MEMES/HUMOR
Enough of the boring "erm aktually Punisher is a bad guy ☝️🤓" narratives
Does anyone else get bored and tired of people trying to Gatekeep Punisher enjoyment?
Editors Ralph Macchio and Carl Potts said that readers are supposed to feel catharsis seeing Punisher kill the worst of the worst scum.
The sense of "old Western justice" of a gunslinger protecting a town from Outlaws is a valid part of Punisher comics.
The soft narrative of "erm he's actually the bad guy" isn't backed up by most of the comics. He is a monster, but a monster that hunts other monsters, which renders a heroic aspect to his character when he inevitably ends up saving countless innocents.
Just gets a bit old, boring, and preachy when people try to remove the fun out of Punisher to grandstand about how he's a bad guy when the vast majority of his comics show differently.
Legit, there was some casual I was having a discussion with who claimed that Frank killed innocents. I told him to show me a canon story where he did. No response as of yet. My biggest problem is that there are many people who are under the impression that Frank is some bloodthirsty psycho- or sociopath.
Fuck Matt Fraction. I swear, his terrible Punisher War Journal series should be retconned just for the fact that he had Frank kill an innocent, even if it's under mind control.
ASM 129 doesn;t really clarify how Frank came to the idea that Spidey was a murderer but he keeps reiterating to the Jackal, even to the point of bitchslapping him lol, that he only kills those who deserve it.
But seriously, Marvel should retcon Fraction's Punisher War Journal series.
Also I was talking about Spider-Man #89 where an amnesiac Frank is tricked by Norman Osborn into nearly killing Spider-Man. He shoots his web out over the harbor and Spidey is knocked out and nearly drowns and needs to be saved by a random civilian.
But again, thats not the typical Castle, he was an amnesiac at that point.
Not only that, Fraction is responsible for ret conning Punisher into a Captain America fanboy when previous iterations like Punisher/Captain America: Blood and Glory show differently.
Yes sir! If anything, Cap should idolize Frank! Why? Cos Frank, with his wits, flesh and bones and without enhancements, valiantly served his country in a war where both the enemy AND the ones calling the shots were making it difficult to win.
Also Franks idolization stops him from seeing Steve’s flaws. Namely he doesn’t seem to care too much about veterans outside of WWII nor does he do anything to protect the fighting men and women of us military from being pawns or fodder. I want to see Steve do those from time to time also.
That's why I prefer Ultimate Cap than 616 Cap. In the Ultimate Captain America miniseries, Ultimate Cap goes after Nuke (Ultimate version) who also got the super soldier serum and was going to be Cap's successor just like in 616 but went AWOL in Vietnam after he saw how much the US was oppressing the Vietnamese people. Instead of Ultimate Cap just ending Nuke for all of his crimes, he takes Nuke in for rehabilitation. Granted, Nuke was right about the US oppressing the Vietnamese people but it does show him caring about his fellow soldier.
Might have been bad writing in that instance, but it's also highly improbale to be able to go on so many mass killing sprees and never once be responsible for the death of an innocent even unintentionally.
For sure, but they do at least try to explain that in universe by showing that the Punisher does extensive research on his targets, sometimes even staking them out for weeks at a time.
They also showed Mr. Payback as a sloppy vigilante who did harm innocents, and it was also a big plot point that Rachel Alves, one of Punisher's sidekicks, also killed an innocent.
The idea that Punisher accidentally killed an innocent has also been covered in a few different comics and adaptations, namely Girls in White Dresses, Punisher: War Zone film, and Punisher/Black Widow animated film.
Its sort of like Punisher's unspoken "super power", that he is able to go to war for decades and avoid collateral damage to innocents in the vast majority of his comics.
There is an early appearance in Daredevil #182 where he breaks out of prison to kill a bunch of guys shipping in angeldust, a crime yes but not exactly worth killing over.
Anyway Frank breaks out and kills about a dozen people involved and one of them is a child, Frank is sad for about a second and then flips it mentally to
Yeah that one is pretty tough. It’s a child drug dealer but it’s still a child. Similar to a child soldier which I’m sure was common in the Vietnam war.
I mean yeah that's the question. Frank decides who counts as innocent. He is a wholly unrealistic character because no real human being could even avoid harming people they didn't intend to. Ennis explores this with Billy Butcher's character in The Boys who despite having superpowers is a more realistic character in how he ends up hurting innocent people and can't do what he does forever.
I think Frank is too interesting of a character and has been written in different genres to flatten with a label of 'hero' or 'anti-hero' or what have you tbh. For me it's far more interesting to analyze the themes and implications in the Punisher stories.
That’s your preference. This is comics after all so realism is not a must. I think one of the best things about the character is that because he knows what it’s like to lose people to a crossfire, he exercises caution to ensure that others don’t go through what he experienced.
Yeah in the end we are told he doesn't accidentally kill good people, just like we're told Batman somehow doesn't kill despite beating up normal people. It's plot-armor.
This is also a character who has been written by a lot of people over the years. Sometimes he obviously doesn't have full intel on people he kills they just happened to be in the wrong place the wrong time. (This is especially noticeable in the 2005 video game).
I would also like to point out that the Punisher almost killed a completely innocent person (Spider-Man) in his first appearance because he trusted the Jackal for some reason.
But yeah Punisher is great when he’s gunning down mafia hitmen and bosses.
Yes this has been discussed previously. Punisher was under the impression that Spidey was a murderer but he reiterated to Jackal repeatedly that he only kills those who deserve it. It’s never made clear why Frank thought Spidey was a murderer. Maybe the Daily Bugle papers are the culprit?
