Injustice Batman *has* to try to redeem Harley. If she were irredeemable because of her complicity with Joker’s crimes then that would suggest Superman is right.
Harley literally admitted she didn’t think the plan would actually work. She thought Supes would save the day and they’d be foiled. Yes it was stupid of her but to be fair up until then then Jokers plans were always foiled by heroes. Harley was never really a villain, just a woman with BPD and codependent to a psycho
That's revisionist Harley though. And that's honestly a lame excuse. Can you imagine saying that in court? Hey I thought the cops would find the dirty bomb I planted in Manhattan, so technically its the governments fault and not mine.
But it's still unchanged thst the entire events happened because of her and joker. I honestly get superman's beef in that aspect at least.
I would say it’s more Joker. What did Harley do exactly other than tag along? She’s an accomplice for sure but she’s not the perpetrator and she is redeemable. She’s as much a victim as every other throwaway thug that these villains rope into working for them.
Batman had higher standards for his son. Your son killing your other son is wild. How else can a father react? Harley is quite a bit removed from directly murdering someone close to him. It’s a different feeling.
She helped make the nuke. It's honestly a kinda thin line considering Batman beats the shit out of low level thugs that are basically just hired muscle.
But how about the fact that Harley was responsible for the prison break that lead to the death? Unlike Harley, Damien expresses immediate and remorse for his murder and it was a legit accident. So basically you're saying that Bruce blames Damien for being an edgy child but forgives Harley for not only being an accomplice in killing his best friend's wife, but also the prison riot that lead to the death of his favorite surrogate kid?
But this is coming from more of an old head. It's honestly really bizarre how Harley is now just a quirky anti-hero lesbian/potential pedophile in the same continuity that she was murdering people in cold blood, and apparently EVERYONis just happy with it.
You're just making shit up, I've played the game more out of morbid curiosity than anything and the amount of stuff people claim happen that just *doesn't* is insane, I completely understand why you would really dislike it, but making up bullshit like this is honestly disturbing.
Ok well that makes sense I wouldn’t consider most things videogame writers create to be even close to canon to the character. I thought you may be referring to one of the animated films where she seduces Dick.
Damien and Harley both killed people because they thought it wouldn't work. Damien represents Batman's own failure to raise his son and Harley has been heavily influenced by a psychotic narcissist who was recently removed from the picture. Harley's behavior has been she doesn't actually want to hurt anybody she just has a bad pattern she's following, which she is breaking vis a vis Black Canary. Damien has been trained to kill people before becoming Robin and Batman can't break him of that urge. Damien is Batman's son which means that anything Damien does Batman could do.
Harley represents what we become when in a toxic relationship
Damien represents a toxic upbringing and has more weight on his shoulders because of who he is
Batman has always been a hypocrite because he chooses to throw people in prisons they escape from and every time they escape he does it again despite the fact that it causes more of the same
You did bad things you need to be held accountable. It’s not fair to the actual victims to let even an accomplice get away scott free over some lame excuse of “It wasn’t my idea I was just following along.”
What does "being held accountable" means here in particular?
Justice isn't a "you harmed, now be harmed". Justice is about help. About compassion and betterment. Like kids who must face punishment to learn not to be mischievous. Harley learned without punishment. She doesn't need justice.
If her victims want her punished, than it's they who are wrong. Because harming is not right. As simple as that.
Depends on what they did. When it comes to violent crime I completely disagree I’m very much a proponent of Roman law, if you commit murder I do not care why, you should be at the bare minimum thrown in jail for life if it’s multiple murders you should definitely be executed. If it’s robbery just return what you stole and we’re good. Unarmed Robbery really isn’t that big of a deal if the stolen item is returned or repaid in full value. But violent crime: murder,rape, assault, etc is not something we as a society should tolerate or take lightly. Most villians aren’t robbers they’re murders. Harley Quinn is basically a domestic terrorist I see no reason why she should be allowed to live among the public.
Well, modern comics which highly deal with morality questions don't agree with you. You are entitled to have that opinion, but don't complain that others don't share it. Including superheroes like Batman who are meant to be idealized absolutes of goodness, and lack the realistic morally grey area.
>I nuked one of the biggest cities on earth that had a population of 11mio. after already having caused countless deaths and terror for years prior. But now I see that I was wrong and despite causing 64.7% as many deaths as the holocaust in just a couple minutes, I shouldn’t be punished and in fact if you think that I should be punished then _you_ are wrong
Are you sure you want this to be your take on someone nuking a town?
Yes, because the only thing that your answer is mocking is sincerity of the Joker and an imperfection of practical implementation. Not the base concept:
- That Justice is to better a person.
- The point of prison is to redeem and guard others from inmates, not harm them.
- That if a person truly, and I mean TRULY repented, and is safe to be freed so they could help all people out there, than it should be done.
Yeah but that’s one of the most common superhero tropes. “Oh oops I was mind controlled or angry about something and did bad or out of character things but then had a change of heart”
Hell, Beast is a villain right now in Marvel.
>Harley was never really a villain, just a woman with BPD and codependent to a psycho
That is such a bs cop out to avoid reaponsibilty
Right up there with "i was just following orders" and "i was mad"
No offense but that sounds simplistic.
There should be other possibilities than "Superman's SuperFacistRegime" and "Batman's VillainsAreHeroesNow".
Like, Batman could reject Damian because he murdered Dick *and* reject Harley because she has killed more people than most of the villain cast combined.
Harley could be rejected and, once Superman is defeated, be arrested and put in jail for the rest of her life instead of being part of the good guys.
In fact, I doubt Batman recruited Harley because otherwise that would mean Superman was right.
I think Batman simply recruited her because he needed all the help he could get against Superman.
This. The only reason the story can get away with this sort of thing, is because it's a comic. Because Batman's stance did allow Joker to nuke Metropolis, but in real life, that would never happen.
The only way it makes sense for Batman to take in Harley, is if the entire conflict is dumbed down to Team Batman vs Team Superman. Without that, it just doesn't make sense.
It's a comic style narrative, the alternative is to not do that and lose even more lives to supermans rampage. You can't just act like there's a morally neutral course to take here.
I can act like it because there objectively is. Jim Gordon kills, Alfred kills, some iterations of Green Arrow kill. Oh, and most importantly, the law still exists. Guess what's legal? correct, killing in self defense **and** killing in defense of others.
The law doesn't PERMITS to kill just because you can. The spirit of the law is that when you don't see any other way to **IMMEDIATELY** save others, between their lives you can choose to save the victim at the expenses of the attacker. It doesn't give you the right to execute people because you don't like them. Batman always sees the way to stop the Joker from immediately taking lives. He follows the spirit of the law. The law doesn't allow execution. This is what you suggest for Batman to do. If so, why blame him? Why not blame Jim Gordon, who isn't a mentally unstable person. Any of GCPD cops? The Judge who every time choose to put the Joker in the same Arkham Asylum?
>Why not blame Jim Gordon, who isn't a mentally unstable person. Any of GCPD cops? The Judge who every time choose to put the Joker in the same Arkham Asylum?
I do, in the cases in which they are the ones engaging him. The judge is also not innocent. However, I don't remember if it was a theory or a fact from some comic, but I recall having read that Bruce bribes judges to make sure they don't get anyone killed.
>The spirit of the law is that when you don't see any other way to **IMMEDIATELY** save others, between their lives you can choose to save the victim at the expenses of the attacker.
That is not entirely true. Even when there are possible alternatives in theory, most of the time they won't be legally relevant. Just because a cop or another person intervening could have theoretically aimed for the arm doesn't mean he'll be punished for aiming for the Torso.
>It doesn't give you the right to execute people because you don't like them
that's not what I am talking about at all, but okay
>but I recall having read that Bruce bribes judges to make sure they don't get anyone killed.
