Joker's origin

[blindman]

I really want joker's origin in the movie. Not flashback but in the movie itself. Batman fights this guy but he fell into a vat of chemicals. Then he becomes the joker. That would give more reasons for the joker to hunt and kill batman. All this destroying the city stuff is boring. The joker could hold rachael hostage as a trap to kill batman but he ends up shooting rachael after the plan foiled.

[kpjoon]

I honestly don't want an origin...
I also believe that... Joker escaped Arkham as the Joker already.

[The Kid]

boo. I want an origin and here's why: We see a man devolve or is it evolve... into the crazy wacko jacko he becomes, similar to what we saw in begins with batman...well sort-of, since he already was angry and obsessed with criminals in the beginning, but then we w3re shown a bunch of flashbacks that told the story of where his motivation came from... so if they go that route I wouldn't mind.

but having batman be blamed for joker's condition is an essential part of the character that I don't want to just poof vanish now... :(

[SatanBurger]

Normally I wouldn't mind seeing Joker at least fall into the chemicals, even though I agree he's best left with no definite origin. The thing is, it'd be so close to a repeat of what Burton did it might be misinterpreted as a full-blown remake by the general audience. I mean, as much as I hate dictating Nolan's Batman by things Burton and Schumacher did before him, I feel like we've seen it before. Just plop Joker into the middle of Gotham and place the relevance on his actions rather than his past. Leave the pathos to Two-Face.

[The Kid]

boo. that's too batman forever two-face-ish for me....

[SatanBurger]

boo. that's too batman forever two-face-ish for me....

Two-Face was already an established criminal in Forever. Surely Joker could be introduced to Gotham as a dangerous villain without resorting to an origin story. Give his crimes and his motivations some mystery. Build him up. I'm just talking post-chemicals here. I'm not saying we should skip ahead to a Batman that's already fairly familiar with Mr J.

Afterall, Hannibal's origins remained unexplained throughout Silence of the Lambs, but he was neither random nor ineffective. Obviously.

[neobido9999]

Joker should be as follows:

Name - unknown
Age - unknown
Alias - joker

[The Kid]

Two-Face was already an established criminal in Forever. Surely Joker could be introduced to Gotham as a dangerous villain without resorting to an origin story. Give his crimes and his motivations some mystery. Build him up. I'm just talking post-chemicals here. I'm not saying we should skip ahead to a Batman that's already fairly familiar with Mr J.

Afterall, Hannibal's origins remained unexplained throughout Silence of the Lambs, but he was neither random nor ineffective. Obviously.

well..right and we won't lose any of that with an origin of the paleface joker or ever get a straight origin from childhood to present I think. His permanent mask makes him a clown, but his sadistic nature wouldn't be betrayed at all if we see him recieve the dip. because like hannibal, an already established criminal serving a sentence for something deserving of such punishment (I guess all the people he has eaten), his origin as a criminal is still mysterious though their past criminal activity is evident and we learn so much about them from their actions. So what if we see the joker become the white-faced/permant smile joker... he's still the violent criminal before doing so, I'm sure, or he wouldn't be in such a position to begin with- facing batman above a vat of toxic stuff.

he was introduced to gotham in the last film and now he's meeting batman for the first time, whether as the joker or whoever- we don't know yet of course. Still I'd rather he become batman's arch nemesis rather than just exist to play the random baddy with a messed up face and a bunch of henchmen like TFINO. He's too interesting for that. Ra's not explaining his views on the world and corruption and immortality through theatricality and deception would have made him pretty pale. hannibal like scarecrow in bb isn't the main antagonist in the silence of the lambs story, but a fascilitator to other characters. If the joker ends up that way, then that sucks. oh well. life goes on.I think. Hans Greuber would be a bettah example He's a badass thief meanie with some real character and deeply entreched hatred for the hero because of how he has thwarted his schemes. I can see it working like that perhaps.

I so don't want to see him get a tazer to the face by batman's girlfriend though..... too demeaning.

[gothamsterror]

I don't think we should have an origin, just a bunch of cryptic clues so his past can be left to the viewers imagination. :)

[Rynan]

The only origin that is needed is Batman's.