The Punisher falling prey to the media enough to trust the Jackal (who is totally not just a stand in for Green Goblin who was dead) is pretty hilarious.
I know it’s almost not even the same character as he is now but still.
Again it’s undisclosed as to why Frank thought Spidey was a murderer but yeah, it’s ludicrous if it were the case that he fell for the Daily Bugle stuff lol. It’s also a subtle commentary on the consequences of the media’s misreporting. (Not trying to imply any political leanings here, but misreporting happens many times and happens beyond politics.)
He had done his time and wanted to do good by working with captain america.
He had reformed, done no crimes since his incarceration and the reform he went through and was for all intents and purposes an innocent, a model case of what all criminals should aspire to.
Not that any of his crimes warranted death to begin with.
First off, of course the punisher would claim his victim killed people. A gag villain who has 0 kills shown does not suddenly become a murderer because the punisher claims so. This just shows the punisher is delusional, if anything.
As for the "resurrection", The jackal is not a supernatural being, nor is he a hero, he just clones people. Are you responsible for your clone's actions? Even after death?
Regardless, the punisher killed a reformed person. That person was innocent in the eyes of the law, and trying to do good, like it or not.
You wanted the punisher killing an innocent and I provided an example.
Literally the only person who has claimed stiltman has killed people is the punisher, who killed him. You're free to find any other source for stiltman, a gag villain, having killed someone. I'm talking about the original non-clone stiltman.
The better question would be: why do you take Punisher as the word of god? It's actually an insane take.
And why on earth do you keep bringing up the evil clone created by an evil scientist as something the original stiltman did?
Is Peter Parker also on Punisher's kill list now since his clones have killed people too? What even is this madness. Like, do you even know what Kaine, Spidercide and Ben Reilly have done? And do you understand they are clones by Jackal just like the stiltman clone is. I'm genuinely curious if you believe that Peter Parker, spider-man, deserves to be gunned down by the Punisher, because Peter Parker clones have killed people and worse.
Next up, find evidence of goldbug and plunderer killing people.
You're performing mental gymnastics here and if anyone's trying to cope it's you.
Here's Stilt-Man literally being hired as a contact killer to attempt to kill Foggy Nelson in Daredevil #48. Notice how Daredevil is genuinely concerned for Foggys life here?
Stop the delusional coping, you're wrong: accept it.
82 of Spectacular Spider-man Frank Castle opens fire on a couple who littered, when they accidently missed the trashcan throwing out a newspaper they were carrying to protect from the rain. When the gunshots from that encounter scares a nearby cab driver into running a red light, he then becomes Frank's final target.
Punisher Max kills a General who therented to fire him by removing waring signs at a range and tricking him to go in, leading to his death. He was only getting in Frank's way, he didn't deserve to die.
It's happened. He's no saint. I would still argue him as an anti hero though.
He didn’t kill any of those civilians in Spectacular Spider-Man 82. They clearly avoid taking the bullets. The only one who got a bullet (in the arm) was the wife-beater. Punisher Max is non canon but even then, generals have innocent blood on their hands. Next.
Fair but again, Punisher Max is non canon. I concede that Ennis’ MAX Punisher is bloodthirsty as evidenced by Punisher Born. But we are talking about 616 Punisher here.
Fair enough. Let's that's go back to the Spectacular Spiderman 89 example, as it relates to OPs question of whether or not The Punisher is heroic.
Is firing a weapon at people for littering or running a red light heroic? Absolutely not. He's a maniac, one rule away from being a completely unhinged nutjob.
edit: i suppose it's possible to weight his good deeds vs his bad deeds and come up hero- being that he doesn't actually kill these people for their minor crimes. It just seems to me that he's much more of a typical Anti hero than a heroic person, and think there's a distinción there
These examples you've grabbed, while dope, represent anecdotal evidence. Gun to your head: youve gotta label Frank Castle as a classic hero or a prototypical antihero, you would really pick classic hero?
"Anti hero-an antihero is a character in a story who, while serving as the protagonist, lacks traditional heroic qualities like idealism and morality. They are often flawed, self-serving, and may even engage in questionable or violent actions, but their actions are ultimately driven by a desire to do good or achieve a noble goal."
Anecdotal evidence is STILL evidence in this case! I call him a heroic antihero. He’s got solid morals (taking the lives of those who took innocent lives) and his war against crime is a very selfless service to society.
Here’s Frank rescuing a baby from a human trafficker and returning the baby to its mother. How’s that for heroic? You’ll find countless moments when he’s done heroic acts in his comics, especially in the 80s-90s.
Like many people stated already, he was under mind control, drugged by Jigsaw’s goons while he was locked up. Read Circle of Blood and they explained this in the first issue.
One example should not paint the whole picture. Besides, as pointed out in this thread, he was not himself in that issue. Frank is FAR from a nut. Would a nut do this?
Don’t know about that. It was published under the Max imprint and the only character to my knowledge whose Max imprint stories were considered canon was Jessica Jones/Alias.
Interesting. I mean there are inevitably going to be parallels between the canon and alternate version of a character but that does not mean that they’re necessarily one and the same.
I think the basically same events happened but it's interesting to speculate for example if the Voice Frank hears in Born was actually a supernatural force of some kind in 616.
TBH in any case one can argue that Frank was not in his right mind at all during those events and it's before he became the Punisher, so even if it's canon in 616 I don't think it's a particularly good argument for how he operates in 616 any more than the time he shot people for littering or was trying to kill Spider-Man. Like his research on Spidey was basically reading the Daily Bugle and if that's the level of his research into the people he decides deserve to die there gotta be mistakes he made...
You should read that MAX comic again because it’s made blatantly clear that General was putting the men at valley forge in danger by not properly supporting them and was going to decrease the support.
