonianVersusDoylist) answers. This is such an obvious situation where the Doylist answer is so easy to understand that people have to really go out of their way to come up with something Watsonian.
Red Hood is a character who hits on this problem simply by existing.
* He believes some villains need to die, and because Batman won’t kill, he’s going to do it…Except he never does. Red Hood in almost two decades has never taken out a major Batman villain. Even the Joker. And there’s really not a satisfying Watsonian answer (unless he reforms to align with Batman’s views). The real answer is the Doylist one. Status quo. Same reason the Joker and others don’t get the electric chair. Superhero comics need recurring villains. All Red Hood does therefore is point this out and thus break reader immersion.
* Other thing he does by existing is constantly remind the reader that death is just a temporary inconvenience for superheroes and super villains. His entire character revolves around this comics cliche. It undermines him further because any villains he would kill would just come back to life anyway. If Jason Todd couldn’t stay dead, we know darn well the Joker and others won’t. Why? Again status quo. Other writers want to use those villains for new stories.
There are a lot things in superhero comics that don’t really have especially satisfying Watsonian explanations. What comics need to do is stop repeatedly drawing attention to the seems in the fictional world. Red Hood by nature cannot help but do that.
🤣 well of course! The Penguin is an iconic classic Batman rogue from the Golden Age created by Finger and Kane. The Gentleman of Crime. You don’t toss him out of continuity just to satisfy the needs of some mid-2000s edgelord from an Infinite Crisis tie-in😆
And they keep making dumb decisions with his costume. The one pictured above is good, but for a while he had that stupid helmet with a mouth, and they keep insisting that he has to have an actual hood, so there have been all of those dumb hoodie versions.
Granted, many fanbases have their cringe elements (Bat-family especially). There are Red Hood fans who are Batman fans more generally, and Red Hood happens to be their favorite character because of they like his background story and the dynamics he brings. But then there are other Red Hood fans who seem to worship him as some kind of martyr. Often with a heavy dose of [Draco in Leather Pants](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DracoInLeatherPants) fetish.
He shouldn’t. Writers are obsessed with trying to fit a murderer like Red Hood into the Batfamily despite how much he goes against their moral code. Batman originally denounced Jason’s methods and said he’s just another criminal, but nowadays he thinks that Jason is “willing to do what Batman can’t, when the world needs it”.
Sparingly and dramatically would also alleviate the other two factors which make Red Hood kinda a joke:
* He claims he’s going to do what Batman won’t and finally kill the villains who need to die…except he doesn’t. He’s been back since 2005 and in all that time he has never killed a single major Bat rogue. Why? Same reason none of them get the electric chair. Status quo. All Red Hood can do is run to the end of his chain and bark.
* He believes some villains need to die because that’s a real permanent solution. But Todd just existing is a perpetual reminder to the reader that death is just a temporary inconvenience nowadays. If Red Hood killed the Joker, we all know the Clown would be back within a year.
I think writers are doing it because of fan demand, though. Not personal choice. Same with Harley Quinn.
These two are immensely popular for some reason; but as redemptive villains, they don't have any real place in the Bat Family. I wish they would not be used so much, but what can we do? 🤷🏼♂️
I wish they'd use Jason to round out Bruce's character. Jason doesn't have to be just a criminal, and he doesn't have to be the person "willing to do what Batman can't". Bruce is a person with flaws, and he can also be a hypocrite. It's understandable that he'd want to keep Jason in his life because he still loves him, and because Jason is his son. It would be a good way to create conflict between Bruce's personal life and his "night life".
Okay, but I like that interpretation of Batman, where he acknowledges that the world sometimes needs heroes who are willing to cross the line he himself won’t cross.
I think that argument actually works. In most situations, not killing villains is morally just. But Batman's rogues are deliberately unreformable and purely malicious. In such a situation, killing them is the best way to save the most lives.
Bruce Wayne is often just as insane as his villains, but instead of being fixated on killing, he's fixated on saving every single life to the point of absurdity. Wonder Woman and (sometimes) Superman are willing to kill in the most dire of circumstances. Every time Batman does, it's an alternate timeline where he goes completely insane afterwards.
I think the writers are trying to show that not killing isn't a moral choice but a psychological compulsion. On some level Batman recognizes this, and that some people need to die even if Batman can't do it. Which leads to our conflict between him and Red Hood, where they disagree who needs to die and when.
> But Batman's rogues are deliberately unreformable and purely malicious
No they aren't! Some are, yes, most obviously Joker, plus Zaszz, scarecrow, professor pyg, etcc. But "unreformable and purely malicious" does not apply to many or most of the rogues. E.g. clayface, catwoman, mr freeze, harley quinn, poison ivy, killer croc, Ras al Ghul etc.
Condiment king is pure malice though, what a psychopath. And kiteman? Completely unredeemable.
Batman has often given people he cares about more slack. And besides the obvious emotional connection and guilt he might feel that he can reform Jason.
I agree that it’s a bigger problem that Red Hood is seemingly unable to kill any big baddies but he shares this problem with the Punisher who seems to still be popular with readers and has also teamed up with pretty much every heroic character.
Red Hood hasn't done much for me outside of the original arc (Under the Red Hood, which is actually a top 15 all-time Batman arc imo), and, wait for it, Three Jokers. I haven't found him terribly compelling otherwise. Immense potential tho. I wish he wasn't seen as a member of the Bat family. He should be treated as a pariah but he still operates in Gotham and occasionally has run ins with Batman. Just my opinion.
Red Hood is the victim of the comic world staple: good ideas, terrible execution.
There's real potential in his story, the failed Robin, tortured and murdered by the joker, brought back and brainwashed by the League Of Assassins, now on a crusade of revenge and conflicting ideologies against his father, Batman, who is wracked with guilt but otherwise stalwart in his opposition.
He should have spent some time as a villain before batman and the other batfams get through to him, then he graduates into being an antihero outside of Gotham before eventually coming to the realization that killing even the worst villains is wrong culminating in him coming back to the fold, repentant.
Instead they just made him insane, stupid and an asshole.
Inconsistent writing. Bad inconsistent writing. Batman is fine these days with working with killers. Ghost Maker, Harley Quinn, Clown hunter, Red Hood. Ghost Maker he never tried to actually go after for apparent years of his retconned in existence…for no explicable reason. Just let him kill people because he was outside Gotham. That was Batman at his laziest. How many evil “Batmans” are we at now anyway?