..and Two-Face, cus his origin is kinda needed for the character to work. And don't say anything that The Joker needs an origin for him to work, cus that's wrong. First, The Joker was never Batman's freind, like Harvey, and he had nothing really to do with him until his supposed "accident"(and since this story is about Batman, that matters). Second, for years since his creation, The Joker never had a back story and you-know-what, he worked surprizingly well. He was a monster and he was there to be Batman's arch-nemesis, not to garner our sympathy for his messed up state.

[Mr. Freeze]

exactly^

The Joker should no have his origin told maybe a couple flashbakcs but that is it.

One of the coolest factors of the joker is the fact that his origin is very much a mystery its self.

Besides like someone said the only villain imo that should get a full blown origin is Two Face.

and anyways it's been establashed at the end of Begins that Joker is already on the loose and causing mayhem already

[Mr. Freeze]

exactly^

The Joker should no have his origin told maybe a couple flashbakcs but that is it.

One of the coolest factors of the joker is the fact that his origin is very much a mystery its self.

Besides like someone said the only villain imo that should get a full blown origin is Two Face.

and anyways it's been establashed at the end of Begins that Joker is already on the loose and causing mayhem already

[Mr. Freeze]

oops my bad

[Mister C]

Have batman ask joker where he came from and then a quick flash to a man screaming in a vat of chemicals.then just go back to the movie.

[Lpilgrim]

abosolutely no origin please. a flashback or 2 but thats it.

[Katsuro]

this movie cant' have an origin unless it is in flashbacks. At the end of Begins we see that The Joker is already up and causing trouble, and he's leaving his calling card. I'd be pissed if the next movie turned had joker as some guy who liked to leave Joker cards at the scene of crimes, then somehow randomly fell into chemicals and turned out looking like a clown. Way too coincidental for me.

The thing about Joker, is even now his origin is a mystery. The only origin we know of is in The Killing Joke, and even there he admits it may not be true because he can't remember. Doing something like that I think would work, have Joker tell his origin in a flashback, then admit that he doesn't even know if it's true or not.

[SatanBurger]

well..right and we won't lose any of that with an origin of the paleface joker or ever get a straight origin from childhood to present I think. His permanent mask makes him a clown, but his sadistic nature wouldn't be betrayed at all if we see him recieve the dip. because like hannibal, an already established criminal serving a sentence for something deserving of such punishment (I guess all the people he has eaten), his origin as a criminal is still mysterious though their past criminal activity is evident and we learn so much about them from their actions. So what if we see the joker become the white-faced/permant smile joker... he's still the violent criminal before doing so, I'm sure, or he wouldn't be in such a position to begin with- facing batman above a vat of toxic stuff..

Right. I see your point, and I agree with it, but it doesn't really address anything in my post. All I said was a chemical dip scene with The Joker would be a repeat of what we've already seen. Personally, I think a creative team could come up with an effective method of introducing The Joker without resorting to what Burton's already done.

he was introduced to gotham in the last film and now he's meeting batman for the first time, whether as the joker or whoever- we don't know yet of course. Still I'd rather he become batman's arch nemesis rather than just exist to play the random baddy with a messed up face and a bunch of henchmen like TFINO. He's too interesting for that..

Now you've failed to miss my point entirely. Why do we need a filmed origin for The Joker to be Batman's arch nemesis? Are you trying to tell me The Joker was only a secondary villain before The Killing Joke?

Ra's not explaining his views on the world and corruption and immortality through theatricality and deception would have made him pretty pale. hannibal like scarecrow in bb isn't the main antagonist in the silence of the lambs story, but a fascilitator to other characters.

Are you kidding me? How on earth does Joker not having a specific origin render him devoid of motivation or personality? Did we get any glimpse of Ras's early life beyond the brief mention of his wife (which may or may not have been true)? No. And yet you cite him as a counter example. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

I want depth and long pretentious monologues for The Joker as much as anyone. Has nothing to do with whether or not we get an origin filmed. Hell, I don't care if Nolan finds some way to shed light on it through narration or dialogue. But we don't need a remake of the scene with Nicholson in '89. It's unecessary. Like I said before, Two-Face's origin is an integral part of his story. The Joker's is superfluous. Or at least not important enough to eat up big chunks of screentime.

[CloneTrooper]

I think the joker should be the guy who got sacked at the end of the movie and replaced by Lucius. Sorry I can't remember his name but if this did happen he could become the joker by trying to kill Fox in his lab while he was using chemicals. Another good thing that could be brought to the movie is he knows everything about Bruce and he knows many different operations at Wayne industries and he could sabotage one of the projects.
That’s what I think but everyone has an opinion.