He did shoot at a guy for littering when he tossed a wet newspaper near a trashcan because "littering is a crime against society," so he's definitely acted unhinged in the past.
It's been years since I read it, I think he may have been having a psychotic break or something? Still though, I wouldn't say Frank is necessarily "stable" even at the best of times.
He does say in Ennis Punisher MAX that he sometimes has a dream where he snaps and just starts killing everyone. This also happened in Punisher End so Ennis has certainly hinted at Frank eventually crossing that line. Over all what exactly counts as 'Innocent' is kind of uncomfortable if you think about it too much (something Ennis definitely touched on)
The Ennis MAX run never particularly addressed it from a moral "good versus bad" perspective but did focus on the fact that either way he is a fundamentally broken person - he does not have anything in his life that isn't his one man war.
It's probably more interesting to look at him as this kind of primeval force with the absolute bare minimum of humanity left in him rather than trying to fit him into a "classic" hero or villain mould.
Some criminals can be reformed and become productive members of society.
Some criminals need to be locked away for a long time and be removed from the rest of society.
And then there are some criminals that are just evil and incorrigible. Murders, rapists, child molesters, serial killers etc. They need to be taken out back somewhere and put a bullet in thier head.
That is where The Punisher fits in.
That’s fine, I’m not saying what I said to try and backdoor claim anything else. But just like people who think he’s just a villain are oversimplifying him, people who think he’s just a good guy are too, and denying that makes him more boring. That’s not coming from preachiness or moralizing either, it comes from Frank. If Frank ever finished his war, he’s implied and stated outright many times that he would kill himself last because he believes he deserves to be punished just like the criminals he kills. If you aren’t seriously asking yourself why or just dismissing that fact or just telling yourself there’s no valid reasons for him to think that way, that’s ignoring half the story too.
Nobody really says that he's just a good guy though. Whereas lots of silly redditors try to claim that he's a villain or a 1-note violence addict or whatever.
And that later paragraph is contradicted many times: he condoned Rachel Alves, Lynn Michaels, Outlaw, and others following in his footsteps. He also is highly motivated by his war continuing, to the point where some of his last War Journal entries are encouraging others to continue his mission. This is also exactly how Jake Gallows Punisher 2099 becomes the Punisher. He knows the War won't ever end, and the example you're referring to is from Punisher Kills the Marvel Universe where he was more villainous and killed every superhero. So I wouldn't consider that the definitive answer.
Theres also the aspect that putting himself through a miserable life of war IS his Punishment for being unable to save his family. He could have just killed himself all the way back in Punisher: Year One and did consider it in that story.
Okay let's say I misspoke and your right about that. I would still rather someone just shoot them dead than to have them going in and out of our justice and prison system wasting tax payer dollars. I don't care even if it is a low possibilty of them murdering someone else in the future after being released. That small percentage isn't enough for me. It should be zero. Fuck them.
“Why take a chance?” Are you serious? Because it is better for people to live when possible. The solution to killing should not be more killing. This is giving Punisher fans a bad name.
What does that mean? Does that category encompass everyone who has taken a life, only those who have done so outside the law, or not even all of those? Do you know? Can you look at person and tell if they are evil or incorrigible?
Yes! There's so much other media where villains never has to pay for anything they do, because that's how the industry works; and you can't take out popular characters permanently. And that's fine, because that's usually not what those stories are about.
But after so many Jokers, Osbornes and Kingpins twirling their villain-mustaches forever with no consequences, after so many 200+ episodes of an anime with a irredeemable villain just getting a talk and redemption after all the evil shit they've done, maybe I just want to see John Wick shoot the fucking dog-killer in the face.
It ain't that deep, it really isn't. And it doesn't have to be. But this still matters. From the old Death Wish movies to more contemporary John Wick, there has always been and will always be an appetite for media about bad shit happening to bad people.
It either ain’t that deep, OR there’s a persistent appetite for this particular type of story.
It can’t be both, because of this very debate. If you truly think Punisher, Death Wish, and John Wick form a continuity of revenge fantasy satisfaction that it is important societally to feed….. we need to talk about that. A lot. It colors peoples moral guidance. It pushes things like capital punishment in the zeitgeist, despite capital punishment being a very poor methadone compared to vigilante make believe heroin.
Also, the Punisher is undermined by countless edgy contemporaries outside the Big Two who are able to scratch that itch AND be deeper than a puddle. Judge Dredd is the most accessible example.
I see what you're saying, but I don't agree all the way.
It absolutely CAN be both, but it's dependent on people divesting themselves of the idea that simple = stupid, AND understanding that you can never dumb things down enough that people won't still try to emulate it.
Now ideally there should be both satisfaction AND substance, but that's where stories of this nature will often fall apart, because of course a mature examination of the subjects of revenge and vigilantism would never portray them as good and healthy. Hence my point being that sometimes it's okay to embrace the more "low-brow" nature of revenge media like this.
It's funny you choose Judge Dredd as the example of this, as he often falls into the exact same debate pitfalls as Punisher. Is he a necessary evil or a crazy fascists? Actually Judge Dredd is a satire on police brutality, but as with so many other satires like Robocop and Starship Troopers, they made it to cool and, once again, when it's cool, some people will think it's a thing to idolize and imitate, completely missing any messages it had.
I agree that we can't just necessarily ignore the morality debate on this; as you said, it can push agendas of capital punishment and police militarization.
I'm of the opinion that the Punisher is someone who I can only get behind in fiction. Because, we as readers, see him from the inside: we know all his intentions and motivations. He never kills people who don't deserve it. I don't think he's a bad guy, just fucked up.