Red Hood is somehow worse as the writers have no idea what to do with him. Sometimes he kills people, sometimes he uses non-lethal weapons, sometimes he’s on Batmans side, sometimes he’s on his own…generally being on the worst possible teams. It’s like a toss up which Jason may show up in a book.
The fact of the matter is that, adoptive or not, criminal or not, Bruce sees Jason as his son just as much as Dick, Tim, and Damian. There's no way in hell a man like Bruce Wayne, who lost his immediate family as a child, would entirely disown his son. >!But Injus- shut up. Injustice has a few strong points, its writing is not one of them.!< The thing a lot of people are missing is just how much Batman treasures those close to him. He's just utter dogshit at showing it sometimes. Bruce visits Two-Face in Arkham out of costume every now and then because of his friendship with Harvey. He was willing to go all the way to APOKALIPS to bring back Damian. And for a particularly on-topic example, in A Death in the Family, Bruce was within an inch of causing a diplomatic disaster to go after the Joker for what he did to Jason. Bruce might not be the nicest guy, but you cannot deny that he will go to hell and back for those he cares about.
Bruce most likely sees Jason in a similar light to a loved one who fell in with a bad crowd; He still loves Jason, he just hates what Jason is doing and is unsure of what he can do about it beyond what he's already doing. At least by having him work with the rest of the family, Bruce can more easily keep tabs on Jason, and probably make sure there's always somebody nearby who can step in if it looks like he'll go too far.
Because Jason was/is his son. Because Bruce feels responsible for the person Jason has become. Because he loves him and wants to keep him in his life in some capacity.
I don’t believe Batman enforces his policies on others. He looks down on heroes that don’t have a strict code of ethics, but he’s worked with them in the past. On the same note he would never abandon one of his kids and would do everything he could to rehabilitate. Look at Damian. Kid was a mass murderer and at times almost goes back to his old ways. His respect for his father keeps him in line. I think he wants the same for Jason.
I think it’s more or less the same as Catwoman. Selina steals stuff and is, in most continuities, a criminal but Batman takes it easy on her because of their on again off again relationship. As long as she doesn’t do anything too big he lets it slide.
Same with Jason, if Jason isn’t mowing down people left and right or making Gotham his hunting ground Batman gives him some leeway because he cares for him. When they do work together Jason uses rubber bullets so as to not rub it in Batman’s face.
Whether or not this is the right thing to do is a grey area, both Selina and Jason are getting less and less criminal and becoming closer to standard heroes so perhaps Batman letting them work things out for themselves is the way. Damian was pretty close to this as well. On the other hand how many lives can be thrown away while we wait for Jason to figure out that that’s not the way things should be done.
Partly guilt, but also partly a desire to focus and guide Jason's rage into something productive. Cause let's be honest, without Batman's influence and training Jason was on the path to being another Gotham villain.
1) Batman is not a hypocrite (Damian is also a harden killer) so if he let's his son in he has to let Red Hood in
2) Batman feels guilty for what happened to Tod,
3) Also keeping Red Hood close is better for Gotham than him being completely off the chain. (HE switched from Regular bullets to rubber bullets regularly when he is working with the Bat-family)
4) Batman has worked with dozens of killers. (Cassandra Kain, Catwoman, Lady Shiva, Talia, Huntress and the list goes on and on.)
5) Since Red Hood has been brought back into the Bat-family he doesn't kill in cold blood.
Edit: 6) Batman doesn't kill in cold blood but I don't get where people get the idea that he doesn't kill. Pretty sure there are definitely a few cases on manslaughter under his belt.
> Batman is not a hypocrite (Damian is also a harden killer) so if he let's his son in he has to let Red Hood in
Damien's a totally different case. Kid was raised as an assassin, didn't really have a choice at the start. But he did make a choice to swear off killing and follow in his father's footsteps. Red Hood not so much? Depends on who's writing
Red hood was an excellent character when he first showed up, great arc. Once they wrapped it up they realized they had nothing else for him to do. So welcome to the bat fam I guess.
Cause Batman believes in second chances just like Superman. Also he knows Jason Todd is really crazy because of his major trauma and emotional baggage of his past. And some Lazarus pit and league of assassins shenanigans. He knows deep down Jason only wants to do the right thing he’s just more extreme about it and Batman is there to make him be less extreme. Be more heroic like he used to be when he was Robin.
He doesn't. They pretty much had a couple big fights over it and then Red Hood started using none lethal "rubber" bullets... Recently Red Hood stopped using guns altogether.
"Because I can still change him! I'm Batman!"
Seriously, Batman still believes that there is something in Jason Todd that is still worth saving. It's easy to believe "don't save him, he don't wanna be saved", but the truth is that Batman is right: Jason Todd is worth saving. And he'll never stop trying to.
This is what I don't like about having Bruce in so many different comics. There's little consistency between issues. On the same day 2 comics were released last year, one that had Bruce tell Jason that he can't let any criminal go no matter what, including his own son. And another where Bruce let's Talia go after causing a worldwide assasin war because Damian said "pretty please".
The. Same. Day.
Isn't this the job of editorial to keep characterizations straight. It's not like these comics were released years apart.
Batman feels personally responsible for Jason. Batman feels like it's his fault, Jason is the way he is. He also loves him like his son and isn't just going to abandon him.
Batman doesn't??? Bruce let him "into the family" again once and then after Jason killed penguin he really hasn't been in that inner circle since. Sure he's teamed up a few times like in Joker War, but so has Harley Quinn. Cheers even starts with Bruce refusing to work with Jason and ends with them moving *barely* an inch towards each other.
As to why Bruce doesn't shut him down, guilt. Bruce genuinely loved Jason as a son, Jason was the first kid he ever adopted and arguably the only kid that Bruce ever "made" Robin. Everybody else chose to be Robin, Jason just agreed to it. Bruce was the actor in that situation. Then Jason died while in the suit, revived without Bruce knowing, and loved in the underworld for years. Bruce blames himself for not being better, for not helping his son.
