Comics / Comic Reviews / Marvel Comics

Daredevil vs. Punisher: Means and Ends

By Geoff Hoppe
September 16, 2006 - 13:15

Synopsis: The Punisher is on a mission to kill a powerful mobster jockeying for the “Kingpin” position of New York crime. He unwittingly involves a family, whose fourteen year old son emulates the Punisher. As the Punisher nears his target, the consequences of his actions become increasingly dire for the entire city of New York.

 

Daredevil vs. Punisher: Means and Ends is a good story, but I feel like something’s missing. Certainly not in the action department: the fight scenes are awesome. Lapham knows how to draw fights. For a great example, see the scene where the Punisher flees the Hospital in issue five. Lapham handles Daredevil very well. I think he shows a level of competence drawing Daredevil “in action” that puts him on a par with other DD greats like Scott McDaniel, Lee Weeks, or even Frank Miller.

 

Is there a moral to this story? Do the characters come out wiser for the experience? Not really. The Punisher has a crisis of faith about his mission, but is rejuvenated by the response of a girl whose life he saves. His rejuvenation doesn’t involve any new revelation, it’s just a new resolve to complete his traditional mission. Daredevil, on the other hand, doesn’t undergo any major changes through the storyline. Daredevil is a stabilizing force: where Frank Castle wavers, flubs up, and even looks foolish on several occasions, Daredevil is always in charge. He terrifies mobsters and evades security systems with ease.

 

It’s not that Lapham doesn’t give Daredevil good material. Lapham’s Daredevil has a biting edge that suits him well. Daredevil’s life is ruined so often by his writers that, in my opinion, he’s become a little too vulnerable. Lapham’s writing and inking give DD a menace more writers should exploit. Daredevil dresses like the theological embodiment of evil—I feel like other writers (at least, the ones I’ve read—I’m new to DD) should take better advantage of this.

 

The two title characters don’t change in any radical ways, but one character does. The story focuses around a typical New York family, the Bastellis, and the way they’re caught up in a world of violent crime. To make a long story short, the family’s fourteen year old, Martin, meets the Punisher, adopts him as a personal hero, and buys a gun so he can emulate the big guy and protect his family. Martin’s development is the story’s most intriguing. When he saves a girl’s life by scaring away her assailant with the handgun, his newfound courage leads him to shoot one of the mobsters who extort “protection” money from his father. The mob finds out, kills the father and put the mother and 20 year old daughter in the Hospital. It is Martin’s experience that hits home the hardest for any comic fan.

 

Some comic book fans, I suspect, love the medium because of its excitement and escapism (I know it’s why I’m a fan). Deep down, some fans (and many who don’t have the guts to admit to being fans) wish they had the powers, and experienced the adventures, that superheroes have. This helps explain why so many fans dress up at comic book conventions. By including a character who idolizes and mimics the Punisher, Lapham indirectly addresses that desire to be like the hero. It’s harsh, and more than a little sobering. Lapham is being more realistic than fanciful in showing that vigilantism leads to chaos and death, more often than happy endings.

 

Is this “realistic” approach a good thing? One could argue that DvP’s sobering realism makes it a “good” work of fiction, but that’s not a quality I always want from a comic book. I like fantastic scenarios. I like bizarre costumes. I like escapism. And this book favors “realism” over those more fantastic qualities.

 

Another big reason why people read comics: they’re imaginative. For some fans, they’re a breath of fresh air in a mundane world. Why is Daredevil, or any caped crusader, so popular? Because superheroes are (both literally and figuratively) a blinding flash of color in the grey-beige concrete lattice-work of the modern city.

 

The plot is missing something. It rambles along until the end, when it sends the protagonists on their merry way with a pat on the head. This makes DvP similar to most cross-over comics, where the story is merely a device to showcase how the personalities and fighting styles of the two characters differ. One is tempted to interpret the end as depressing: The Punisher ends the series thinking the same way he did when he entered it.

 

D vs. P certainly isn’t without substance. The art is richly detailed and the pacing is excellent, sucking the reader into a whirlpool which gets increasingly furious with each issue. Lapham uses Punisher and Daredevils’ various duels to define differences between the two. Twice in the series, Frank Castle gets particularly frustrated with Daredevil’s “Eastern” approach. When Punisher finally boxes Daredevil into a corner, he vents to himself: “No more ballet. No more style. No more technique. Just ugly. Just me. Welcome to my world.” This scene sums up what Means and Ends is all about: pinpointing the differences between the heroes. When the grenade smoke clears and the last billy club is thrown, neither character has changed demonstrably, but the reader understands why and how they’re so radically different.

 

All in all, how do I weigh in on DvP? It’s good. There are things I would have done differently, but I didn’t write this story. Lapham did. And what he does do is create a consistent, engaging (albeit bleak) universe for the two protagonists to live and fight in. This book isn’t entirely my style, but it’s well-written.

 

Last Updated: August 31, 2023 - 08:12