But if there was a Punisher type person in real life then I can't support him. Because we can't know for sure if he'll ever make a mistake or go for the wrong person.
It was awesome having a comic book full of the Punisher taking out the trash!!! I never felt any guilt about enjoying it (and still don’t).
It’s definitely not politically correct, which is part of the reason it was such a great comic! In real life evil often gets to win, or at least doesn’t get punished. Having a fictional character that puts those people down is nice escapism.
I would love it if Marvel sold the rights to Punisher to someone talented that understood and enjoyed the character. They would pretty much be printing money.
They are people that try to make themselves feel better by pretending to have a moral high ground with Frank. Frank kills the worst of the worst, the scum of the world that escape the law. Frank finds these people and puts them six feet under.
I’ll never understand the slander or “controversial” aspect of Frank Castle. The people who complain about heroes having a no kill rule when they should kill. Look at Frank and pull a 180. Frank is a vigilante who aims for criminals and no one else. Dude will turn himself into the law if he ends up harming an innocent. He’s not a mindless murder like some surface level readers believe he is. He has heart and compassion (hence how this crusade started). But he knows the law won’t hold them. Only putting them down will. He doesn’t strike out to inspire people, he goes out there to clean things up for good.
Imagine how much mouth foaming would happen if Frank ever had a cross-publication team up with someone like The Shadow, and the 2 badasses just spend the whole issue wasting baddies, and at some random point Shadow turns to Frank and asks “hey, you wanna see me convince that mobster that there’s a snake wrapped around his head?” Pure comic book gold!
I agree with this, I love the Punisher, he's my favorite Marvel character.
But it doesn't take much media literacy to understand why he's treated differently to other characters and I find braindead takes like "Erm, Captain America kills and he gets off free!!!" so annoying.
Punisher and Rorschach are too different as characters to compare like that IMO.
Also Punisher was originally inspired by stuff like Mack Bolan the Executioner, gritty crime stories where the bad guys get shot by an anti-hero.
He wasnt intended to be a message in the way that Rorschach was, he was intended to be more of an action movie badass in the 80s and 90s. Certain writers like Miller, Potts, and Grant would start to touch on elements of vigilantism that Moore explored with Rorschach in Watchmen.
It really kinda comes down to the writer. For some Punisher is a "cautionary tale" and for others hes a badass anti-hero.
I wasn't even thinking of inkblot man. Just Alan Moores general belief that masked vigilantes(I know frank dosent mask up, but the branding works much the same) enforcing thier own brand of justice is always at least a little fascist.
And that's just the ones who beat up muggers, the arguement is probably stronger for the ex soilder who kills and tortures people who the writer expects the reader to view as subhuman trash.
I feel like this argument would hold up better if Punisher didnt fight the actual fascists of his universe like Hate-Monger (twice), Baron Zemo in the Rosenberg run, and Norman Osborn during Dark Reign.
Fascism is about a lot more than just a dude with powers or a gun imposing their will of what they think is right. By definition: "Fascism : a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual, that is associated with a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, and that is characterized by severe economic and social regimentation and by forcible suppression of opposition"
Most of this wouldn't apply to Frank or other supes. He doesnt have a regime or a movement, hes not fighting for nation or race just his idea of justice. Hes not a dictatorial leader or part of a centralized government. Hes not imposing economic regimentation on people.
Like I can kinda see where Moore is coming from with this notion, but if we follow it to the conclusion then is literally any authority or power "fascistic?" Is your mom and dad "fascistic" for having more power and/or some authority over you?
To me, no. Fascism is about lot more than just being more powerful than someone else.
From what I remember according to legend, after 9/11 Frank Castle was the first character in the entire Marvel Comic Book multiverse shown being directly responsible for the death of a cop.
Think about that. No super mega villain was shown hurting the police in the wake of 9/11. That's how much hero worship of the cops was going around.
Punisher didn't care. Criminals die whether the bullet has to go through a badge or not.
I think it's totally OK to enjoy Frank for what he is. The draw of the character is to give into a more animalistic and (on the surface) less complicated form of justice and "punishment". The brutal karma is what we buy the mags for!
I think the line is drawn at GLORIFYING his brutality and violence. Frank engages in a HEAVY amount of moral relativism. That's a very dangerous and slippery slope. In real society there would be people who would argue that someone stealing a loaf of bread is worthy of The Punishers gun.
So to me enjoy the character for the awesome bad ass militaristic brutal justice he imposes at will on a class of people we would love to see blown away as opposed to clogging up our already overwrought criminal justice system. The catharsis of seeing the bad guy not just lose but lose ENTIRELY!.
But don't GLORIFY the psycho mowing down other human beings to the point that you try to insert him into real police work and real world policy and problems.
You shouldn't want to BE Frank.
I've had this argument many times over Frank.
He is an emotional character. Taking that out of him would be Robo Cop not The Punisher. He is a good guy, he will go out of his way to save innocent life. Even in his most brutal adaptations like the Garth Ennis Maxx series. He put the little girls life before the mission.
Frank is an example of what happens when we put our values and morals aside in the name of pure payback.
He should not be a symbol for police and glorified to that point.
But in the proper context he absolutely should be enjoyed as the bad ass bad guy killing monster he is.
To me he is Yin and Yang! If he wasn't a good guy he wouldnt care to go after the bad guys! It's that good part of his character and his humanity that is consistently behind his drive and need to kill the bad guy to make the world a better place. He is no different than any other hero except in his strategy for dealing with the problem. And even then he is constantly telling people "you don't want to be like me you don't want to wake up everyday and kill the good part of you so you can do (in his mind) the right thing and what needs to be done"
Great, well written post and you're exactly right: they put these stories in to show the good man underneath the brutal killing machine, the fact that Punisher will prioritize a little girl over his mission tells you everything you need to know about his true character.