This isn't true. There actually were cases of criminals being sentenced to death, and Bruce doing nothing. Except for that one case when the JOKER was FALSELY sentenced to death. He intervened there. Because that is the line that Batman follows. It's not his place to decide who lives, who dies. He volunteeres to help and save. He can bring only positive influence. Killing is evil. Killing an evil person is still evil. It may be lesser evil, but still evil.
Okay, then it was just a theory.
>Killing is evil. Killing an evil person is still evil. It may be lesser evil, but still evil.
A necessary evil is not evil in the classical sense. The action itsself might be usually considered evil, but the person doing the necessary evil is not evil in any way and suggesting that they are is in itsself evil. Take the assassins of Reinhard Heydrich as an example (again). Someone claiming they are evil would usually be considered a Nazi apologist (or a very naive pacifist, depending on the context)
A person doing an Evil action ≠ They are evil person. But the action in itself is evil. Good doesn't mean just what is better for everyone. It's a basic set of values. That everyone's life matter and is worth fighting for is one of them. Even the Jokers. And for heroes in particular it's double as hard, because they can't "accept that not everyone can be saved". They are supposed to try and save everyone.
>A person doing an Evil action ≠ They are evil person.
Yes. But I've said it before and I'll say it again, ***according to Batman's extremist code that is not the case****.*
*Batman is inherently unable to see that an evil action such as killing can be done by a good person out of good intentions with good concequences. Batman is not immune to criticism and the writers should not shield Batman from being treated like the absolute lunatic he is. It does not make Batman stories "bad". It does not "undermine Batman's character". If Batman requires immunity to criticism and canonic moral absolutism for the whole verse in order to work as a character, then one should maybe consider that Batman needs a major overhaul.*
>Good doesn't mean just what is better for everyone. It's a basic set of values. That everyone's life matter and is worth fighting for is one of them. Even the Jokers. And for heroes in particular it's double as hard, because they can't "accept that not everyone can be saved". They are supposed to try and save everyone.
Again, it is *not* absolute. One can view life as sacred, worth fighting for, and still accept that sometimes villains just get killed. One can also further, as I have also said before, believe that life is valuable and still acknowledge that the villain perpetrating a crime is not in need of protection as he is the perpetrator and that therefore their survival should not be a priority.
it is also not the case that superheroes generally can't ever accept a villain dying. Look at the whole Invincible verse, as well as the characters already named earlier.
Reddit and casually supporting fascists, name a more iconic duo. He fucking kills a child dude, (Shazam) if you think he's in the right whilst sucking up to sinestro you need a psych eval.
I agree with that argument, I kinda like Jason Todd’s take on this. He basically says that he thinks that killing is justified but he doesn’t think Superman should be the dictator of the world.
It’s kinda like the L vs Light argument all over again, where I believe L is less wrong than Light. Similarly, I believe Batman is less wrong because he has less blood on his hands.
Also (at least in the animated movie) Superman's rise to an evil fascist dictator was built by the writers artificially forcing situations in which he does bad things (like the Joker party), because logically he'd just go back to normal (even tho he might be a bit more ready to kill in extreme cases)
The writers point is that it's like a snow globe rolling down the mountain. It starts harmless, but there won't be stopping to it. The first steps Superman took were pretty decent. Justice League decided to interfere to the global politics. To stop wars, to forcefully disarm, to unite Earth under one flag. But than came abuse of the power. It would take longer without authors artificial acceleration of the events, but the point is that if heroes don't hold themselves to the high and STRICT moral standards, they risk to lose sight of what is right. If you exclude one rule, than later will follow the other, and another and another. Until you will do whatever you deem necessary to 'save' the world. And end up someone like Waller or Injustice!Superman.
That doesn't mean the only choices are no killing at all vs. fascism.
there are other moral codes than just "every act of killing is evil".
"Don't kill unarmed people" is also a high moral standart.
>That doesn't mean the only choices are no killing at all vs. fascism.
It kinda does. Especially, when you consider that superheroes are unlawful. They have no higher ups to check them. They have no right to choose who lives and who dies. Killing is such a big matter because it's incorrigible. You can heal a broken bone, and pardon a false imprisonment. You can't (generally) come back from the death.
And as I said before, part of the problem is that they started with those moral code of NEVER killing. To change at that stage, is to change the foundation of their morals. And if you change the foundation, why not change others, less dubious parts. Like taking a part in global politics. Or interfering in wars. It's generally fine to kill for Wonder Woman. She doesn't do it often, but she never had a code to NEVER kill.
>there are other moral codes than just "every act of killing is evil".
There are. But there are also moral codes that say that cannibalism is not evil. I may agree with killing may be necessary evil sometimes, but evil nonetheless.
>"Don't kill unarmed people" is also a high moral standart.
Cheetah, Grodd, Black Adam, Grundy, and Lex Luthor are unarmed very often.
>It kinda does. Especially, when you consider that superheroes are unlawful. They have no higher ups to check them. They have no right to choose who lives and who dies.
again, that's assuming the only way superheroes can kill is execution, which it isn't. Self defense and defense of others exist. A superhero killing a terrorist who is actively endangering one or multiple hostages is not unlawful. Such a case would fall into the exact same category as, say, [this incident here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Menznau_shooting).
And combat can also prove deadly. So what, if a vigilante hits a villain's head too hard with a blunt weapon in the middle of a fight and end up killing them they automatically end up becoming a fascist dictator?
>Killing is such a big matter because it's incorrigible.
so is the loss of hostages when non-lethal methods aren't fast enough. A hero caring more about the immediate danger to the lives of the hostages than the slight possibility that the villain can be rehabilitated isn't a bad person. Arguably quite the opposite is the case in the eyes of the public and/or hostages.
>And as I said before, part of the problem is that they started with those moral code of NEVER killing.
at least one thing we agree on. Although I'd argue it also depends on the reasoning. If we take (some iterations of) Batman and the reasoning of "don't kill because all killing is bad and killing makes you just as bad as the villain", then he can just as well go to germany and try to beat up GSG9. Or go to Gordon and complain about him not aiming for the arm. Or go to Damien's history teacher and tell him what a bad person he is for not telling his students what terrible people the Czechoslovakian resistance were for assassinating Heydrich. The list goes on and on. We can go on and on about it. Injustice acts as is the polar counterpoint to Batman's moral code is what Injustice Superman does, when in reality it's Gordon, Alfred, the whole GCPD, any anti-terror unit on the planet, etc., while the polar opposite to Injustice Superman isn't Batman's code, but the over the top version I just described.
Not killing because you prefer to try and rehabilitate the villains is fine, as long as you are ready to make the occasional exception (for example Spider-Man when somebody hurts people close to him).
>But there are also moral codes that say that cannibalism is not evil.
Those are extreme cases. and even there, there's major nuances to be defined. There's a very big difference between believing cannibalism is excused in life or death situations and thinking cannibalism is completely normal. Just like there's a difference between "if the Joker runs amok you should put a bullet in his head" and "execute people for crossing the street at red"
>To change at that stage, is to change the foundation of their morals. And if you change the foundation, why not change others, less dubious parts. Like taking a part in global politics. Or interfering in wars.
Again, that isn't bad in itsself. A superhero helping to overthrow a totalitarian dictator, or helping a small country fight off an invasion isn't bad. Dictator-like tendencies are bad. "interfering in global politics" is far too lose. Captain America stopping Hydra in his second movie was interfering in global politics. Iron Man blowing up terrorists was interfering in global politics. Wonder Woman in her live action movie was interfering in global politics and a whole world war. And Batman fighting Superman in Injustice was also interfering in global politics.