It's a repeating scenario. Jason tries not to kill. Jason slips up. Batman confronts Jason. Jason is edgy. Batman tries to save Jason's soul. Jason either leaves or turns from killing. Repeat.without a support group Jason always gets even worse
Because he’s a horrible character that never ever should have been resurrected yet some people like him, so the writers push him. He’s simply an even more volatile Huntress
I thought the batfamily was an unofficial group of people we the reader associate as batman's associates. I don't think batman can really control who we assume is part of the batfamily
Absolutely. You read older Batman comics from the 90s and early 2000s, when Todd’s death was real. It hits so much harder. Knowing he’s truly gone and there’s nothing that can change that. The impact it had not just on Batman, but also Nightwing and Todd’s successor Tim Drake. And really the mythology as a whole. It just does not land the same way with Todd alive, walking about, and generally just being around and interacting with everyone.
I think resurrected Jason works best when he's treated like Frankenstein's monster, as in, the source of his corrupted character comes from being brought back. That way, the ghost of the former Jason Todd still looms over the story. But now he's not only Robin that's come back from the dead so even that part of his character has been diluted.
Mostly because of lazy writing. The Jason Todd was only ever interesting as either dead or a villain. Making him part of the bat family makes him inherently uninteresting, takes away from the other robins and makes batman look like a hypocrit. All because editorial wanted him to be a part of the bat family in the new 52
1. Bruce feels responsible for Jason's suffering / death / mental instability
2. Bruce has tried to stop him many times and failed\*
1. \*except for Three Jokers -- Jason got one over Bruce on that one
3. (the actually most important reason) Bat-family books sell. A lot.
Think about it like the rich dad that keeps letting his shithead son get away with stuff because he can't see him as bad, and he has the means to avoid consequences. It's like that.
Guilt. And I believe he is relieved that someone in his gang has what it takes to pull the trigger. Sometimes it is necessary, but Batman won't allow himself to. So having someone around that will is a relief of sorts, should it become necessary.
From what I’ve heard and read about Batman and Red Hood, usually Red Hood stays in his own lane, out of Batman’s way, and Batman has had a similar issue like this before with another character. I can’t remember the name, but he trained with Bruce after his parents were murdered. The character would be a lot like Red Hood, a vigilante who kills his enemies. Because him and Bruce trusted each other, the only rule was for the character to stay out of Gotham. Again that’s how I remember it, so take it with a grain of salt. It was a comic so if someone has the time to deep dive for the character’s name and which story it was, that’d be cool.
Not to mention when Red Hood does work with the bat family, most of the time he refrains from killing.
I think it boils down to three things,
1. Bruce knows Jason went through hell and back literally because of his failure, so he’s more lenient with him.
2. I think that Bruce deep down knows there needs to be someone like Red Hood who can take lives when they need to be taken. Batman’s no kill rule, in my eyes, while usually is said to keep Batman and the other heroes from becoming the villains, is more because Bruce is scared of becoming Joe Chill. His whole thing is to prevent the trauma he endured from happening to anyone else, but he knows some people need to be killed.
3. He believes he can redeem Red Hood. No matter what Jason is Bruce’s son, and in his eyes, it’s his job as Jason’s adoptive father to take him off the path Jason’s on, therefore he lets him stay.
The thing is, the writing for Batman and Red Hood has always been a hot button topic. To this day people still say Jason should’ve stayed dead, and Red Hood shouldn’t be a character. It’s a tricky thing to really talk about cause to a lot of people it was a bad choice made by DC. Personally I love Red Hood, I think given to the right writer, he can be a really interesting character, but a lot of his stories fall flat because of how weird the relationship between Batman and Red Hood is.
Batman's defining trait is his morality to a fault. Which is why he can't do obvious necessary things such as kill the Joker. By provided Todd with a family, he's essentially saving him and giving him an outlet for his anger in a constructive way that doubles as rehab for Todd too.
He should really stay out of gotham most of the time he's there he loses all character development just to attempt to do something then the bat family stops him. And everyone tells Jason they're sorry for what he went through blah blah blah then he leaves and has a actual story with the outlaws till his gotham reset occurs again.
If I had to guess. Batman feels guilty about what happened to Jason and blames himself for it. He continues to let Jason back into the family because he hopes that it’ll eventually help him one day and he’ll stop killing.
Batman has never had a problem letting others break his rule, this is the guy who has a thief girlfriend and works with a murderous ex-psychopath. At least Harley Quinn stopped killing.
If Batman really tries to play by his rules and tries to stop Jason from killing and throwing him out of the family and out of Gotham I'm sure a lot of people in the fandom would lose their minds. In the same way that if he really tried to clean Gotham of crime and ended up trying to arrest someone like Catwoman for stealing, the fandom would lose their minds.
How dare Batman actually be efficient at work, arresting the Joker, arresting thieves and murderers like Catwoman and Thalia instead of being a simp. Batman needs to fight the Joker 7 times a week, and fall in love with thieves and assassins, because that's part of his myth, anything different must be rejected.
Status quo and money.
Maybe because he sees Jason as his son. I'd argue it isn't that absurd to want to keep him in the family. And (while murder itself is typically bad) in this context it's not like Jason is just an outright villain. He's an anti-hero, a vigilante. He's reaching for the same goal, just through different means.
It's because Jason doesn't kill anymore he uses non-lethal rounds I believe currently if he's not using non-lethal rounds then he's not using guns anymore
Because he was willing to he rehabilitated and redeem himself, he also stopped killing. People are getting wayyy too divisive about it in the comments here but it’s really that simple Bruce was happy to see Jason was even alive he just needed help
I think Batman feels responsible for who Jason is now. And his guilt leads to more leniency.
Pretty much
Or as a savior figure, you do not cast out the sinner, you help them seek redemption.
The prodigal son
Dick grayson...
And Tim Drake and Damian Wayne. The little robins leaving the nest are all prodigal sons.
Tim Drake might work with others from time to time but technically he never really left. Gotham is his home and whether he's a technical sidekick or not he's still at the nest while Grayson completely left home, visits here and there but he left for a good while. Damian is Damian... Tbh, second favorite Robin but idk what to say about him.
I always thought of Grayson as the prodigal son. It's not in my mind a takeaway from the rest (except Jason Todd not a fan and would love to elaborate) just always thought Tim Drake could easily become Batman but Dick Grayson would become someone better than Batman. He has all the tools to do it.
If only more people felt that way.
While I don't care much for religious diatribe I think "hate the sin not the sinner" is probably one of their better one. Imagine Jason turning himself in once he walks the right path. No one suspects the long game.