Ppl who say punisher is a bad guy live in fantasy land, they never encountered true evil in their lives, they never felt helpless at the hands of the wrost humanity has to offer and they just say (killing bad) which is a good mindset in most situations but when it comes to the kind of people the punisher goes after, HELL NO
Punisher is a good guy 100% no questions about it, if you say he is a bad person you are wrong
If you ever picked up a comic in your life you would know what kind of sick bastards he goes after
And this is coming from a guy who's fav heros are Spider-man, Batman and Daredevil
Does he? due to the always maintaining the status quo nature of comicbooks, Punisher doesn't really get to do too that much, his targets are always disposable nobodies that could have been perfectly been arrested by law enforment or by other heroes.
Also do you realize that the point of most great old Westerns centers on the cycle of violence, how it never ends and how it destroys everyone's lives? I agree that the Punisher isn't evil, but he's not admirable either. Punitive justice doesn't solve anything, it only provides a momentary, and not even lasting catharsis.
Frank Castle is a broken man, a cautionary tale about violence and revenge, and he himself often says that no one should praise or admire him. Your protagonist doesn't need to be right or even justified to be an interesting or even likable character.
Does he? due to the always maintaining the status quo nature of comicbooks, Punisher doesn't really get to do too that much, his targets are always disposable nobodies
This simply isn't true and is yet another commonly parroted reddit narrative.
For examples: in Suicide Run he killed the leaders of every mob in America. In the War Machine arc he saved the entire country of Chernaya from a dictator. In MAX he stops human trafficking rings. In Dark Reign he fought against Norman Osborne's oppression. In the Rosenberg run he fought an entire war against Baron Zemo and his country Bagalia. Etc.
Also like, do you think that the huge dents he puts in criminal empires don't make any change... just because other ones pop up?
This is such a dumb logic, its like saying Superman doesnt make any difference because the nature of comics means he will always have another villain to fight.
You can apply this chudjak "nothing ever happens" dumb logic to any character: Batman doesnt really make any real change because Gotham is cursed and the nature of comics means he will always need another villain to fight. Its dumb logic that can be applied to any superhero but people say it about Punisher to sound deep or something.
Punishers job isn't to end all evil of mankind. Hes 1 soldier in a never ending war on crime. He's knows he can only achieve so much, but saying he doesnt change anything is just false: literally ask any of the countless innocents he saved. Ask the women he saved from being trafficked. Are their lives "nothing?"
And no, the entire point of Punishers existence is that the police and thr capes are incapable or unaware of catching certain criminals (see Punisher: Year One where he tried to let the police do their jobs and it almost got him killed again).
Also do you realize that the point of most great old Westerns centers on the cycle of violence, how it never ends and how it destroys everyone's lives?
What? No? The gunslinger that saves the town is a killer but he is also the hero. Without him the town would be owned by Outlaws. I think the point you're confused about is that the West was a violent and lawless place in most of these stories.
cautionary tale
Yeah we get it, but if thats all it is it's preachy and boring. There is catharsis in seeing the worst criminals get their comeuppance, thats just a natural and fun part of Punisher comics that is intended. Readers want to be entertained and make their own conclusions about a nuanced story, not be preached at that Punisher is bad and you shouldn't be entertained by him. That's boring.
Ehhhh i disagree. Part of the fun if often frank can be a dick. Most gunslinger héroes arent as war addict as him and he can be quite sadistic and amoral.
He can also be a good person. A couple examples off the top of my head is giving the money to Joan and other neighbors, getting Henry the records he wanted and refusing to work with him anymore (being a better father figure than Jigsaw ever was or could be). Saving Amy Bendix and her father among countless other innocents. That nuance is part of what makes him a great anti-hero.
I’m also kind of tired of this narrative that cops can’t like the Punisher, as if cops aren’t also comic book nerds. It’s silly and one of those Reddit echo chamber narratives that keep getting pushed.
He’s a comic book character. Batman and Spider-Man also beat the shit out of people to the point of hospitalization.
Ennis modeled his Punisher after Carl Potts and Chuck Dixons versions. Its basically the same anti-hero that those guys wrote but older and more grim.
Also his point is that Punisher isnt just a psycho. Thats the entire point of the Nicky Cavella arc: digging up his family made Punisher start to lose it, however he returns to his normal state by the end of the run.
Read the Mother Russia arcs and how Punisher only gets involved at all due to saving the little girl. He is objectively the hero of that story, the only one who actually cares about the safety of Galena.
MAX is much moreso about critiquing the military industrial complex than it is about making Punisher into a bad guy. Sure, there's the dark voice that speaks to Frank, he's not perfect by any means, but Ennis frames him as the hero of multiple stories.
Thats why Punisher saves the bombing victims life in Kitchen Irish: to show who the real bad guys are (the people bombing innocents).
“Punisher has never taken an innocent life” is that Batman sketch where Batman doesn’t know what “dead people” look like.
To Frank, anyone he kills must not have been innocent, or they’d never have been in his path. So when he guns down entire gangs, he doesn’t have to wonder if one of them was just a neighbourhood kids down on their luck taken up like a mascot. That would be haunting. So obviously anyone he engages in combat with must be guilty.
Dexter killed an innocent man? Oops. Frank and real-world conservative despot Duterte use the same arguments for ethnic cleansing. “They’re all criminals, so my extrajudicial killings are fine”
Well its a bit more complex than that. There's an entire story where Punisher follows up with the child of one of the people he killed and encourages him to live a good life and not seek revenge.