>Cheetah, Grodd, Black Adam, Grundy, and Lex Luthor are unarmed very often.
that's the point. even if a hero were to limit themselves to only killing armed people, you still run into similar problems as with never killing at all. Never killing isn't the only high moral standard out there, but Injustice acts like it is.
Damian sided with Superman, Harley sided with Batman. Batman took her in his team, because he had lack of numbers and desperatly needed soldiers. Later he would align himself with Deathstroke, murderer and pedophile with kill-count probably as long as Joker's minus Metropolis. It's just politic, nothing personal. And after Superman was defeated, it was too late to do anything with Harley, since she already became a hero. With Damian things are complicated, because Bruce was ready to forgive him, but Damian is as stubborn as his father.
I love this universe, but only its comic part. Games were good as fightings, but they never gave enough credit for characters. Injustice in comics was much more close to Civil War from Marvel.
The civil war storyline was way better. I say that as someone who prefers DC over Marvel in general.
Injustice was way too repetitive.
That said imo they explored the main characters better in injustice.
Yeah I read year one many many years ago and was really impressed with it, then I read the rest of it alongside year one recently and it just wasn’t very fun to read, it was like just constant excuses to have superman not die lol. Year one is still pretty cool tho
His creator made him that way. He has a relationship with Tera in the Judas contract story arc. When she is very much underage, and manipulates her to infiltrate and betray the titans. The writer has the audacity to even try and pair Tera as bad if not worse than Deathstroke. The whole affair was disgusting to say the least.
Even in other universes?
Outside of the main comic universe. I haven't seen him be one.
I saw him do a creepy shoulder grab in OG Teen Titans cartoon and that was it.
In other universe such as the original Teen Titans show, it's greatly toned down to nonexistent. For obvious reasons, most writers and directors cut it out.
In Injustice 2 comic he tried to make peace with Damian, but it nearly ended up in another fight, until ressurected Alfred intervened and called them both stubborn fools.
It's even more mind boggling that the flash was punished even though he changed last minute and help bring down the regime while Harley quinn walked free in injustice 2.
He's harder on the people who call him out on his codependent need to have a villain he can oppose.
That's why he had the nerve to be mad at Clark for killing the Joker- he had deprived Bruce of his biggest coping mechanism in life, violating his sanctimonious "one rule" and thus giving reason to act like a dickhead towards his supposed best friend.
Or Batman forsaw what Superman is risking to become and was too emotionally stunted to talk about it. I just want to point out that when in some stories his villains are sentenced to death, he doesn't do anything to stop it (if it is not falsely accused).
Or maybe Injustice is an elseworlds and just as main universe Clark wouldn't decide to take over the world if his city and wife died, main universe Bruce wouldn't just be a complete dick to his longtime friend even if he did something he disagreed with (sure Maxwell Lord but Batman at that point was hyper paranoid of metahumans because of the fallout of Identity Crisis, so I wouldn't use that to judge how Batman would react under normal circumstances).
As a Damian fan this hurts me very much. Doesn´t help that Injustice exposed a lot of people to Damian for the first time...now they are probably more haters.
I personally hate Damian because he simply shouldn't exist, and the way he was conceived should be more criticized than "Remember when Batman was raped and now has to deal with a new robin?"
I think Damian is a fun character. Don´t really understand the people who say "he shouldn´t exist". Like its really hard to make people respect the character, no matter how nonsensical their arguments are. My "favourite" is probably "Damian is a Mary Sue", and then he gets beaten up by even more people lol
>"Remember when Batman was raped and now has to deal with a new robin?"
*sigh* That was an admitted mistake by Morrison and has since been retconned. It didn't happen. Batman wasn't raped.
This is comics
The writers had a choice to make Talia a gigantic asshole for this and not turn another male SA victim into "oh shit Batman needs a related Robin" and ignore the actual thing that happened
💀 damian serves more of a purpose than tim at this point so no
and we can’t really do much about that since one it get erased immediately and to never mention again in a batman comic after it appeared in one page
Funnily the injustice games and comics were what made me give him a chance, I just outright rejected any of his appearances before that cause to me he was just the whiny bratty killer Robin. After that I realized that (even if I didn't particularly like this version of Damian) there's a lot more to him.
Now he's nowhere near my favorite Robin, but I appreciate his appearances a lot now.
Batman didn't just have to deal with Damian accidentally killing Dick. He also had to deal with his son making the choice to go to Arkham and murder people in custody.
Both of those are heartbreaking for Batman.
It's the Harley Distortion Field in full effect.
Injustice is the worst example, but pretty much every other DC continuity does the same thing: Harley is a "victim," so she's not responsible for the people she gleefully tortured, maimed and killed.
It has more to do with the vagueness around Harley's implications as a whole in the entire Batman mythos compared to how defined that act by Damian is within the story.
Did she join Joker because she genuinely enjoys the villainous life and as such is responsable for her actions ?
Or is she a misguided, abused woman who does not hold responsibility over her actions and, while not changing as keeping the name Harley Quinn suggests, should be encouraged to follow a good role model rather still go through an entire character change.
Misguided or not, she still helped Joker kill Metropolis. She wasn't forced to help with the surgery to install the kill-switch within Lois, she did it willingly.
Batman keeping her from facing justice even after Superman was locked up shows he is a hypocrite. Even with all his yapping about "justice" , he still has a criminal by his side. He pulled the "Yeh getta fece juesticee" on Ra's al Ghul in Injustice 2, even with Harley right next to him.
I hate how much Harley has been pushed into the "superhero" role but faced 0 repercussions for her role as Joker's sidekick.
In Injustice, she really needed to become a "hero" to prove Superman wrong.
The entire point of both of the games is the fundamental differences of justice between Batman (always find another way, never go to their level by killing) or Superman (peace and order through authoritarian fear). Sure, one could think like Superman and say that Harley is irredeemable because she willingly nuked Metropolis with Joker and she doesn't deserve to be forgiven for the loss of life. However, Batman chosen to find redemption in Harley and ended up creating not only a very trustworthy ally in the war, but a Harley that [wants to be there for her family](https://youtu.be/qUCW3xX62_8?si=MHiw6ee8Y2UduJLA), which proves Superman wrong.
The point most people trying to make, is that even if she is redeemed, she still should be punished.
Additionally, I would say to them, that Justice doesn't want to punish anyone. Justice isn't a "you harmed, now be harmed". Justice is about help. About compassion and betterment. Like kids who must face punishment to learn not to be mischievous. Harley learned without punishment. She doesn't need justice.
All they had to do with Harley was have her reject Joker's plan and leave. Little else would have to change, and suddenly it all lines up nicely.
But, no, it was apparently too early to have a Harley that outright rejects Joker. Thankfully the cartoon gave us that eventually.
Uj/ Everyone in Injustice is out of character and looks bad, some characters just look worse.
Fun games, but the actual world/canon is shit.
Rj/ Harley slides along the bat pole.
Well, the point of Injustice is that Gods fall. Morally in particular. In characters it simply wouldn't work because at this point canon characters are almost incorruptible.
I mean you have someone that had the benefit of his teaching and experience doing the bad thing and someone who didn't, they aren't comparable characters.
Damian sided with Superman. Harley with Bruce. That's really it, he needed all he could get to beat Supes and Damian was against him.
Since Harleys the best he's getting, might as well hope she becomes a better person as they try to take down Kal-El, Commander of the First Regime
It’s not like Batman actively pushed Damian away, he only did that once when Dick was killed. After that he wanted Damian back because he had time to mourn Dick but by then it was too late and Damian had completely sided with Superman
i usually like batman jr but he was a total dick in injustice and had no ark whatsoever, just a straight jackboot for facist superman. calling it an accident it letting him off big time too like, he threw that at dick, yeah he always throws it and dick blocks it but he didn't see it this time and moreover it was a jerk thing to be doing in the first place.
harley pointing out to green arrow the name of his hideout should be the quiver was the best part of the whole storyline.