[SilentType]

how I would handle the joker's origin:
Joker tells his own form of joke. He tells batman about a man. He got married right out of college where he had majored in chemistry. His wife convinced him to forget chemistry and follow his dream of doing comedy. He didn’t make money as a comedian, so they were poor but happy. When he discovered that his wife was pregnant he agreed to help a crime syndicate develop a new drug. They were busted when “shopping” for chemicals at a the chem. plant, and fearing he would be in prison when his daughter was born, he tried to escape through the chemical laden outflow of the plant. He awoke handcuffed to a hospital bed. He was told by the policemen in his room that he had been fingered as the leader of the chemical heist by his co-conspirators. Then he was told that his wife had been murdered execution style, presumably for his failure in the heist. And what is the punch line to this cosmic joke? His exposure to the caustic chemicals had eaten away his face. The doctors were able to repair his face, but the surgery left him with a permanent grin. Now, even in his deepest grief, he couldn’t help but smile. The Joker says that is when he realized that life was a great cosmic joke, that someone up there was looking down on all our agony and despair and laughing. He also saw how delicate sanity is, and how one bad day can break a man. He says he will show the world they are walking a razor’s edge of madness, and perhaps then they will see how pointless and ridiculous it all is. They can see, as he does, the comedy in tragedy, the laughter in man’s despair. Perhaps they can all be, as he is, in on the gag.

[The Kid]

Right. I see your point, and I agree with it, but it doesn't really address anything in my post. All I said was a chemical dip scene with The Joker would be a repeat of what we've already seen. Personally, I think a creative team could come up with an effective method of introducing The Joker without resorting to what Burton's already done.



Now you've failed to miss my point entirely. Why do we need a filmed origin for The Joker to be Batman's arch nemesis? Are you trying to tell me The Joker was only a secondary villain before The Killing Joke?



Are you kidding me? How on earth does Joker not having a specific origin render him devoid of motivation or personality? Did we get any glimpse of Ras's early life beyond the brief mention of his wife (which may or may not have been true)? No. And yet you cite him as a counter example. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

I want depth and long pretentious monologues for The Joker as much as anyone. Has nothing to do with whether or not we get an origin filmed. Hell, I don't care if Nolan finds some way to shed light on it through narration or dialogue. But we don't need a remake of the scene with Nicholson in '89. It's unecessary. Like I said before, Two-Face's origin is an integral part of his story. The Joker's is superfluous. Or at least not important enough to eat up big chunks of screentime.

I miss points all that time. They called me pointmisser in the service. That doesn't mean the joker doesn't deserve an origin as much as two-face or Rachel. Rachel showed a lot more personality than either villians in begins and I loved it... She believes in Bruce's father's ideals for gotham city, she loves bruce and cares about him, and shares his pain, but not his passion. surely nolan can easily handle the joker's, maye find ways to create a motivation through, like what others said, flashbacks or something.

I'm not closed off to the idea of no origin. I'd simply prefer one. A lot of things in the story are unnecessary if you want to look at them that way. I think there's no problem involved in showing how he gets so freaky looking or at least have it explained in some way.

What's wrong with that?

[Timstuff]

We don't need an origin. At least, we don't need to see it. If they have to tell us where he came from, then we could see BATMAN/BRUCE do some digging into Joker's history, and finding out how he ended up looking the way he does. But we should not devote 15 minutes of the movie just to showing it all unfold! That's where the old Batman movies went wrong; they spent so much time setting up the villains, when they should have let us see BATMAN learning where the villains came from.

[The Kid]

but tim, tim, tim, listen to me, tim.

It works, man. Jack Napier hating the bat for eternitiy works best. Listen to me.... tim... :( he will no doubt be as obsessed and determined to destroy batman if they have a personal connection like that in my open onion, tim. It's the truth, tim.

tim...

[Rynan]

Have batman ask joker where he came from and then a quick flash to a man screaming in a vat of chemicals.then just go back to the movie.

Heheheheheheheheh. I can see it my mind's eye. There's a fight between The Joker and Batman, Joker pulls a gun but Batman grabs it, forcing it upward perventing The Joker from shooting Batman. Then Batman says: "Hey, Joker. I know we've been pals along time. Hell, we've seen battle together. I know better than to ask, but after all these years, I have to know, How did you get so ****ed up?".