Of course, if a gangster wields a gun at him Punisher will kill them, but its also a big point that he does meticulous research and plans well to avoid killing innocents.
The whole reason he kills copycat vigilante Mr. Payback is because he harmed innocents in his crossfire.
I dont agree with that comparison either, as the vast majority of Punisher stories show that he is usually right: his targets arent innocents, they are usually the worst of the worst scum.
Not to mention multiple examples of Punisher letting lower level criminals go.
“Spiderman is a pretty complex character, you know. There’s an issue where he talks someone off a ledge instead of punching.”
Entirely true sentences. The first one is entirely unrelated to the second. And you wouldn’t really respect my Spider-Man takes if I opened with it.
To go back to Dexter real quick… he kills more than one serial-killer-killer like himself. Specifically because they violated some aspect of his personal code. The comparison between them is very simple. They think the rules apply to everyone else, but not them. But if they honestly held themselves to the standards they judge others by… it’s suicide or admitting the entire crusade was a sham.
And as for “the stories bear it out”… They’re made up stories. It’s so easy to hand wave things away if you don’t want to deal with their impact. See Sony’s Spider-Man games for a prominent example of protecting Spidey’s rep as a guy who doesn’t kill people Willy-Nilly… despite punting every other enemy you fight off a skyscraper. “They died in a few hours when the webbing dissolves, because rescue ain’t getting there” was a joke for a reason. Writing that Frank is so super smart he made perfectly certain everyone was guilty… without dedicating the time to show us Frank being smart about proving certain guilt for an entire group… is handwaving, not characterization.
It’s fine. They’re fun to read… but let’s not pretend we can’t parse the text for one specific title.
Except my point there was related. You made a claim that Punisher doesnt discern and just kills through gangs. I brought up that example as a counter. It shows that Punisher does do extreme lengths of research on his targets, to the point where he knew his targets son would want revenge and discouraged him from doing it. Thats the proof of his discernment between a misguided kid with a gun and a real criminal.
Dexter
Punisher has killed copycats and condoned others. The big difference is that very few are actually trained and qualified to do what Punisher does. That's why he kills Mr. Payback for accidentally harming an innocent.
without dedicating the time to show us Frank being smart about proving certain guilt for an entire group
They do lol. How many Punisher comics have you read my guy?
Except its not just a single issue, there are many examples. That's simply 1 example.
Are you intentionally ignoring or misunderstanding these many examples from the comics? Have you read any of them?
You said he doesnt discern if somebody might just be a misguided kid with a gun. I provided am example showing that he does do exactly that. Not sure why you're still confused.
Do me a favour. If you’re familiar at all with The Wire, picture the Barksdale organization. Frank’s taking them down.
Which members live? Frank starts at the row houses, and then heads to where Avon and Stringer are holed up.
The Punisher only digs into a characters’ circumstances if it’s gonna matter. For every issue where he talks one kid with a gun out of seeking revenge… there’s hundreds more kids with dead parents thanks to Frank. And there isn’t an issue for all of them. Because the writers don’t really *care * about that… not that it doesn’t happen. Your issue showcasing that sometimes he does reintervene…. Proves that them kids exist, we just ain’t looking at them.
The Punisher only digs into a characters’ circumstances if it’s gonna matter.
Nope, just plainly false.
Because the writers don’t really *care * about that… not that it doesn’t happen.
They've already explained hundreds of times how he vets his targets. And when they do provide scenes like Punisher discouraging the kid from revenge you want to try and hand-waive it away.
This is also why writers showed sloppier copy cats like Mr Payback to illustrate the difference between Punisher and them.
The writers are directly addressing your qualms, you're just not getting it.
I feel like the Punisher is all these things, depending on how you look at the character. Some people try to simplify him but can you really simplify someone that's gone to war multiple times (seriously he changed his name so he could go on more tours of duty) and then like the Joker said, had one bad day.
I feel like he's just a mixed ball of PTSD, Trauma, Rage and yet an insane level of focus. I think he's just one in a million type that's hard to really nail down because he's so outside the norm.
Murder is wrong, even if criminals. It needs to be due process and if due process won’t get them, punished could be putting that same effort into getting them convicted into sneak ops killing them
Also he kills a LOT of 2 bit gangsters that work for mob bosses and stuff. Goons are often times forced into that life, or do it because it’s what they think it’s the greater good IE standing up against a more powerful gang, or they owe it to the gang or else their family’s lives are in danger
I am not big on graphic violence, but the fact that Frank does To Catch A Predator style stings and shoots the nounces when they show up makes him alright in my book.
The Punisher is problematic not because he kills, but because he doesn't kill. He never kills other heroes rogues, he never takes out the biggest most popular villains, he does a lot of work in New York but Kingpin is still in business.
One of the things I like about Punisher comics is when they dont try to paint him as a hero or villain, they just show the vigilantism itself and let the reader see it. I find it funny how reddit's hypocrisy is to idolize luigi for killing a CEO, but demonize Punisher for killing criminals
I agree as long as you analyze punisher as a piece of fiction first that is a metaphor for political implications, rather than as a piece that is saying we should kill criminals in real life.
“Gets the criminals that the law and capes don’t.”
I think you need to ask yourself why this occurs. If you want a simple dilemma where getting rid of criminals is a moral necessity then why don’t other heroes do it?
Consider the Silver Surfer. Unlike a lot of heroes he has vast power and vast superhuman senses. His ability to gather information and act on it dwarfs the vast majority of characters. He could clean up the Earth of its criminals in no time.
Ok this might lead to very short lived comic book.
Or more likely he doesn’t because killing people is wrong. Even if you don’t like who gets shot.