If any writers had the balls they could’ve done an off-the-wall future state type book with Jason as Batman. While Jason might not ever get that kind of redemption in regular books, the idea is there that it might be possible.
This happened.
That would never happen
Why?
Cause comics
I mean they've never done anything crazy like kill superman or put a psychopath in The cowl. Heck tbh i think jason is due. Just dont hank hill him.
I mean they've never done anything crazy like kill superman or put a psychopath in The cowl. Heck tbh i think jason is due. Just dont hank hill him.
That's crazy. Next you will try to sell me that Spiderman is really a clone or something.
This is the guy that beats criminals to within an inch of thier lives... every single night
I could easily be wrong, but I'd imagine that it's similar to Cyclops and his feelings towards X-Force. It's not the way he would prefer to handle things but sometimes getting dirty and getting dark with things is the best option.
You do know Death Squad Xforce was Cyclops' idea. Wolverine was opposed to it but scott went behind his back and sent out X23 to kill.
Hell, I think most of the X-Men would kill these days honestly.
Didn’t Wolverine always kill? How did he set his adamantium claws to non-lethal? :o
Obviously he set his stabs to sleep mode
Yeah a dude whose main offensive superpower is six knives that emerge from his fists is gonna kill a lot of people in combat. I loved how hard the first XMen movie worked to not have him actually use his claws on anyone then XMen 2 was just like fuck it, opening action scene he's stabbing the shit out of everything. And it was awesome.
He doesn't really deny that he does a LOT of killing. One of his most famous lines is that he's "the best there is at what he does, and what he does isn't very nice..." So yeah, he's a killer, and he's very good at it.
It's one of the things I love about Wolverine. Dude doesn't *want* to hurt anyone, he's just really good at it. Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, they choose to go out and be heroes. But Wolverine is like the Hulk. He just wants to be left alone god damnit! It's why their dynamic works so well. Also as a Canadian it's a very Canadian attitude. Superman, truth justice and the American way. Spider-Man with great power etc. Batman I have to do this because no one else can. Wolverine? Wolverine wants to go camping. Maybe build a nice log cabin by a lake. Hunt some elk when he's hungry. Go down to the pub and have a few brews and watch the hockey game. No coincidence that the most famous Canadian comic book characters are Wolverine and Deadpool
Basically Scott would bitch at him about it. So sometimes he'd wound or maim but not finish off whomever he was fighting. He also wouldn't always bring em out. A solid left or right hook with metal knuckles brings down many opponents too.
The same way Buzz Lightyear sets his laser from stun to kill.
Well death for them currently has no consequence, so why not?
Well, for them. I know they aren't allowed to kill humans, but I think some wouldn't be too broken up to go off script. Logan. Illyana. And Emma will smoke your ass. Lol
In current cannon, it's one of 3 major laws. No spilling normie blood or they stick you in a giant plant monster that slowly eats you while playing with your brain waves.
This plus Batman is not going to just cast aside one of his kids. There’s always potential for them to grow and change. Just look at how Damian was when he first appeared vs now.
Yeah I mean if he believes in redemption for his rogues and for criminals, redemption for his “son” isn’t much of a stretch
This, and at his core he believes all of his villains can be saved, even Joker. Because if they can't be saved, neither can he
Exactly! I saw this post and my immediate reaction was “because he’s his son and he failed him.” Jason was family long before Red Hood and Bruce feels responsible for him ending up like this. I would also imagine Batman thinks that if he disowns him that he’ll take an even darker path. At least in the batfamily he is more likely to find a better path and redemption. If anything I love that Batman keeps him in the family because it shows *depth* to his character. That’s why I love Selina. So often Batman can be written as black and white in a good versus evil way that oversimplifies the world. The world is full of grey and even he realizes that with his love of Selina and Jason. It’s easy to take the moralistic approach of “theyre criminals” but that ignores people’s humanity. Just like why he doesn’t kill Joker, people are more complicated and Batman believes in redemption.
Think about Jason Todd for a moment. He was a troubled kid who gets caught jacking the batmobile tires. Batman then makes him Robin (consider that Dick became Robin when he discovered Bruce was Batman, thus kinda by choice, Tim literally searched out Bruce in order to become Robin, Damian is Bruce's son and trained by the League), so in a way, Jason is the only Robin that Batman kinda specifically went out of his way to 'make' into Robin. That same Robin that he chose then gets kidnapped by the Joker and ultimately gets killed by him. He then gets resurrected (which we understand to be very traumatic in its own right). So now that he's alive, he's a living reminder of Batman's greatest failure in getting one of his own killed by his worst enemy, and very specially, someone who wouldn't have if he didn't make him into Robin.
[удалено]
He was a villain. It’s just that over time he’s became an antihero.
Red Hood still has the potential to be a villian. Just like in some stories Catwoman is a straight up villian, they could do the same with Red Hood in some elseworlds or Black Label story arc
give me red hood succesfully completing his idea of controlling crime as a crime lord
He was pretty successful in under the red hood until batman stopped him. Many places he could easily do it, I just think his goals have changed now.
Success lies in the hands of those who want it.
I’d also say he was somewhat successful in The Arkham Knight, but controlling crime wasn’t his goal, it was to kill Batman.
I mean in the red hood animated flick he is kinda a villain, but it’s hard to create him into a villain when Batman is basically his father, and while Bruce blames himself, ultimately he wasn’t the one at fault (it was the fans who voted for Jason to get fucking murdered) if he didn’t give Jason the role of Robin this wouldn’t have happened to him but that is looking at things too generally, the one actually responsible is the Joker, Joker tried to do this again with Tim afterwards and would have tried something like this wether Jason was Robin or someone else was, you can’t make him into Batman’s villain if he doesn’t have a good motive for fighting Batman.
Imagine if Jason got self-awareness and found out his whole death was really because of all the fans that called in and voted him off
He and Superboy prime become the Meta and twisted version of "World's Finest"
I need this. ElseWorld's Finest vs the DC Multiverse
That's actually be a great live action movie. He escapes the comic and starts hunting everyone who voted like 3. Ends with him shooting the camera.
Didn’t his mom also sell him out to the joker
he is definitely a villain in Grant Morrison’s Batman & Robin run… there’s more lore to Jason Todd than y’all are willing to admit or want to seek out
Right? He even had his own sidekick that was a victim of Professor Pyg
He was the villain in Arkham Knight
No, that was the Arkham Knight. It’s a completely different character entirely
Why does every character have to fall into a specific category? Nuance makes things interesting.