And The Joker looks up with quizical look, then responds...

"Well, you see, I was robbin' the Ace chemical plant, see. I busted the safe, loaded the loot, but as I was making my escape down the catwalk over some pretty dangerous looking chemicals, there huge fat woman blocking my way accross the catwalk. I tried to squeeze past her, tried to go under her, it was impossible. I belive she preoccupied with a Hero sandwitch. My hatred of Heroes was born that day, but back to the story. Then I came up with a brillant idea: I would get past her by crawling accross the outside of the saftey railing. It was all going good, until my hand hit a patch of greese. Turns out every night they greese portions of the railings, I don't know why yet, but that was my downfall. I went screaming toward the vat of chemicals. Actually, I didn't land in the chemicals immediatly, I hit the side the tank, then into the chemicals. Thank god I had that ridiculus Red Hood on, or I would've got a concussion and drown."

Batman says: "Really?"
Joker: "Really."

Then the fight contnues.

[SatanBurger]

I'm not closed off to the idea of no origin. I'd simply prefer one. A lot of things in the story are unnecessary if you want to look at them that way. I think there's no problem involved in showing how he gets so freaky looking or at least have it explained in some way.

What's wrong with that?

Nothing. Which is why I've never argued against it, only against the idea of rehashing something Burton's already done. Joker can have personality and meaning without a sappy clear-cut Hollywood origin, which is something you can't seem to fathom. Motivation is not always linked to oirign. I've always seen Joker as inherently evil. He would have been a homicidal sociopath no matter what, falling into the chemicals just gave him more reason to follow the theatrical route. I remember reading an interview with cartoonist Jhonen Vasquez that does a pretty good job of critisizing the utter stupidity of having to link every villain to some easy life changing event. It's just conveniant and comfortable. The Joker doesn't need anything like that. He's pure and elemental. The fact that he's so dedicated to just being bad among a jumble of conflicted, victimized characters makes him chilling.

[The Kid]

that's pretty much what scarecrow was in begins. let's try something different.

[AshtonFoster]

No origin...But I wouldnt mind some flashbacks towards the end of the film. If there is the envitable connection between Joker and Batman, it should be told towards the end before their final battle. For example the Joker speaking to Batman, and telling him how Batman made him (to Batman's shock and dismay)- and that in itself could be the orgin story, without actually being told in the normal way.

[SatanBurger]

that's pretty much what scarecrow was in begins. let's try something different.

Mighty christ you're dense. Obviously the ability to look at the dynamics of a film without seeing everything in two different extremes is a talent you lack, so I'm done trying. It's like arguing with a brick wall.

[Dark Knight]

he should be a family man....who was down on his luck as a comedian and was trapped into a patsy role for a Falcone mission.....where he fell into chemicals. His family was killed practically in front of him by Falcone or his thugs.....something like that. We need to see Joker go through tragedy to what caused him to be a homicidal lunatic. Preferably in flashback form. Can you imagine an intense crazy Penn dueling with diolouge with Bale?? Oh boy... :up:

[The Kid]

Mighty christ you're dense. Obviously the ability to look at the dynamics of a film without seeing everything in two different extremes is a talent you lack, so I'm done trying. It's like arguing with a brick wall.

why are you flaming me? :down I know what I am, who I am and how dense I am. To conquer idiocy one must become an idiot. I make no claims to be any other way, never have.

However, the origin of the joker is something I'm all for. Give us something good, nolan.

[mongo44]

I’m on the fence with this discussion (should they or shouldn’t they). My issue with origin plots is the origin mires down too much valuable story telling time. It kind of reminds me of telling my 3 year old a story: why is he like that, why is his hair green, why is he laughing, etc.

I would rather just jump right into the story. Never acknowledge anything about his name, origins, or motivation. Let’s just have a knock down drag out Batman VS. Joker story. And if they don’t kill him it leaves the door open down the road for a story that alludes to the Joker’s beginnings. Imagine the plot potentials if nothing is given. Makes for a better mystery and detective story. Bats is frustrated that he can not get a handle on this guy. He doesn’t know who he is, etc, etc.

The other reason I don’t want an origin story is two fold. First it was already done in 89. Secondly Joker’s true origins are speculative at best. Because of his motivations, are we positive that he became that way from falling into chemicals? I prefer that the chemical accident is a good theory to hold on to but only a theory not fact.