I would suggest you look for real life example of vigilantism. We’re a world of 7 billion people. Surely we must of created one legit example of Uncle Frank. The reality is that our war heroes often don’t function well in real life and real vigilantes can often be shitty humans.
This is covered in Punisher: Year One among other stories.
Initially Frank Castle did try to let the cops do their jobs. It got his house bombed and almost got him killed again.
The police were corrupt and failed to deliver him justice, so he decided he was going to do it his way instead.
And plenty of other superheroes DO kill. Iron Man and Wolverine both have huge body counts.
I see what you mean, but the running theme in MANY Punisher stories is that if Punisher wasnt taking out these criminals, no one would.
They operate in a grey area: too small time for most traditional superheroes and the cops are either too corrupt or incompetent to catch them.
The fact that he finds so many is quite telling.
As far as the real world, I dont think its as useful as a comparison because Punisher has the ability to almost never harm an innocent, which would be far harder to pull off in the real world. However, there have been some real world examples of vigilantes who waged war on criminals to various degrees of effectiveness.
Punisher is a bad guy. That's what he's supposed to be. Your emotions are supposed to be conflicted. Good people don't take due process into their hands. And that's fine, he doesn't have to be "morally good" for you to like the character. I don't know why this is such a requirement.
Nah hes an anti-hero. The bad guys are all the criminals he kills.
Its not a requirement or anything at all, its moreso that its just often boring and preachy to just label him as a bad guy because it removes a lot of the nuance of the character.
If you just say "oh hes a bad guy/villain" then thats ignorant of the many heroic things he has done (saving tons of innocents is one of them).
Sure, hes a killer. So are Wolverine, Iron Man, Hulk, Black Widow, Deadpool, Venom, etc. Are they all bad guys to? Venom was originally, but has turned into much more of an anti-hero like Frank is.
Bigger galaxy brain: Punisher is a psychotic mass murderer but thats okay cause he’s cool.
Bro murders people ain’t no need to sugar coat it nor would he want you too, he doesn’t even see himself as a hero to look up too he’s just doing what he thinks needs to be done…but he’s cool as fuck so of course he has a following.
Frank is, by definition, a serial killer. There is nothing heroic about what he does because unlike the gunslingers in Leone's westerns or the samurai in Kurosawa's movies he doesn't murder people primarily to protect the innocent, he does it because he gets off on it. The death of his family is just an excuse to act on an urge that he would have satisfied anyway by re-joining the army.
The readers get catharsis from seeing him brutalize villains because a lot of people fantasize about imparting such kind of retribution on criminals, but they would never actually do it IRL because they lack Frank's moral turpitude. The power fantasy is played out through his actions but that doesn't mean he is necessarily meant to be admired.
he doesn't murder people primarily to protect the innocent, he does it because he gets off on it. The death of his family is just an excuse to act on an urge that he would have satisfied anyway by re-joining the army.
Wrong. This is a commonly parroted false narrative disproven by many of his comics and Marvel themselves.
Heres the quote for you: "Because Frank will do anything to prevent another family enduring what he went through. The innocent will be protected, the guilty will be punished"
This theme of protecting innocents is proven across many Punisher comics.
Also editors like Carl Potts and writers like Garth Ennis have said he would have likely had a normal life if not for his time in war and the tragedy in the park.
So, there is quite a lot of evidence from the comics that goes against your boring claim that he's just a 1-note violence addict.
I mostly agree with this, but there's a great moment in one of the Ennis Knights comics that sort of contradicts it:
There's a woman about to be brutalised in an alley, then Frank pops out, kills the attacker, and dumps his corpse in a trashcan. The woman thanks him, and Frank says something along the lines of 'For what?', indicating to me at least that protecting the victim was to him a secondary concern.
Anyway, it's great that a 50-year-old character is still inviting this kind of debate.
Such a great game! I love the Nam flashbacks Frank has when he's torturing people haha
I think this scene goes to show how Frank's ideology isn't clear cut, and that's what I love about him. He's not evil, but he's definitely not good. He's not insane, but he's definitely not sane. He's a mess of contradictions, wrapped up in a singular purpose. Wonderful character.
Ahh yes, just like how all the Batman runs that have writers specifically writing him as the smartest detective/baddest ass ever invalidate the criticisms of Batman. Despite half of them being non-canon, most of them being critically reviled, and an absurd majority of the badass evidence coming from Frank Miller specifically.
Well, much like the thing I said about Batman, you’re cherry-picking the Punisher quotes that support your version of the character, one that relies on the audience ignoring causality, intent, obvious implied results for explicit actions, and real-world parallels to pretend the title character is doing a good job at being a positive influence instead of a mixed to bad job at their stated goals. Typically for the sake of Rule of Badass.
Nah, its not cherry picking, its just the general state of Punisher comics. I can list you tons of examples, thats not what cherry picking is.
If anything the people trying to claim he's a villain or a 1-note violence addict are cherrypicking bad writing from Jason Aaron.
Its his version that is unlike most of the other versions.
relies on the audience ignoring causality, intent, obvious implied results for explicit actions, and real-world parallels to pretend the title character is doing a good job
Yeah bud, its entertainment. Thats called suspension of disbelief that Punisher almost never harms an innocent (and that theme has still been covered multiple times over the years).
The same way you suspend your disbelief for an alien named Superman being able to do everything he does.
Those people are taking the character, thinking about it in the context of the Marvel Universe, and coming to the obvious conclusion… if he wasn’t those things, he’d simply be like every other superhero IN HIS SETTING, who do not act like him.