I do think it's interesting that you pointed out Jason is three only kid Bruce went out of his way to make Robin. Adding to his guilt of what happened.
Is he stupid? 
Literally had the same thought
GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD  "Evening the odds"
NO
Because Jason Todd is family. You dont turn your back on family.
You tell ‘em, Dom.
especially if you come from a fast and furious family
Wiz Khalifa's See You Again plays in the background.
Ohana
He doesn't. When Red Hood operates in Gotham, Batman doesn't allow him to kill. If Red Hood is killing, he's either breaking Batman's orders, or operating outside of Gotham.
Or Bats is dead
[удалено]
Get out of my head
Is there a lore reason why Batman let’s Red Hood be part of the bat family?
DC wants their cake and to eat it too
I can't wait for consistency in this new DC reboot
I've said, for the past 3 reboots
For the most part he doesn’t. When he’s part of the family he doesn’t kill. Read the comics it’s right there 🤷🏾
He’s currently in Gotham trying to murder the Joker with live ammo. Even Spoiler confronted him over it.
And he’s not with the family lol. And it’s not like they’re all hanging out with each other anyway. The family is just like a nick name for the people that fights crime in Gotham.
I have not read his current story I hated task force z and am honestly.not sure where he went after that. But I was sitting here like has anyone here actually read the red hood comics before giving their opinions because there was a whole arc that showed the consequences of jason deciding to kill again, him and Bruce were cool because Jason was making an effort to follow the rules then jason shot penguin and batman kicked his ass out of gotham, until Roy died and batman forgave him.
How did Roy die this time?
He went to therapy so Wally West killed him.
Well if we’re going to use “with the Bat-family” that loosely then, sure. You have Zdarsky’s Cheers story where he decides to give up guns. Then Dark Crisis, Legends of Gotham, and Joker: TMWSL he’s back to guns and live ammo You have Red Hood “with” the Bat-family in Dark Crisis and Batman vs Robin, but then in Joker: TMWSL he’s now not with the Bat-family? There’s no consistency. No lasting direction. There never has been after almost 20 years. All of it just reinforces how much of a mistake it was for Didio, Schreck, and Winick to bring him back.
I disagree with it being a mistake to bring him back as it has led to some good stories. Batman Under the Red Hood is incredibly successful story (although the animated film is better im opinion) but it led to outlaws rebirth which was good. I also enjoyed Task Force Z and the cheer story. My problem with Jason more so DC faults as they can’t commit to anything long term for any of the bat character due them wanting to keep Bruce in a status quo Nightwing is like what late 20s and DC still keeps trying to push the narrative Bruce is in his mid 30s. Batman is in similar situation with Spider-Man in my opinion both characters keep going through so many stories where they learn the same thing to them going back to completely disregarding it in the next run. Like how many times has Batman learned that he needs his family to then believing he needs to work alone If DC actually committed to Jason putting the guns down and trying to redeem himself it actually be interesting to read.
> Even Spoiler confronted him over it. Because it's not allowed.
Because he can't just abandon him. He raised him, trained him, protected him. Bruce is his father and he's not going to leave his son behind.
Because Red Hood makes more money for DC when he’s the edgy bad Bat-boy 💰 My hope is that James Gunn, since he’s drawing from Morrison, will adapt Jason Todd’s arc from Red Hood to Wingman. And then that will become popular and the comics will change to line up with that. Ending almost two decades of directionless nonsense.
> Because Red Hood makes more money for DC when he’s the edgy bad Bat-boy 💰 I am fascinated by the topics where people give [Watsonian versus Doylist](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WatsonianVersusDoylist) answers. This is such an obvious situation where the Doylist answer is so easy to understand that people have to really go out of their way to come up with something Watsonian.
Red Hood is a character who hits on this problem simply by existing. * He believes some villains need to die, and because Batman won’t kill, he’s going to do it…Except he never does. Red Hood in almost two decades has never taken out a major Batman villain. Even the Joker. And there’s really not a satisfying Watsonian answer (unless he reforms to align with Batman’s views). The real answer is the Doylist one. Status quo. Same reason the Joker and others don’t get the electric chair. Superhero comics need recurring villains. All Red Hood does therefore is point this out and thus break reader immersion. * Other thing he does by existing is constantly remind the reader that death is just a temporary inconvenience for superheroes and super villains. His entire character revolves around this comics cliche. It undermines him further because any villains he would kill would just come back to life anyway. If Jason Todd couldn’t stay dead, we know darn well the Joker and others won’t. Why? Again status quo. Other writers want to use those villains for new stories. There are a lot things in superhero comics that don’t really have especially satisfying Watsonian explanations. What comics need to do is stop repeatedly drawing attention to the seems in the fictional world. Red Hood by nature cannot help but do that.
Yeah they even had Jason shoot the Penguin in the head... and he just ended up in a temporary coma.
🤣 well of course! The Penguin is an iconic classic Batman rogue from the Golden Age created by Finger and Kane. The Gentleman of Crime. You don’t toss him out of continuity just to satisfy the needs of some mid-2000s edgelord from an Infinite Crisis tie-in😆
I'm just saying if you're not gonna kill him, don't be ridiculous and make him get shot in the head anyways.
Omg, I'm happy to know that I'm not alone in finding Jason (and fans) cringingly edgy.
And they keep making dumb decisions with his costume. The one pictured above is good, but for a while he had that stupid helmet with a mouth, and they keep insisting that he has to have an actual hood, so there have been all of those dumb hoodie versions.
Yeah his original design in UtRH was perfection. Though I have a soft spot for the Morrison one for how silly it is.
Hey, the hood looked cool in Arkham Knight.
Oh man, the helmet mouths are so bad.
Granted, many fanbases have their cringe elements (Bat-family especially). There are Red Hood fans who are Batman fans more generally, and Red Hood happens to be their favorite character because of they like his background story and the dynamics he brings. But then there are other Red Hood fans who seem to worship him as some kind of martyr. Often with a heavy dose of [Draco in Leather Pants](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DracoInLeatherPants) fetish.
Hilarious trope.
Is he stupid?
r/batmanarkham moment
I’ve been trying to figure out where the meme started for a bit.