[Rynan]

^ Agree. Mystery > Origin.

I look forward to a drag out Batman vs. Joker story, without stuff getting in the way.

[souvlaki]

but having batman be blamed for joker's condition is an essential part of the character that I don't want to just poof vanish now... :(

How is it an essential part of the character? The Red Hood incident still isn't even neccessarily cannon in modern Batman continuity. The Joker's origin, for the most part, is unknown. He even says in Killing Joke something to the effect of "sometimes I remember it this way, sometimes another way. If I am going to have memories, I prefer to have them be multiple choice". The only one that really knows is the Joker. Batman has said a few times he somewhat suspects a connection between Red Hood and the Joker, but that's about it. So really, the only way Batman has ever really been blamed for the Joker's existance is through the whole "escalation" thing that Gordon spoke of in BB.

[GL1]

Multiple choice... it's the reason I hated Batman 89, cuz the Joker stopped being a force of nature and became a personal vendetta between two man... it shrinks the universe... and I hate it when they shrink the universe... it's one thing to connect their pasts... it's another to make them schoolyard enemies...

[Clarkman]

For now, i don't want a full-blown origin. But i definitely wanna see the Red Hood incident being mentioned. Maybe as a police report that Gordon receives from his men (Det. Montoya and Harvey Bullock, maybe?).
I'd also like to hear the name Jack Napier in a Batman-Gordon conversation. None of this should be directly linked to The Joker though. Jack Napier could be his real name but it could also be a low-profile stand-up comedian. The origin should remain in mystery, but there should be all kinds of hints for Batman do the digging through BB2 and BB3. And we can be sure that the hints will be there. I really hope to see even more detective work from Batman's part.
Oh, The Joker giving the "bad day" speech and trying to tantalize/torture Gordon into the wacko side is a must.

[mongo44]

For now, i don't want a full-blown origin. But i definitely wanna see the Red Hood incident being mentioned. Maybe as a police report that Gordon receives from his men (Det. Montoya and Harvey Bullock, maybe?).
I'd also like to hear the name Jack Napier in a Batman-Gordon conversation. None of this should be directly linked to The Joker though. Jack Napier could be his real name but it could also be a low-profile stand-up comedian. The origin should remain in mystery, but there should be all kinds of hints for Batman do the digging through BB2 and BB3. And we can be sure that the hints will be there. I really hope to see even more detective work from Batman's part.
Oh, The Joker giving the "bad day" speech and trying to tantalize/torture Gordon into the wacko side is a must.

I don't like the name Jack Napier. That showed up first in Batman 89. I don't want his real name.

[Clarkman]

Mongo44, first of all: funny sig.

The way i see it, Jack Napier wouldn't be his real name. His origin would remain in mystery, with clues all over the place (like Red Hood being cited, and the name Jack Napier). Everytime Batman investigates about The Joker, the only thing he would get would be more mystery. Think about it: if the world's greatest detective can't find a thing about a villain, this must be the scariest and most f***ed up villain ever.

It was created in B89, but TAS has also used the name Jack Napier as The Joker's real name. I don't know about the current comics though. Even though i love Batman, i'm more of a Superman follower. I know that Joker's name and age are officially unknown, but can anyone tell if they ever used the name Napier in the comics?

[mongo44]

Mongo44, first of all: funny sig.

The way i see it, Jack Napier wouldn't be his real name. His origin would remain in mystery, with clues all over the place (like Red Hood being cited, and the name Jack Napier). Everytime Batman investigates about The Joker, the only thing he would get would be more mystery. Think about it: if the world's greatest detective can't find a thing about a villain, this must be the scariest and most f***ed up villain ever.

It was created in B89, but TAS has also used the name Jack Napier as The Joker's real name. I don't know about the current comics though. Even though i love Batman, i'm more of a Superman follower. I know that Joker's name and age are officially unknown, but can anyone tell if they ever used the name Napier in the comics?

Jack Napier and Joe Napier are the only names ever used as far as I know. The first time a name was given was B89.



I agree with the mystery/detective aspect. I really want a good one in a Batman movie. I think they can do a Joker story in the next movie. Follow it up with another villain for the third. Then readdress the Joker in say the 4th or 5th movie. Then reveal something about him that far down.



(thanks about the signature. That is the actual lines from the movie referenced).