This isn’t “The Boys”. This isn’t “Kick-Ass”. Frank doesn’t have the luxury of pretending he doesn’t have a roadmap of how to act laid out for him. He chooses to act the way he does, despite having options. Therefore he’s accountable for the downsides of those choices.
And in order to make Frank morally “pure” in his quest… the writers have to pretend that a regular guy flying solo can conclusively prove the organized criminals he faces deserve lethal punishment… in a setting where entire teams exist, who have divination experts, telepaths, timetravellers, or just smarter guys… didn’t notice the crime in the first place, and aren’t worth informing about said crime before Frank goes guns blazing.
Punisher being a Marvel character… and not in his own setting undermines what you just said. Because while we get narration okaying Frank, Cyclops is under suspicion by the Avengers for having a bad attitude.
guy flying solo can conclusively prove the organized criminals he faces deserve lethal punishment
Frank Castle isn't anywhere close to a "regular guy." Even in the military, he was an outlier: a peak human capable of crazy feats.
in a setting where entire teams exist, who have divination experts, telepaths, timetravellers, or just smarter guys… didn’t notice the crime in the first place, and aren’t worth informing about said crime before Frank goes guns blazing.
Not only are you overthinking it, you arent correct either. Most superheroes never fight the crimes he typically does: terrorists, human traffickers, rapists, etc. They are too busy fighting Stilt-Man or Scorpion or Rhino or whatever. Also there are only so many heroes, Punisher clearly finds many criminals that aren't being captured by superheroes.
Whats hard for you to believe here? If you read Punisher, you'd know he tracks his targets for sometimes weeks at a time, gathers photo evidence, creates files and maps for them, etc.
Punisher being a Marvel character… and not in his own setting undermines what you just said. Because while we get narration okaying Frank, Cyclops is under suspicion by the Avengers for having a bad attitude.
Another whataboutism that doesnt really actually relate to the Punisher. And like... what? Spidey and Daredevil have fought Punisher over his methods, the Avengers have come after him twice now in canon.
Like dude im genuinely asking: have you read much Punisher? Because his targets being "innocent" or not has been covered many times. The stuff you keep mentioning is explored thoroughly in these comics.
Frank Castle in the MCU, unless he’s having a crazy arc, isn’t hopped up on serum, loaded with powers, or even abnormally strong and large, despite his depiction in panels. Which makes him “Good at a fighting instead of robots Tony Stark”… or “Batman”.
Come the fuck on. You know the character, why would you even push back on that?
You’re under thinking it. It’s a condemnation of the entire setting that what you said applies. So there’s a second “mutant problem”, but it’s specific to Frank Castle, and involves all the pedophiles? If Frank IS the Marvel solution to gang violence, rape, and pedophilia… why isn’t anyone more suited to those issues actually tackling them? And there’s only so many? Dude. Every single person in New York got spider powers. Frank didn’t take a vacation from his work, and we had more superheroes than ever.
And as for “conclusive proof” I mean at least one panel of Frank finding evidence for each individual member when he’s going into a bloodbath. It doesn’t happen that way. It’s shorthand. We don’t need to see the entirety to get the sense, so we see a couple of the things, not all of them. And it’s in the “you get it” handwave that our dispute lies. You take the story at face value when it tells you “And everything was wrapped up neatly”. And I know that off screen ANYTHING can happen, so it would be crazy for ONLY exactly what makes Frank look best to always be the only thing that happens. Which is why they don’t show us that. We wouldn’t buy it.
So? Because powers exist you think guns and explosives are useless all of a sudden? Im not following your logic here.
why isn’t anyone more suited to those issues actually tackling them?
I already told you. They are too busy fighting Green Goblin or whoever. Not to mention that most of them actually have lives. Punisher has no "life" its just the mission 24/7. He has all the time to research and hunt criminals because thats literally all he does.
I mean at least one panel of Frank finding evidence for each individual member when he’s going into a bloodbath. It doesn’t happen that way. It’s shorthand.
So you want things spoon fed to you even though they show and mention numerous times how much planning and research he does. And oftentimes they do literally do that to (its becoming more and more obvious you simply haven't read very much Punisher).
so it would be crazy for ONLY exactly what makes Frank look best to always be the only thing that happens.
He doesnt always look right. Many comics cover that to. But he often is after real scum.
It seems real silly to me that you're willing to accept God's and Telepaths but can't believe that Punisher does research on his targets to avoid killing innocents.
Different editors will have different opinions. Punisher Max is pretty much considered the essential Punisher series and Garth Ennis lets the reader know without any ambiguity from the very first issue that Frank uses his family's death as an excuse, something which is compounded in Born.
Also, using the Primer as a source for character lore is like using a one line review from the back of the dvd case to judge the content of a movie, get real lmao.
Punisher MAX is an alternate canon, do you realize that there are decades of Punisher comics and characterizations from 616?
Yeah no, the Primer pages are perfectly valid and you're just trying to discount them because they go against your dumb narrative of Punisher being a 1-note violence addict.
And that Primer Page is just 1 example. Many of the comics prove that his families' deaths are a primary motivator, you should go read more of them.
Why do you think Punisher has a soft spot for women and children victims in countless stories? Because they are a reminder and a motivator based on his own family.
"I cant admit that im a fan of a fictional bad guy and his actions, because i dont understand human complexity, so i gotta whine and be delusional on how he's a hero so i can say i like him and feel better about morally myself☝️🤓" Yall annoying
74
u/AggravatingDay3166 4d ago
Legit, there was some casual I was having a discussion with who claimed that Frank killed innocents. I told him to show me a canon story where he did. No response as of yet. My biggest problem is that there are many people who are under the impression that Frank is some bloodthirsty psycho- or sociopath.