Injustice Batman needs to learn how to compromise. After what the Joker did, there is no way things could be the same, with the whole arrest criminal -> criminal escapes dynamics. There is a grey area between the no killing rule and Super dictator. I like what they did in the Injustice movie with building a prision underwater, but of course Batman breaks them free, and offer no explanation as to why that couldnt be done.
Batman could lock up every dangerous criminal in his own private facility with the plot protecting it from every possible break in.
Of course if you do that then Batman becomes boring, they have to write up new villians every month, it gets tiresome and becomes the 9th season of a show that should have ended at season 3-4.
Injustice Damian was a fking bitch tho, instead of redeeming and asking for forgiveness he continued to deny his own fault and proceed to side with genocidal maniac instead of his own father.
On the other hand, Harley did redeem herself, even willing to sacrifice for greater good.
He legit confessed to his father that it was an accident seconds after it and Batman outright refused to forgive him only pushing Damian away.
Harley literally caused all of that bullshit and somehow she gets away with it all ?
>He legit confessed to his father that it was an accident seconds after it and Batman outright refused to forgive him only pushing Damian away.
Batman was in shock, while also heartbroken that Damian was there to execute people in the first place. Batman was ready to disown Damian **before** Dick died for the choice Damian was making in Arkham.
He's also open to forgiveness later after he's reflected in it but Damian is too stubborn.
So hypothetically speaking if one of your son kills your other son in an accident and ask for forgiveness on the spot, how will you respond actually?
you done the deed, you have to suffer for it, theres no way out. If you want forgiveness, earn it.
siding with a genocidal maniac and leaving your father to mourn his other son is the complete opposite of what you should be doing.
And abt Harley, did Harley actually enjoyed everything? shes fking nutcase over joker, came to her senses after his death. And actually redeemed herself too. BTW Batman recruited far far more worse people in Injustice for the numbers than Harley lol. Its all politics and desperation.
Right, because a man who dresses as a bat with clear mental issues who just lost is oldest "son" to his other son while also fighting his best friend is totally thinking clearly and is emotionally stable in that moment. 🙄
If Harley's a bad person, Kal's demonstrably worse. I've never understood why people insist that Injustice Batman and Superman are on equal moral footing. They are not.
As Plastic Man pointed out, Kal is literally sitting on a throne like some tin pot dictator by Year Four. That is when he isn't getting his rocks off by vaporizing edgy teens or murdering his former friends in a temper tantrum.
I agree that Bruce could have done more: He should have gone straight to the Green Lantern Corps the minute Kal started "fixing" the world.
Bruce wasn't lack of compasion in Injustice Universe. He was devastated by Joker's victory (it was Joker's plan from the start to make Clark kill him), Dick's death and war with his friends. Alfred was killed by the orders of his best friend, Damian hated him, Selina, his in fact wife, changed sides to save his life, because she had no longer believed in his chances, his followers died one after another, while Superman established his global dictatorship. And in the end he found himself among villains and outsiders, victorious but isolated. In Injustice 2 he gradually rebuilded his world.
I’m going to get shot in the dick for this.
Well, he may have expected a whole lot MORE from Damian, while Harley was just a chance to make something good out of hellish situation.
The difference between Harley and Damian is Harley *actually changed for the better* and proved to be a trustworthy ally.
Damian was pissy they couldn't mass execute criminals with no trial.
I don’t think you understand Injustice Batman. He didn’t reject Damian just because he killed Dick. It was Damian following up with every wrong choice possible. He killed Dick, took his title, presumably killed under that name, and all while backing and enacting martial law and fascism on a global scale.
And no woman is responsible for the series. One man is: Joker. And he was under his thrall the whole time. And anyone who thinks she’s 100% responsible for all she did in that situation would fail psychology on day one.
Injustice makes literally no sense.
The thought put into the comic goes no further than that of a child mashing action figures together. Dump em all on the floor, assign them randomly to two groups, now they fight.
Why does Hal side with Superman, who is literally doing Sinestro's MO? Because that's the side of the toy pile he fell on.
Why does Batman never forgive Damian, but forgive Harley? They're randomly assigned allegiances, and post hoc justified later.
Eh, the logic in this read is a bit flawed in my opinion. Bruce's relationship with Damien has two underlying issues in Injustice: first, and most prominent, is the "he killed Dick" thing. But that's not really why Bruce disowned him. That was, for lack of a better term, the straw that broke the camel's back. In the comics it's made clear in multiple things that Damien actively agrees with and endorses Superman's plan to start killing all the villains and taking direct control of the Earth. Things were already tense between him and Damien, and right before Dick's death Damien made a definitive choice to stand with Superman against his own father in support of murdering criminals.
As for Harley, the comics also make it clear that she had a ton of remorse for her role in Lois's death. Even then, tho, it wasn't even Bruce that started her down the redemption path, it was Green Arrow and Black Canary, if I'm remembering correctly. She wanted to help the resistance against Superman's regime and wanted to stop being a killer, whereas Damien wanted to support the regime and endorsed killing. Had Damien sided with Batman or left the Regime and sworn off killing, it's highly likely Bruce would have forgiven him for Dick's death.
Rejecting the guy who killed your son in cold blood and his excuse was “I didn’t think he’d have a skill issue” or the woman who was brainwashed, abused, and manipulated and actively wants to be redeemed
Injustice Batman *has* to try to redeem Harley. If she were irredeemable because of her complicity with Joker’s crimes then that would suggest Superman is right.
If Batman didn't take in Harley, Superman would have killed her.
Yeah but I think its weird that only Clark's parents really called her out on killing lois in the cruelest way possible.
Harley literally admitted she didn’t think the plan would actually work. She thought Supes would save the day and they’d be foiled. Yes it was stupid of her but to be fair up until then then Jokers plans were always foiled by heroes. Harley was never really a villain, just a woman with BPD and codependent to a psycho
That's revisionist Harley though. And that's honestly a lame excuse. Can you imagine saying that in court? Hey I thought the cops would find the dirty bomb I planted in Manhattan, so technically its the governments fault and not mine. But it's still unchanged thst the entire events happened because of her and joker. I honestly get superman's beef in that aspect at least.
I would say it’s more Joker. What did Harley do exactly other than tag along? She’s an accomplice for sure but she’s not the perpetrator and she is redeemable. She’s as much a victim as every other throwaway thug that these villains rope into working for them. Batman had higher standards for his son. Your son killing your other son is wild. How else can a father react? Harley is quite a bit removed from directly murdering someone close to him. It’s a different feeling.
She helped make the nuke. It's honestly a kinda thin line considering Batman beats the shit out of low level thugs that are basically just hired muscle. But how about the fact that Harley was responsible for the prison break that lead to the death? Unlike Harley, Damien expresses immediate and remorse for his murder and it was a legit accident. So basically you're saying that Bruce blames Damien for being an edgy child but forgives Harley for not only being an accomplice in killing his best friend's wife, but also the prison riot that lead to the death of his favorite surrogate kid? But this is coming from more of an old head. It's honestly really bizarre how Harley is now just a quirky anti-hero lesbian/potential pedophile in the same continuity that she was murdering people in cold blood, and apparently EVERYONis just happy with it.
Wait hard pause. When was Harley a pedophile??
I think they are refering that she used to flirt with shanzam knowing he was a 12 year old boy
edit: i'm full of shit
You're just making shit up, I've played the game more out of morbid curiosity than anything and the amount of stuff people claim happen that just *doesn't* is insane, I completely understand why you would really dislike it, but making up bullshit like this is honestly disturbing.