[Bad Superman]

It can go both ways. Since the Joker was "introduced" at the end of BB, the script could be done via flashback or Joker origin. I would like an extended flash back origin with a darker approach of the character. Since Joker is Batman's arch-nemesis, his hatred for Bats should be explained too.

[Dark Knight]

full blown origin for Joker would not be the way to go. Batman should not find out why Joker became who he is until near the end, during the climactic battle. It should be done with words....with Joker telling Batman, (with very intense emotion) what happened to him and his family at the hands of Falcone and his thugs. When Joker is telling Batman what happened to him and his family.....the scenes should be shown in flashback form. I can already envision Penn going crazy with intense emotion in a scene like this.....

[mongo44]

full blown origin for Joker would not be the way to go. Batman should not find out why Joker became who he is until near the end, during the climactic battle. It should be done with words....with Joker telling Batman, (with very intense emotion) what happened to him and his family at the hands of Falcone and his thugs. When Joker is telling Batman what happened to him and his family.....the scenes should be shown in flashback form. I can already envision Penn going crazy with intense emotion in a scene like this.....

But what you have described is a totally different version than all the others (and if I remember right introduced in TAS, not the comics). There is no one definitive story I like it that way better. There are about a dozen different versions. It’s multiple choice remember. So under this idea we should have a unique origin.

[souvlaki]

Argh.... the Joker's name is not Jack Napier, people!

[The Kid]

It can go both ways. Since the Joker was "introduced" at the end of BB, the script could be done via flashback or Joker origin. I would like an extended flash back origin with a darker approach of the character. Since Joker is Batman's arch-nemesis, his hatred for Bats should be explained too.

Hey, B-S :up: now that would be terrific.

[The Kid]

Argh.... the Joker's name is not Jack Napier, people!

It's a good name. he should use it.

[Alfie Luke]

How 'bout this guys...

Don't mention Joker's history in BB2, have it be a mystery. Then, in BB3 when he's on trial for what he did, have the people in the court, including his lawyer try to figure out what happened to him.

On one part, you have people that think he's evil, on the other people that think he's a victim, misunderstood or just plain crazy. That way, you have the "multiple choice" scenario, as his past is sucha blur, that no one REALLY knowns what made him the way he is...

Everyone should be trying to get inside his head, with no success...
He would just be sitting there patiently, with a f**king big smile. LOL

[Dark Knight]

How 'bout this guys...

Don't mention Joker's history in BB2, have it be a mystery. Then, in BB3 when he's on trial for what he did, have the people in the court, including his lawyer try to figure out what happened to him.

On one part, you have people that think he's evil, on the other people that think he's a victim, misunderstood or just plain crazy. That way, you have the "multiple choice" scenario, as his past is sucha blur, that no one REALLY knowns what made him the way he is...

Everyone should be trying to get inside his head, with no success...
He would just be sitting there patiently, with a f**king big smile. LOL


keeping it a mystery as long as possible would be good....however, i think they should show his origin through flashback near the end of the film during the climactic battle with Batman. When it is shown through flashback it should be very dark, disturbing and tragic.

[Rynan]

Flashbacks? Phff. This isn't a Joker movie nor The Killing Joke, so I don't see why we need them. I perfer Alfie Luke's idea. I can see The Joker's defense comes up with a story(out of thin air) for their client, to make him look like a poor victim of circumstance, that he can't decerne right from wrong. He needs our acceptance and help, instead of our hate and revoulsion. Then he will be Dent's witness...

And for The Joker's name, how about this: John Doe. Or maybe in the flair of the comic: Joe Kerr.

[Timstuff]

In Batman the Animated Series, they refer to the Joker's real name as being "Jack Napier" on multiple occasions. I could care less if they use it in the film or not, they have already established that he was NOT the man who killed Bruce's parents, so it will not hurt anything if it gets used again.

[Clarkman]

Exactly. :up:
Since it's (correctly) established that the Waynes were killed by Joe Chill, it wouldn't be so harmful to use the name Jack Napier, as TAS has already done.
But, i still think if the name is used, it should be as just another piece of the puzzle. It should never be defined if his name is or isn't Jack Napier.

[IzzyJG99]

I would imagine since Goyer is such a big fan of the comics and a pal of Jeph Leobs and didn't mess up Bruce's origin story you can bet that if they do feature a Joker origin flashback in the next film it will be as correct as possible.