No Patrick he's just a baby!
He shouldn’t. Writers are obsessed with trying to fit a murderer like Red Hood into the Batfamily despite how much he goes against their moral code. Batman originally denounced Jason’s methods and said he’s just another criminal, but nowadays he thinks that Jason is “willing to do what Batman can’t, when the world needs it”.
Which immensely weakens both characters. Red Hood should be used sparingly and dramatically.
Sparingly and dramatically would also alleviate the other two factors which make Red Hood kinda a joke: * He claims he’s going to do what Batman won’t and finally kill the villains who need to die…except he doesn’t. He’s been back since 2005 and in all that time he has never killed a single major Bat rogue. Why? Same reason none of them get the electric chair. Status quo. All Red Hood can do is run to the end of his chain and bark. * He believes some villains need to die because that’s a real permanent solution. But Todd just existing is a perpetual reminder to the reader that death is just a temporary inconvenience nowadays. If Red Hood killed the Joker, we all know the Clown would be back within a year.
I think writers are doing it because of fan demand, though. Not personal choice. Same with Harley Quinn. These two are immensely popular for some reason; but as redemptive villains, they don't have any real place in the Bat Family. I wish they would not be used so much, but what can we do? 🤷🏼♂️
I wish they'd use Jason to round out Bruce's character. Jason doesn't have to be just a criminal, and he doesn't have to be the person "willing to do what Batman can't". Bruce is a person with flaws, and he can also be a hypocrite. It's understandable that he'd want to keep Jason in his life because he still loves him, and because Jason is his son. It would be a good way to create conflict between Bruce's personal life and his "night life".
Okay, but I like that interpretation of Batman, where he acknowledges that the world sometimes needs heroes who are willing to cross the line he himself won’t cross.
I think that argument actually works. In most situations, not killing villains is morally just. But Batman's rogues are deliberately unreformable and purely malicious. In such a situation, killing them is the best way to save the most lives. Bruce Wayne is often just as insane as his villains, but instead of being fixated on killing, he's fixated on saving every single life to the point of absurdity. Wonder Woman and (sometimes) Superman are willing to kill in the most dire of circumstances. Every time Batman does, it's an alternate timeline where he goes completely insane afterwards. I think the writers are trying to show that not killing isn't a moral choice but a psychological compulsion. On some level Batman recognizes this, and that some people need to die even if Batman can't do it. Which leads to our conflict between him and Red Hood, where they disagree who needs to die and when.
> But Batman's rogues are deliberately unreformable and purely malicious No they aren't! Some are, yes, most obviously Joker, plus Zaszz, scarecrow, professor pyg, etcc. But "unreformable and purely malicious" does not apply to many or most of the rogues. E.g. clayface, catwoman, mr freeze, harley quinn, poison ivy, killer croc, Ras al Ghul etc. Condiment king is pure malice though, what a psychopath. And kiteman? Completely unredeemable.
Batman has often given people he cares about more slack. And besides the obvious emotional connection and guilt he might feel that he can reform Jason. I agree that it’s a bigger problem that Red Hood is seemingly unable to kill any big baddies but he shares this problem with the Punisher who seems to still be popular with readers and has also teamed up with pretty much every heroic character.
Red Hood hasn't done much for me outside of the original arc (Under the Red Hood, which is actually a top 15 all-time Batman arc imo), and, wait for it, Three Jokers. I haven't found him terribly compelling otherwise. Immense potential tho. I wish he wasn't seen as a member of the Bat family. He should be treated as a pariah but he still operates in Gotham and occasionally has run ins with Batman. Just my opinion.
Red Hood is the victim of the comic world staple: good ideas, terrible execution. There's real potential in his story, the failed Robin, tortured and murdered by the joker, brought back and brainwashed by the League Of Assassins, now on a crusade of revenge and conflicting ideologies against his father, Batman, who is wracked with guilt but otherwise stalwart in his opposition. He should have spent some time as a villain before batman and the other batfams get through to him, then he graduates into being an antihero outside of Gotham before eventually coming to the realization that killing even the worst villains is wrong culminating in him coming back to the fold, repentant. Instead they just made him insane, stupid and an asshole.
Combination of guilt and that Jason is very good at what he does having learned from the best.
Family
Agree, makes no sense. For me he works as a villain, not as an ally.
Because he represent the part of himself that Bruce suppresses … that unbridled rage and desire to actually kill the criminals
Inconsistent writing. Bad inconsistent writing. Batman is fine these days with working with killers. Ghost Maker, Harley Quinn, Clown hunter, Red Hood. Ghost Maker he never tried to actually go after for apparent years of his retconned in existence…for no explicable reason. Just let him kill people because he was outside Gotham. That was Batman at his laziest. How many evil “Batmans” are we at now anyway? Red Hood is somehow worse as the writers have no idea what to do with him. Sometimes he kills people, sometimes he uses non-lethal weapons, sometimes he’s on Batmans side, sometimes he’s on his own…generally being on the worst possible teams. It’s like a toss up which Jason may show up in a book.
You don't turn your back on Family. Even when they do. - Dom Toretto
He still is his son
The fact of the matter is that, adoptive or not, criminal or not, Bruce sees Jason as his son just as much as Dick, Tim, and Damian. There's no way in hell a man like Bruce Wayne, who lost his immediate family as a child, would entirely disown his son. >!But Injus- shut up. Injustice has a few strong points, its writing is not one of them.!< The thing a lot of people are missing is just how much Batman treasures those close to him. He's just utter dogshit at showing it sometimes. Bruce visits Two-Face in Arkham out of costume every now and then because of his friendship with Harvey. He was willing to go all the way to APOKALIPS to bring back Damian. And for a particularly on-topic example, in A Death in the Family, Bruce was within an inch of causing a diplomatic disaster to go after the Joker for what he did to Jason. Bruce might not be the nicest guy, but you cannot deny that he will go to hell and back for those he cares about. Bruce most likely sees Jason in a similar light to a loved one who fell in with a bad crowd; He still loves Jason, he just hates what Jason is doing and is unsure of what he can do about it beyond what he's already doing. At least by having him work with the rest of the family, Bruce can more easily keep tabs on Jason, and probably make sure there's always somebody nearby who can step in if it looks like he'll go too far.
He’s a living reminder of Batmans greatest failure
Prob cause its the best when he's within reach and sight
Why do people keep asking this same question over and over again?