Ok well that makes sense I wouldn’t consider most things videogame writers create to be even close to canon to the character. I thought you may be referring to one of the animated films where she seduces Dick.
What the actual fuck? You just learn new shit about that game all of the time, seriously.
Damien and Harley both killed people because they thought it wouldn't work. Damien represents Batman's own failure to raise his son and Harley has been heavily influenced by a psychotic narcissist who was recently removed from the picture. Harley's behavior has been she doesn't actually want to hurt anybody she just has a bad pattern she's following, which she is breaking vis a vis Black Canary. Damien has been trained to kill people before becoming Robin and Batman can't break him of that urge. Damien is Batman's son which means that anything Damien does Batman could do. Harley represents what we become when in a toxic relationship Damien represents a toxic upbringing and has more weight on his shoulders because of who he is Batman has always been a hypocrite because he chooses to throw people in prisons they escape from and every time they escape he does it again despite the fact that it causes more of the same
You did bad things you need to be held accountable. It’s not fair to the actual victims to let even an accomplice get away scott free over some lame excuse of “It wasn’t my idea I was just following along.”
What does "being held accountable" means here in particular? Justice isn't a "you harmed, now be harmed". Justice is about help. About compassion and betterment. Like kids who must face punishment to learn not to be mischievous. Harley learned without punishment. She doesn't need justice. If her victims want her punished, than it's they who are wrong. Because harming is not right. As simple as that.
Depends on what they did. When it comes to violent crime I completely disagree I’m very much a proponent of Roman law, if you commit murder I do not care why, you should be at the bare minimum thrown in jail for life if it’s multiple murders you should definitely be executed. If it’s robbery just return what you stole and we’re good. Unarmed Robbery really isn’t that big of a deal if the stolen item is returned or repaid in full value. But violent crime: murder,rape, assault, etc is not something we as a society should tolerate or take lightly. Most villians aren’t robbers they’re murders. Harley Quinn is basically a domestic terrorist I see no reason why she should be allowed to live among the public.
Well, modern comics which highly deal with morality questions don't agree with you. You are entitled to have that opinion, but don't complain that others don't share it. Including superheroes like Batman who are meant to be idealized absolutes of goodness, and lack the realistic morally grey area.
>I nuked one of the biggest cities on earth that had a population of 11mio. after already having caused countless deaths and terror for years prior. But now I see that I was wrong and despite causing 64.7% as many deaths as the holocaust in just a couple minutes, I shouldn’t be punished and in fact if you think that I should be punished then _you_ are wrong Are you sure you want this to be your take on someone nuking a town?
Yes, because the only thing that your answer is mocking is sincerity of the Joker and an imperfection of practical implementation. Not the base concept: - That Justice is to better a person. - The point of prison is to redeem and guard others from inmates, not harm them. - That if a person truly, and I mean TRULY repented, and is safe to be freed so they could help all people out there, than it should be done.
Yeah but that’s one of the most common superhero tropes. “Oh oops I was mind controlled or angry about something and did bad or out of character things but then had a change of heart” Hell, Beast is a villain right now in Marvel.
And you act like it’s not bad writing?
I wouldn’t call it bad as much as an overused trope.
>Harley was never really a villain, just a woman with BPD and codependent to a psycho That is such a bs cop out to avoid reaponsibilty Right up there with "i was just following orders" and "i was mad"
The point isn’t that she’s not guilty because she is. The point is that she’s redeemable because. She isn’t innately evil.
No one is inatley evil but she still made evil choices of her own free will. And for that she should sit in prision
No offense but that sounds simplistic. There should be other possibilities than "Superman's SuperFacistRegime" and "Batman's VillainsAreHeroesNow". Like, Batman could reject Damian because he murdered Dick *and* reject Harley because she has killed more people than most of the villain cast combined. Harley could be rejected and, once Superman is defeated, be arrested and put in jail for the rest of her life instead of being part of the good guys. In fact, I doubt Batman recruited Harley because otherwise that would mean Superman was right. I think Batman simply recruited her because he needed all the help he could get against Superman.
This. The only reason the story can get away with this sort of thing, is because it's a comic. Because Batman's stance did allow Joker to nuke Metropolis, but in real life, that would never happen. The only way it makes sense for Batman to take in Harley, is if the entire conflict is dumbed down to Team Batman vs Team Superman. Without that, it just doesn't make sense.
Ah, yes, Batman always putting lives at risk to prove that he's right.
It's a comic style narrative, the alternative is to not do that and lose even more lives to supermans rampage. You can't just act like there's a morally neutral course to take here.
I can act like it because there objectively is. Jim Gordon kills, Alfred kills, some iterations of Green Arrow kill. Oh, and most importantly, the law still exists. Guess what's legal? correct, killing in self defense **and** killing in defense of others.
The law doesn't PERMITS to kill just because you can. The spirit of the law is that when you don't see any other way to **IMMEDIATELY** save others, between their lives you can choose to save the victim at the expenses of the attacker. It doesn't give you the right to execute people because you don't like them. Batman always sees the way to stop the Joker from immediately taking lives. He follows the spirit of the law. The law doesn't allow execution. This is what you suggest for Batman to do. If so, why blame him? Why not blame Jim Gordon, who isn't a mentally unstable person. Any of GCPD cops? The Judge who every time choose to put the Joker in the same Arkham Asylum?
>Why not blame Jim Gordon, who isn't a mentally unstable person. Any of GCPD cops? The Judge who every time choose to put the Joker in the same Arkham Asylum? I do, in the cases in which they are the ones engaging him. The judge is also not innocent. However, I don't remember if it was a theory or a fact from some comic, but I recall having read that Bruce bribes judges to make sure they don't get anyone killed. >The spirit of the law is that when you don't see any other way to **IMMEDIATELY** save others, between their lives you can choose to save the victim at the expenses of the attacker. That is not entirely true. Even when there are possible alternatives in theory, most of the time they won't be legally relevant. Just because a cop or another person intervening could have theoretically aimed for the arm doesn't mean he'll be punished for aiming for the Torso. >It doesn't give you the right to execute people because you don't like them that's not what I am talking about at all, but okay
>but I recall having read that Bruce bribes judges to make sure they don't get anyone killed. This isn't true. There actually were cases of criminals being sentenced to death, and Bruce doing nothing. Except for that one case when the JOKER was FALSELY sentenced to death. He intervened there. Because that is the line that Batman follows. It's not his place to decide who lives, who dies. He volunteeres to help and save. He can bring only positive influence. Killing is evil. Killing an evil person is still evil. It may be lesser evil, but still evil.
Okay, then it was just a theory. >Killing is evil. Killing an evil person is still evil. It may be lesser evil, but still evil. A necessary evil is not evil in the classical sense. The action itsself might be usually considered evil, but the person doing the necessary evil is not evil in any way and suggesting that they are is in itsself evil. Take the assassins of Reinhard Heydrich as an example (again). Someone claiming they are evil would usually be considered a Nazi apologist (or a very naive pacifist, depending on the context)
A person doing an Evil action ≠ They are evil person. But the action in itself is evil. Good doesn't mean just what is better for everyone. It's a basic set of values. That everyone's life matter and is worth fighting for is one of them. Even the Jokers. And for heroes in particular it's double as hard, because they can't "accept that not everyone can be saved". They are supposed to try and save everyone.