Like someone stated above I'd perfer if they didn't even give him an origin. Have him be The Joker before Batman came along. Something along the lines of he was insane and all that of course, but the gas that was released drove him that one extra inch over the edge and made him bonkers or something. I'm not picky.

[COMPO]

i think joker should be a mystery, but, they should different origins from the comics like in one point they think that he is leslie thompkins' son, but, we find out leslie's son died years. then, batman thinks taht he made Joker from a heist a few months back and at the end Joker tells batman the Killing Joke origin. Batman believes him only for joker to laugh at him and call him gullible. So Joker remains a mystery but, we still get the origins in some way.

[bstringer]

remember, at the end if Batman Begins, the joker had already a double homicide record, and was already leaving joker cards at the scene of his crimes...leaves me to beleive that he doesnt need an origin, because he already is the joker before The Dark Knight even begins

[NinjaTurtleFan]

boo. I want an origin and here's why: We see a man devolve or is it evolve... into the crazy wacko jacko he becomes, similar to what we saw in begins with batman...well sort-of, since he already was angry and obsessed with criminals in the beginning, but then we w3re shown a bunch of flashbacks that told the story of where his motivation came from... so if they go that route I wouldn't mind.

but having batman be blamed for joker's condition is an essential part of the character that I don't want to just poof vanish now... :(

I wholeheartedly agree. I want Joker to start out as a meek, mild-mannered man just trying to get by at his job at the chemical plant but also trying to become a overnight sensation as a standup comedian. He realizes he can't cut it at both, comes home to his pregnant wife and finds out he'll be evicted from his apartment in a week for not paying the rent.

So he turns to organized crime. From "Batman Begins" we learned that he has been known to have done a few arm-robberies. It'll play out here, because the guy is a gambler (hence the Joker card) he likes to make bets, take risks and chances, and ultimately lose in the end. Hence, why he turns to the mob.

As an initiation he dons a red ski-mask (not a hood) and he goes back to the chemical plant.

Jack Napier or whatever name the character will go by before The Joker, suddenly begins freezing up. A few people get shot and killed and now the cops are coming for him and the others.

But before the cops arrive, The Red Hood runs for it while the others deal with Gordon and the cops. Gordon assumes The Red Hood is the gunman and that's why he is running away from him, so after Gordon deals with the goons, he goes after The Red Hood. The Red Hood now seeing his days are numbered, jumps over the railing and into a vat of chemicals.

There inside the chemicals the meek, mild-mannered, shy man we knew from the beginning of the movie and suddenly evolves into the man inside of him. A man who has repressed bad memories in the back of his head but is now bringing them out infront of the world. Relapsing to his former self as a child, The Joker is the part of him who'd be known to pour hot coffee on a dog and scald it, or shove firecrackers down a kid's pants.

This is his former childhood self now brought into the dangerous man that he is.

Hence, no need for a flashback and no need for Batman to step into early. Sure, it goes against Alan Moore, but it'll work because Gordon in "BB" seems to know The Joker better than Batman already.

[Miranda Fox]

I wholeheartedly agree. I want Joker to start out as a meek, mild-mannered man just trying to get by at his job at the chemical plant but also trying to become a overnight sensation as a standup comedian. He realizes he can't cut it at both, comes home to his pregnant wife and finds out he'll be evicted from his apartment in a week for not paying the rent.

So he turns to organized crime. From "Batman Begins" we learned that she has been known to have done a few arm-robberies. It'll play out here, because the guy is a gambler (hence the Joker card) he likes to make bets, take risks and chances, and ultimately lose in the end. Hence, why he turns to the mob.

As an initiation he dons a red ski-mask (not a hood) and he goes back to the chemical plant.

Jack Napier or whatever name the character will go by before The Joker, suddenly begins freezing up. A few people get shot and killed and now the cops are coming for him and the others.

But before the cops arrive, The Red Hood runs for it while the others deal with Gordon and the cops. Gordon assumes The Red Hood is the gunman and that's why he is running away from him, so after Gordon deals with the goons, he goes after The Red Hood. The Red Hood now seeing his days are numbered, jumps over the railing and into a vat of chemicals.

There inside the chemicals the meek, mild-mannered, shy man we knew from the beginning of the movie and suddenly evolves into the man inside of him. A man who has repressed bad memories in the back of his head but is now bringing them out infront of the world. Relapsing to his former self as a child, The Joker is the part of him who'd be known to pour hot coffee on a dog and scald it, or shove firecrackers down a kid's pants.