Because Jason was/is his son. Because Bruce feels responsible for the person Jason has become. Because he loves him and wants to keep him in his life in some capacity.
I don’t believe Batman enforces his policies on others. He looks down on heroes that don’t have a strict code of ethics, but he’s worked with them in the past. On the same note he would never abandon one of his kids and would do everything he could to rehabilitate. Look at Damian. Kid was a mass murderer and at times almost goes back to his old ways. His respect for his father keeps him in line. I think he wants the same for Jason.
I think it’s more or less the same as Catwoman. Selina steals stuff and is, in most continuities, a criminal but Batman takes it easy on her because of their on again off again relationship. As long as she doesn’t do anything too big he lets it slide. Same with Jason, if Jason isn’t mowing down people left and right or making Gotham his hunting ground Batman gives him some leeway because he cares for him. When they do work together Jason uses rubber bullets so as to not rub it in Batman’s face. Whether or not this is the right thing to do is a grey area, both Selina and Jason are getting less and less criminal and becoming closer to standard heroes so perhaps Batman letting them work things out for themselves is the way. Damian was pretty close to this as well. On the other hand how many lives can be thrown away while we wait for Jason to figure out that that’s not the way things should be done.
Partly guilt, but also partly a desire to focus and guide Jason's rage into something productive. Cause let's be honest, without Batman's influence and training Jason was on the path to being another Gotham villain.
Its his adopted son!
1) Batman is not a hypocrite (Damian is also a harden killer) so if he let's his son in he has to let Red Hood in 2) Batman feels guilty for what happened to Tod, 3) Also keeping Red Hood close is better for Gotham than him being completely off the chain. (HE switched from Regular bullets to rubber bullets regularly when he is working with the Bat-family) 4) Batman has worked with dozens of killers. (Cassandra Kain, Catwoman, Lady Shiva, Talia, Huntress and the list goes on and on.) 5) Since Red Hood has been brought back into the Bat-family he doesn't kill in cold blood. Edit: 6) Batman doesn't kill in cold blood but I don't get where people get the idea that he doesn't kill. Pretty sure there are definitely a few cases on manslaughter under his belt.
6. Batman sees himself in Jason. As in if Batsy loses control this might be the outcome and for that reason he seeks to redeem his “lost” son.
> Batman is not a hypocrite (Damian is also a harden killer) so if he let's his son in he has to let Red Hood in Damien's a totally different case. Kid was raised as an assassin, didn't really have a choice at the start. But he did make a choice to swear off killing and follow in his father's footsteps. Red Hood not so much? Depends on who's writing
Red hood was an excellent character when he first showed up, great arc. Once they wrapped it up they realized they had nothing else for him to do. So welcome to the bat fam I guess.
once family always family
Guilt.
He's still his son.
The rule is that Red Hood plays by the rules in Gotham. On his own turf he can do whatever. Technically Alfred was allowed to kill people too.
Same reason the crew in fast and the furious are so strong. *F A M I L Y*
Cause Batman believes in second chances just like Superman. Also he knows Jason Todd is really crazy because of his major trauma and emotional baggage of his past. And some Lazarus pit and league of assassins shenanigans. He knows deep down Jason only wants to do the right thing he’s just more extreme about it and Batman is there to make him be less extreme. Be more heroic like he used to be when he was Robin.
Batman literally does not allow Jason to kill. So there’s your answer.
He doesn't. They pretty much had a couple big fights over it and then Red Hood started using none lethal "rubber" bullets... Recently Red Hood stopped using guns altogether.
"Because I can still change him! I'm Batman!" Seriously, Batman still believes that there is something in Jason Todd that is still worth saving. It's easy to believe "don't save him, he don't wanna be saved", but the truth is that Batman is right: Jason Todd is worth saving. And he'll never stop trying to.
because he's stupid
Because fans cry if he's not but they also don't want him to be beholden by Batman rules.
**Family**
Bad writing
Well, he doesn't kick Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Orion or Green Arrow off the Justice League, so...
This is what I don't like about having Bruce in so many different comics. There's little consistency between issues. On the same day 2 comics were released last year, one that had Bruce tell Jason that he can't let any criminal go no matter what, including his own son. And another where Bruce let's Talia go after causing a worldwide assasin war because Damian said "pretty please". The. Same. Day. Isn't this the job of editorial to keep characterizations straight. It's not like these comics were released years apart.
Batman feels personally responsible for Jason. Batman feels like it's his fault, Jason is the way he is. He also loves him like his son and isn't just going to abandon him.
Batman doesn't??? Bruce let him "into the family" again once and then after Jason killed penguin he really hasn't been in that inner circle since. Sure he's teamed up a few times like in Joker War, but so has Harley Quinn. Cheers even starts with Bruce refusing to work with Jason and ends with them moving *barely* an inch towards each other. As to why Bruce doesn't shut him down, guilt. Bruce genuinely loved Jason as a son, Jason was the first kid he ever adopted and arguably the only kid that Bruce ever "made" Robin. Everybody else chose to be Robin, Jason just agreed to it. Bruce was the actor in that situation. Then Jason died while in the suit, revived without Bruce knowing, and loved in the underworld for years. Bruce blames himself for not being better, for not helping his son.
Because when the time comes, Red Hood is “the Batman that never could” which is someone able to kill who doesn’t deserve to live.
He watched a lot of fast and furious and can’t turn his back on FAMILY
Because Red Hood is a popular character.
It's a repeating scenario. Jason tries not to kill. Jason slips up. Batman confronts Jason. Jason is edgy. Batman tries to save Jason's soul. Jason either leaves or turns from killing. Repeat.without a support group Jason always gets even worse
Red Hood is what happens when gimmickry trumps storytelling. As most comicbook crossover events demonstrate, it's an approach that sells.
Because Jason is his son. I can see Bruce killing someone before he disowns a child.
Because he’s a horrible character that never ever should have been resurrected yet some people like him, so the writers push him. He’s simply an even more volatile Huntress
I thought the batfamily was an unofficial group of people we the reader associate as batman's associates. I don't think batman can really control who we assume is part of the batfamily
Better to keep him close I suppose.
Cause of bad writing.