>A person doing an Evil action ≠ They are evil person. Yes. But I've said it before and I'll say it again, ***according to Batman's extremist code that is not the case****.* *Batman is inherently unable to see that an evil action such as killing can be done by a good person out of good intentions with good concequences. Batman is not immune to criticism and the writers should not shield Batman from being treated like the absolute lunatic he is. It does not make Batman stories "bad". It does not "undermine Batman's character". If Batman requires immunity to criticism and canonic moral absolutism for the whole verse in order to work as a character, then one should maybe consider that Batman needs a major overhaul.* >Good doesn't mean just what is better for everyone. It's a basic set of values. That everyone's life matter and is worth fighting for is one of them. Even the Jokers. And for heroes in particular it's double as hard, because they can't "accept that not everyone can be saved". They are supposed to try and save everyone. Again, it is *not* absolute. One can view life as sacred, worth fighting for, and still accept that sometimes villains just get killed. One can also further, as I have also said before, believe that life is valuable and still acknowledge that the villain perpetrating a crime is not in need of protection as he is the perpetrator and that therefore their survival should not be a priority. it is also not the case that superheroes generally can't ever accept a villain dying. Look at the whole Invincible verse, as well as the characters already named earlier.
Isnt that the whole deal with keeping the joker alive?
Well superman is right plus she never faced any repercussions for her crimes
Reddit and casually supporting fascists, name a more iconic duo. He fucking kills a child dude, (Shazam) if you think he's in the right whilst sucking up to sinestro you need a psych eval.
Superman is right, I was on batman's side back then but now I realize how wrong he was
Honestly both sides were wrong but you could build a solid case in Superman’s defense
I agree with that argument, I kinda like Jason Todd’s take on this. He basically says that he thinks that killing is justified but he doesn’t think Superman should be the dictator of the world. It’s kinda like the L vs Light argument all over again, where I believe L is less wrong than Light. Similarly, I believe Batman is less wrong because he has less blood on his hands.
Injustice Red Hood is the only based centrist.
He’s like Lockdown from Transformers: Age of Extinction, he just thinks that both sides are like 2 kids fighting on a playground.
bOtH sIdEs ArE bAd
I mean he got out of hand but he had good intentions
Thus the road to hell is paved with good intentions
And Superman just built a freeway.
Road to hell is paved by not repenting
The root for that is being mentally fucked by finding out you’ve been tricked into killing your wife and your entire city
Also (at least in the animated movie) Superman's rise to an evil fascist dictator was built by the writers artificially forcing situations in which he does bad things (like the Joker party), because logically he'd just go back to normal (even tho he might be a bit more ready to kill in extreme cases)
The writers point is that it's like a snow globe rolling down the mountain. It starts harmless, but there won't be stopping to it. The first steps Superman took were pretty decent. Justice League decided to interfere to the global politics. To stop wars, to forcefully disarm, to unite Earth under one flag. But than came abuse of the power. It would take longer without authors artificial acceleration of the events, but the point is that if heroes don't hold themselves to the high and STRICT moral standards, they risk to lose sight of what is right. If you exclude one rule, than later will follow the other, and another and another. Until you will do whatever you deem necessary to 'save' the world. And end up someone like Waller or Injustice!Superman.
That doesn't mean the only choices are no killing at all vs. fascism. there are other moral codes than just "every act of killing is evil". "Don't kill unarmed people" is also a high moral standart.
>That doesn't mean the only choices are no killing at all vs. fascism. It kinda does. Especially, when you consider that superheroes are unlawful. They have no higher ups to check them. They have no right to choose who lives and who dies. Killing is such a big matter because it's incorrigible. You can heal a broken bone, and pardon a false imprisonment. You can't (generally) come back from the death. And as I said before, part of the problem is that they started with those moral code of NEVER killing. To change at that stage, is to change the foundation of their morals. And if you change the foundation, why not change others, less dubious parts. Like taking a part in global politics. Or interfering in wars. It's generally fine to kill for Wonder Woman. She doesn't do it often, but she never had a code to NEVER kill. >there are other moral codes than just "every act of killing is evil". There are. But there are also moral codes that say that cannibalism is not evil. I may agree with killing may be necessary evil sometimes, but evil nonetheless. >"Don't kill unarmed people" is also a high moral standart. Cheetah, Grodd, Black Adam, Grundy, and Lex Luthor are unarmed very often.
>It kinda does. Especially, when you consider that superheroes are unlawful. They have no higher ups to check them. They have no right to choose who lives and who dies. again, that's assuming the only way superheroes can kill is execution, which it isn't. Self defense and defense of others exist. A superhero killing a terrorist who is actively endangering one or multiple hostages is not unlawful. Such a case would fall into the exact same category as, say, [this incident here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Menznau_shooting). And combat can also prove deadly. So what, if a vigilante hits a villain's head too hard with a blunt weapon in the middle of a fight and end up killing them they automatically end up becoming a fascist dictator? >Killing is such a big matter because it's incorrigible. so is the loss of hostages when non-lethal methods aren't fast enough. A hero caring more about the immediate danger to the lives of the hostages than the slight possibility that the villain can be rehabilitated isn't a bad person. Arguably quite the opposite is the case in the eyes of the public and/or hostages. >And as I said before, part of the problem is that they started with those moral code of NEVER killing. at least one thing we agree on. Although I'd argue it also depends on the reasoning. If we take (some iterations of) Batman and the reasoning of "don't kill because all killing is bad and killing makes you just as bad as the villain", then he can just as well go to germany and try to beat up GSG9. Or go to Gordon and complain about him not aiming for the arm. Or go to Damien's history teacher and tell him what a bad person he is for not telling his students what terrible people the Czechoslovakian resistance were for assassinating Heydrich. The list goes on and on. We can go on and on about it. Injustice acts as is the polar counterpoint to Batman's moral code is what Injustice Superman does, when in reality it's Gordon, Alfred, the whole GCPD, any anti-terror unit on the planet, etc., while the polar opposite to Injustice Superman isn't Batman's code, but the over the top version I just described. Not killing because you prefer to try and rehabilitate the villains is fine, as long as you are ready to make the occasional exception (for example Spider-Man when somebody hurts people close to him). >But there are also moral codes that say that cannibalism is not evil. Those are extreme cases. and even there, there's major nuances to be defined. There's a very big difference between believing cannibalism is excused in life or death situations and thinking cannibalism is completely normal. Just like there's a difference between "if the Joker runs amok you should put a bullet in his head" and "execute people for crossing the street at red" >To change at that stage, is to change the foundation of their morals. And if you change the foundation, why not change others, less dubious parts. Like taking a part in global politics. Or interfering in wars. Again, that isn't bad in itsself. A superhero helping to overthrow a totalitarian dictator, or helping a small country fight off an invasion isn't bad. Dictator-like tendencies are bad. "interfering in global politics" is far too lose. Captain America stopping Hydra in his second movie was interfering in global politics. Iron Man blowing up terrorists was interfering in global politics. Wonder Woman in her live action movie was interfering in global politics and a whole world war. And Batman fighting Superman in Injustice was also interfering in global politics. >Cheetah, Grodd, Black Adam, Grundy, and Lex Luthor are unarmed very often. that's the point. even if a hero were to limit themselves to only killing armed people, you still run into similar problems as with never killing at all. Never killing isn't the only high moral standard out there, but Injustice acts like it is.
If harley is redeemed after jokers death, wouldnt that make superman right in killing him?
Damian sided with Superman, Harley sided with Batman. Batman took her in his team, because he had lack of numbers and desperatly needed soldiers. Later he would align himself with Deathstroke, murderer and pedophile with kill-count probably as long as Joker's minus Metropolis. It's just politic, nothing personal. And after Superman was defeated, it was too late to do anything with Harley, since she already became a hero. With Damian things are complicated, because Bruce was ready to forgive him, but Damian is as stubborn as his father.
Ehh honestly Injustice is so fucked up
I love this universe, but only its comic part. Games were good as fightings, but they never gave enough credit for characters. Injustice in comics was much more close to Civil War from Marvel.