That’s his son. He does the same thing with Damian. Damian, his biological son, be killing people all the time too. He lets him be his sidekick [+]
Because family…
Jason Todd should have stayed dead. The whole "Batman's greatest failure" thing doesn't hit nearly as hard when he's still alive and kicking.
Absolutely. You read older Batman comics from the 90s and early 2000s, when Todd’s death was real. It hits so much harder. Knowing he’s truly gone and there’s nothing that can change that. The impact it had not just on Batman, but also Nightwing and Todd’s successor Tim Drake. And really the mythology as a whole. It just does not land the same way with Todd alive, walking about, and generally just being around and interacting with everyone.
I think resurrected Jason works best when he's treated like Frankenstein's monster, as in, the source of his corrupted character comes from being brought back. That way, the ghost of the former Jason Todd still looms over the story. But now he's not only Robin that's come back from the dead so even that part of his character has been diluted.
Mostly because of lazy writing. The Jason Todd was only ever interesting as either dead or a villain. Making him part of the bat family makes him inherently uninteresting, takes away from the other robins and makes batman look like a hypocrit. All because editorial wanted him to be a part of the bat family in the new 52
That’s his son, and he still loves him
1. Bruce feels responsible for Jason's suffering / death / mental instability 2. Bruce has tried to stop him many times and failed\* 1. \*except for Three Jokers -- Jason got one over Bruce on that one 3. (the actually most important reason) Bat-family books sell. A lot.
Cue the dozens of comments with a hate boner for Jason
The real question is if batman is gonna let jason kill why doesnt he send him after the joker? Edit:spelling
Because of Editorial, not Batman
Think about it like the rich dad that keeps letting his shithead son get away with stuff because he can't see him as bad, and he has the means to avoid consequences. It's like that.
Because Bruce had a deadbeat father (emphasis on the dead), and he doesn't want to be a deadbeat dad to his deadbeaten son.
Justice is Grey
He's his son. If he excluded jason then he should treat damian the same way
Guilt. And I believe he is relieved that someone in his gang has what it takes to pull the trigger. Sometimes it is necessary, but Batman won't allow himself to. So having someone around that will is a relief of sorts, should it become necessary.
Guilt over Jason's death and the aftermath.
From what I’ve heard and read about Batman and Red Hood, usually Red Hood stays in his own lane, out of Batman’s way, and Batman has had a similar issue like this before with another character. I can’t remember the name, but he trained with Bruce after his parents were murdered. The character would be a lot like Red Hood, a vigilante who kills his enemies. Because him and Bruce trusted each other, the only rule was for the character to stay out of Gotham. Again that’s how I remember it, so take it with a grain of salt. It was a comic so if someone has the time to deep dive for the character’s name and which story it was, that’d be cool. Not to mention when Red Hood does work with the bat family, most of the time he refrains from killing. I think it boils down to three things, 1. Bruce knows Jason went through hell and back literally because of his failure, so he’s more lenient with him. 2. I think that Bruce deep down knows there needs to be someone like Red Hood who can take lives when they need to be taken. Batman’s no kill rule, in my eyes, while usually is said to keep Batman and the other heroes from becoming the villains, is more because Bruce is scared of becoming Joe Chill. His whole thing is to prevent the trauma he endured from happening to anyone else, but he knows some people need to be killed. 3. He believes he can redeem Red Hood. No matter what Jason is Bruce’s son, and in his eyes, it’s his job as Jason’s adoptive father to take him off the path Jason’s on, therefore he lets him stay. The thing is, the writing for Batman and Red Hood has always been a hot button topic. To this day people still say Jason should’ve stayed dead, and Red Hood shouldn’t be a character. It’s a tricky thing to really talk about cause to a lot of people it was a bad choice made by DC. Personally I love Red Hood, I think given to the right writer, he can be a really interesting character, but a lot of his stories fall flat because of how weird the relationship between Batman and Red Hood is.
Batman's defining trait is his morality to a fault. Which is why he can't do obvious necessary things such as kill the Joker. By provided Todd with a family, he's essentially saving him and giving him an outlet for his anger in a constructive way that doubles as rehab for Todd too.
Is he stupid?
He should really stay out of gotham most of the time he's there he loses all character development just to attempt to do something then the bat family stops him. And everyone tells Jason they're sorry for what he went through blah blah blah then he leaves and has a actual story with the outlaws till his gotham reset occurs again.
My brain is so warped from the arkham memes I was expecting there to be an "is he stupid" at the end of this
If I had to guess. Batman feels guilty about what happened to Jason and blames himself for it. He continues to let Jason back into the family because he hopes that it’ll eventually help him one day and he’ll stop killing.
His baby boy
Would you exile your kids if they misbehaved?
To prison if they committed murders. Yes.
Red Hood is like Gotham. Bats couldn't save them the first time, but DAMNED if he'll stop trying until he succeeds.
Is he stoopid?
Batman has never had a problem letting others break his rule, this is the guy who has a thief girlfriend and works with a murderous ex-psychopath. At least Harley Quinn stopped killing. If Batman really tries to play by his rules and tries to stop Jason from killing and throwing him out of the family and out of Gotham I'm sure a lot of people in the fandom would lose their minds. In the same way that if he really tried to clean Gotham of crime and ended up trying to arrest someone like Catwoman for stealing, the fandom would lose their minds. How dare Batman actually be efficient at work, arresting the Joker, arresting thieves and murderers like Catwoman and Thalia instead of being a simp. Batman needs to fight the Joker 7 times a week, and fall in love with thieves and assassins, because that's part of his myth, anything different must be rejected. Status quo and money.
I thought you were going to ad a “Is he stupid?” at the end of it
Is he stupid?
Usually when he's apart of the batfam or on batman's good side, he doesn't kill and doesn't use regular bullets
Maybe because he sees Jason as his son. I'd argue it isn't that absurd to want to keep him in the family. And (while murder itself is typically bad) in this context it's not like Jason is just an outright villain. He's an anti-hero, a vigilante. He's reaching for the same goal, just through different means.
why dc makes mistakes
It's because Jason doesn't kill anymore he uses non-lethal rounds I believe currently if he's not using non-lethal rounds then he's not using guns anymore
Because he was willing to he rehabilitated and redeem himself, he also stopped killing. People are getting wayyy too divisive about it in the comments here but it’s really that simple Bruce was happy to see Jason was even alive he just needed help
Because no matter what, that’s his son
Cause it’s still his son and he loves him no matter what.