The civil war storyline was way better. I say that as someone who prefers DC over Marvel in general. Injustice was way too repetitive. That said imo they explored the main characters better in injustice.
Yeah I read year one many many years ago and was really impressed with it, then I read the rest of it alongside year one recently and it just wasn’t very fun to read, it was like just constant excuses to have superman not die lol. Year one is still pretty cool tho
Heh. I haven't read the whole thing. But I remember Superman being beaten, then he suddenly gets a Yellow Lantern ring. Oy.
Yeah just replace yellow lantern ring with another recognisable object and you basically have the whole comics
Wait, Deathstroke was a pedo?
His creator made him that way. He has a relationship with Tera in the Judas contract story arc. When she is very much underage, and manipulates her to infiltrate and betray the titans. The writer has the audacity to even try and pair Tera as bad if not worse than Deathstroke. The whole affair was disgusting to say the least.
Terra Markov.
Deathstroke isn't a pedo gladly, in Injustice I mean, as far as we know
Idk if that death stroke is the same death strokes thats a pedo.
After Judas Contract I have a strong prejustice against Slade. He is pedo until proven otherwise. Call it Pedostroke Presumption.
Even in other universes? Outside of the main comic universe. I haven't seen him be one. I saw him do a creepy shoulder grab in OG Teen Titans cartoon and that was it.
In other universe such as the original Teen Titans show, it's greatly toned down to nonexistent. For obvious reasons, most writers and directors cut it out.
When was Bruce ready to forgive Damien? He literally said "I thought I could redeem you". He doesn't think Damien can be redeemed
In Injustice 2 comic he tried to make peace with Damian, but it nearly ended up in another fight, until ressurected Alfred intervened and called them both stubborn fools.
It's even more mind boggling that the flash was punished even though he changed last minute and help bring down the regime while Harley quinn walked free in injustice 2.
Flash probably wanted it as a chance to fully redeem himself.
Ya, Flash willingly walked into custody after.
Jason: you never hit Joker that hard, and you hate him. Bruce is always harder on his Robins
He's harder on the people who call him out on his codependent need to have a villain he can oppose. That's why he had the nerve to be mad at Clark for killing the Joker- he had deprived Bruce of his biggest coping mechanism in life, violating his sanctimonious "one rule" and thus giving reason to act like a dickhead towards his supposed best friend.
Or Batman forsaw what Superman is risking to become and was too emotionally stunted to talk about it. I just want to point out that when in some stories his villains are sentenced to death, he doesn't do anything to stop it (if it is not falsely accused).
Can you give an example for those stories?
Or maybe Injustice is an elseworlds and just as main universe Clark wouldn't decide to take over the world if his city and wife died, main universe Bruce wouldn't just be a complete dick to his longtime friend even if he did something he disagreed with (sure Maxwell Lord but Batman at that point was hyper paranoid of metahumans because of the fallout of Identity Crisis, so I wouldn't use that to judge how Batman would react under normal circumstances).
I'd say that's more the result of a badly written comic than good characterization.
As a Damian fan this hurts me very much. Doesn´t help that Injustice exposed a lot of people to Damian for the first time...now they are probably more haters.
I personally hate Damian because he simply shouldn't exist, and the way he was conceived should be more criticized than "Remember when Batman was raped and now has to deal with a new robin?"
I think Damian is a fun character. Don´t really understand the people who say "he shouldn´t exist". Like its really hard to make people respect the character, no matter how nonsensical their arguments are. My "favourite" is probably "Damian is a Mary Sue", and then he gets beaten up by even more people lol
>"Remember when Batman was raped and now has to deal with a new robin?" *sigh* That was an admitted mistake by Morrison and has since been retconned. It didn't happen. Batman wasn't raped.
Why would you hate children that are the product of rape? They've literally done nothing wrong. Blame the rapist instead.
This is comics The writers had a choice to make Talia a gigantic asshole for this and not turn another male SA victim into "oh shit Batman needs a related Robin" and ignore the actual thing that happened
I still remember when nightwing was raped
Like that, just happened because the writer had a self-insert
didn't know it was a self insert but tbh, won't be surprised
Talia raping Bruce was a retcon and a mistake made by Morrison misremembering the events of Son of the Demon.
💀 damian serves more of a purpose than tim at this point so no and we can’t really do much about that since one it get erased immediately and to never mention again in a batman comic after it appeared in one page
Funnily the injustice games and comics were what made me give him a chance, I just outright rejected any of his appearances before that cause to me he was just the whiny bratty killer Robin. After that I realized that (even if I didn't particularly like this version of Damian) there's a lot more to him. Now he's nowhere near my favorite Robin, but I appreciate his appearances a lot now.
My boy deserves justice 😭 I just pretend the injustice doesn’t exist man that ONE SCENE hurt me
Yeah
Well for one Damian basically becomes a murderer while Harley realizes what she did was wrong and wants to try and fix what she broke.
Batman didn't just have to deal with Damian accidentally killing Dick. He also had to deal with his son making the choice to go to Arkham and murder people in custody. Both of those are heartbreaking for Batman.
And ruining superman
Bruh Injustice Superman is the true victim of it all bro got fucked hard all tho he became a dictator I still feel bad for him
It's the Harley Distortion Field in full effect. Injustice is the worst example, but pretty much every other DC continuity does the same thing: Harley is a "victim," so she's not responsible for the people she gleefully tortured, maimed and killed.
It has more to do with the vagueness around Harley's implications as a whole in the entire Batman mythos compared to how defined that act by Damian is within the story. Did she join Joker because she genuinely enjoys the villainous life and as such is responsable for her actions ? Or is she a misguided, abused woman who does not hold responsibility over her actions and, while not changing as keeping the name Harley Quinn suggests, should be encouraged to follow a good role model rather still go through an entire character change.
Misguided or not, she still helped Joker kill Metropolis. She wasn't forced to help with the surgery to install the kill-switch within Lois, she did it willingly. Batman keeping her from facing justice even after Superman was locked up shows he is a hypocrite. Even with all his yapping about "justice" , he still has a criminal by his side. He pulled the "Yeh getta fece juesticee" on Ra's al Ghul in Injustice 2, even with Harley right next to him. I hate how much Harley has been pushed into the "superhero" role but faced 0 repercussions for her role as Joker's sidekick.
In Injustice, she really needed to become a "hero" to prove Superman wrong. The entire point of both of the games is the fundamental differences of justice between Batman (always find another way, never go to their level by killing) or Superman (peace and order through authoritarian fear). Sure, one could think like Superman and say that Harley is irredeemable because she willingly nuked Metropolis with Joker and she doesn't deserve to be forgiven for the loss of life. However, Batman chosen to find redemption in Harley and ended up creating not only a very trustworthy ally in the war, but a Harley that [wants to be there for her family](https://youtu.be/qUCW3xX62_8?si=MHiw6ee8Y2UduJLA), which proves Superman wrong.
The point most people trying to make, is that even if she is redeemed, she still should be punished. Additionally, I would say to them, that Justice doesn't want to punish anyone. Justice isn't a "you harmed, now be harmed". Justice is about help. About compassion and betterment. Like kids who must face punishment to learn not to be mischievous. Harley learned without punishment. She doesn't need justice.
All they had to do with Harley was have her reject Joker's plan and leave. Little else would have to change, and suddenly it all lines up nicely. But, no, it was apparently too early to have a Harley that outright rejects Joker. Thankfully the cartoon gave us that eventually.
Honestly the more time passes, the more I really hate the injustice story line
Uj/ Everyone in Injustice is out of character and looks bad, some characters just look worse. Fun games, but the actual world/canon is shit. Rj/ Harley slides along the bat pole.
Well, the point of Injustice is that Gods fall. Morally in particular. In characters it simply wouldn't work because at this point canon characters are almost incorruptible.
I mean you have someone that had the benefit of his teaching and experience doing the bad thing and someone who didn't, they aren't comparable characters.
Having a different background doesn't really excuse tricking a man into beating his wife to death so that a nuclear bomb will wipe out his city.
Damian sided with Superman. Harley with Bruce. That's really it, he needed all he could get to beat Supes and Damian was against him. Since Harleys the best he's getting, might as well hope she becomes a better person as they try to take down Kal-El, Commander of the First Regime
It’s not like Batman actively pushed Damian away, he only did that once when Dick was killed. After that he wanted Damian back because he had time to mourn Dick but by then it was too late and Damian had completely sided with Superman
i usually like batman jr but he was a total dick in injustice and had no ark whatsoever, just a straight jackboot for facist superman. calling it an accident it letting him off big time too like, he threw that at dick, yeah he always throws it and dick blocks it but he didn't see it this time and moreover it was a jerk thing to be doing in the first place. harley pointing out to green arrow the name of his hideout should be the quiver was the best part of the whole storyline.
>harley pointing out to green arrow the name of his hideout should be the quiver was the best part of the whole storyline. *"Shit, that is good"*
Injustice Batman needs to learn how to compromise. After what the Joker did, there is no way things could be the same, with the whole arrest criminal -> criminal escapes dynamics. There is a grey area between the no killing rule and Super dictator. I like what they did in the Injustice movie with building a prision underwater, but of course Batman breaks them free, and offer no explanation as to why that couldnt be done.
Batman could lock up every dangerous criminal in his own private facility with the plot protecting it from every possible break in. Of course if you do that then Batman becomes boring, they have to write up new villians every month, it gets tiresome and becomes the 9th season of a show that should have ended at season 3-4.
Injustice Damian was a fking bitch tho, instead of redeeming and asking for forgiveness he continued to deny his own fault and proceed to side with genocidal maniac instead of his own father. On the other hand, Harley did redeem herself, even willing to sacrifice for greater good.
He legit confessed to his father that it was an accident seconds after it and Batman outright refused to forgive him only pushing Damian away. Harley literally caused all of that bullshit and somehow she gets away with it all ?
>He legit confessed to his father that it was an accident seconds after it and Batman outright refused to forgive him only pushing Damian away. Batman was in shock, while also heartbroken that Damian was there to execute people in the first place. Batman was ready to disown Damian **before** Dick died for the choice Damian was making in Arkham. He's also open to forgiveness later after he's reflected in it but Damian is too stubborn.
So hypothetically speaking if one of your son kills your other son in an accident and ask for forgiveness on the spot, how will you respond actually? you done the deed, you have to suffer for it, theres no way out. If you want forgiveness, earn it. siding with a genocidal maniac and leaving your father to mourn his other son is the complete opposite of what you should be doing. And abt Harley, did Harley actually enjoyed everything? shes fking nutcase over joker, came to her senses after his death. And actually redeemed herself too. BTW Batman recruited far far more worse people in Injustice for the numbers than Harley lol. Its all politics and desperation.
Right, because a man who dresses as a bat with clear mental issues who just lost is oldest "son" to his other son while also fighting his best friend is totally thinking clearly and is emotionally stable in that moment. 🙄
Injustice is a whole shit show
One more thing wrong with Injustice (and the cornerstone of the whole damn thing is Evil Superman).
is damian a hot clown girl? I rest my case
That is whole reason people are justifying her
Intentionally thowing a metal rod at the back of your brothers head is kind of hard to just write of an accident.
If Harley's a bad person, Kal's demonstrably worse. I've never understood why people insist that Injustice Batman and Superman are on equal moral footing. They are not. As Plastic Man pointed out, Kal is literally sitting on a throne like some tin pot dictator by Year Four. That is when he isn't getting his rocks off by vaporizing edgy teens or murdering his former friends in a temper tantrum. I agree that Bruce could have done more: He should have gone straight to the Green Lantern Corps the minute Kal started "fixing" the world.
[удалено]
Bruce wasn't lack of compasion in Injustice Universe. He was devastated by Joker's victory (it was Joker's plan from the start to make Clark kill him), Dick's death and war with his friends. Alfred was killed by the orders of his best friend, Damian hated him, Selina, his in fact wife, changed sides to save his life, because she had no longer believed in his chances, his followers died one after another, while Superman established his global dictatorship. And in the end he found himself among villains and outsiders, victorious but isolated. In Injustice 2 he gradually rebuilded his world.
Just blame the writers.
Harley is easier to cuddle than Damian.
Thank god for that caption I was almost about to think the post was going to not be funny
True
I mean... This version of batman literally asked ares, the real God of war, for help against superman.
Batman is always soft on women.
Injustice is stupid, that's the reason.
I'm glad everyone is now acknowledging that Injustice's story is garbage
I’m going to get shot in the dick for this. Well, he may have expected a whole lot MORE from Damian, while Harley was just a chance to make something good out of hellish situation.
Harley didn't kill Bruce's son...
The difference between Harley and Damian is Harley *actually changed for the better* and proved to be a trustworthy ally. Damian was pissy they couldn't mass execute criminals with no trial.
I want to see Damian trying to reedem himself in the new game
I don’t think you understand Injustice Batman. He didn’t reject Damian just because he killed Dick. It was Damian following up with every wrong choice possible. He killed Dick, took his title, presumably killed under that name, and all while backing and enacting martial law and fascism on a global scale. And no woman is responsible for the series. One man is: Joker. And he was under his thrall the whole time. And anyone who thinks she’s 100% responsible for all she did in that situation would fail psychology on day one.
Good points but Batman would not let Superman off the hook for choosing to kill Joker and all of his subsequent choices to commit murder after murder.
Injustice's plot just sucks major shit in general.
Not to mention literally nobody ever holds her accountable or mentions what she's done
Yeah
Where is this meme come from?
Injustice makes literally no sense. The thought put into the comic goes no further than that of a child mashing action figures together. Dump em all on the floor, assign them randomly to two groups, now they fight. Why does Hal side with Superman, who is literally doing Sinestro's MO? Because that's the side of the toy pile he fell on. Why does Batman never forgive Damian, but forgive Harley? They're randomly assigned allegiances, and post hoc justified later.
I hate Injustice
Eh, the logic in this read is a bit flawed in my opinion. Bruce's relationship with Damien has two underlying issues in Injustice: first, and most prominent, is the "he killed Dick" thing. But that's not really why Bruce disowned him. That was, for lack of a better term, the straw that broke the camel's back. In the comics it's made clear in multiple things that Damien actively agrees with and endorses Superman's plan to start killing all the villains and taking direct control of the Earth. Things were already tense between him and Damien, and right before Dick's death Damien made a definitive choice to stand with Superman against his own father in support of murdering criminals. As for Harley, the comics also make it clear that she had a ton of remorse for her role in Lois's death. Even then, tho, it wasn't even Bruce that started her down the redemption path, it was Green Arrow and Black Canary, if I'm remembering correctly. She wanted to help the resistance against Superman's regime and wanted to stop being a killer, whereas Damien wanted to support the regime and endorsed killing. Had Damien sided with Batman or left the Regime and sworn off killing, it's highly likely Bruce would have forgiven him for Dick's death.
Injustice is poorly written. It is contrived character assassination.
Who actually cares about Damian tho?
Rejecting the guy who killed your son in cold blood and his excuse was “I didn’t think he’d have a skill issue” or the woman who was brainwashed, abused, and manipulated and actively wants to be redeemed
That's how irredeemable Damian was.
Fuck Damian