This is his former childhood self now brought into the dangerous man that he is.

Hence, no need for a flashback and no need for Batman to step into early. Sure, it goes against Alan Moore, but it'll work because Gordon in "BB" seems to know The Joker better than Batman already.
I really like that. :up: Isn't there a non-canon story where, as a child, the Joker murdered animals for fun and kept a macabre gravesite for them? I never read the story myself, but it sounded really interesting.

One origin story someone suggested that I really liked was thus - at the beginning of TDK, we see three guys meet up near the chemical plant. It looks like a meeting between some gangsters but it's actually a setup and two turn and apparently kill the other. They dump the body into the chemical basin to dispose of the evidence but, of course, the man isn't dead.

Gives the Joker an origin without any real specifics.

[Freedom77]

hasn't nolan already said that there will be an origin story. Either way i think it would work well. And I know Nolan will do a great job.

[NinjaTurtleFan]

I really like that. :up: Isn't there a non-canon story where, as a child, the Joker murdered animals for fun and kept a macabre gravesite for them? I never read the story myself, but it sounded really interesting.

One origin story someone suggested that I really liked was thus - at the beginning of TDK, we see three guys meet up near the chemical plant. It looks like a meeting between some gangsters but it's actually a setup and two turn and apparently kill the other. They dump the body into the chemical basin to dispose of the evidence but, of course, the man isn't dead.

Gives the Joker an origin without any real specifics.

Thanks Miranda. :)

Stay foxxxy.

[Crooklyn]

hasn't nolan already said that there will be an origin story. Either way i think it would work well. And I know Nolan will do a great job.
No, Nolan said he'd go back to Joker's original roots in the comics, but never mentioned anything about a backstory. I personally don't want any for Joker. It ruins the mystique of his character. Besides, whatever story they'd come up with, I doubt it'd live up to the expectations.

[DeFett]

I wonder if Nolan will try and tie the origin into the end of BB where it could be The Joker is hiding-out underground and gets a extreme dose of fear gas which could transform him into a nutter. - Sorry if that has been mentioned already.

I like the Red Hood idea which was mentioned above.

[Eddie Dean]

I like the idea of Batman finding various clues that explain Joker's origin, but they all lead to different ends.

[Maniacal]

The Joker's real name should never EVER! be mentioned because it never has in the comics and to the uneducated his name is not Jack Napier so stop bringing that name up. If a Joker origin needs to be shown in TDK then it should be a brief flashback at the beginning much like how in BB young Bruce fell down the well into the cave of bats. But instead have a man with a red hood that covers his face so that we never see it, running away from gunfire and mayhem and falling into a vat of chemicals. So therefore, we get to see how Joker became Joker and also there is still a degree of mystery to him as we do not know what his name was, who he was previously and what he looked like pre-Joker. But like I said only a brief flashback like the start of Begins.

[L0ngsh0t]

Joker should have no origin, he should just be, makes him less human, and more villainous

[Maniacal]

I actually agree with you I was just saying if one needed to be done then that's what I would like to see. But yes the Joker should be the most vicious, sadistic, remorseless b*stard on the planet. A guy Batman cannot find any background info on, a guy whose actions are completely erratic and a guy that starts to drive Bruce/Batman, Gordon and Dent crazy.

[L0ngsh0t]

I actually agree with you I was just saying if one needed to be done then that's what I would like to see. But yes the Joker should be the most vicious, sadistic, remorseless b*stard on the planet. A guy Batman cannot find any background info on, a guy whose actions are completely erratic and a guy that starts to drive Bruce/Batman, Gordon and Dent crazy.

My bad if I made it sound like I was challenging you, I was just making a general statement of what I think the Jokers origin should be.

but good, I am glad you agree with me

[cryptic name]

Argh.... the Joker's name is not Jack Napier, people!

really? what is it then? :cwink:

[strider]

No back story to the Joker please....I want him to be an ex gang member with a fighting/brawling background, a master thief and almost to the brink of insanity.

[Miranda Fox]

Thanks Miranda. :)

Stay foxxxy.

Will do! :p

[COMPO]

remember, at the end if Batman Begins, the joker had already a double homicide record, and was already leaving joker cards at the scene of his crimes...leaves me to beleive that he doesnt need an origin, because he already is the joker before The Dark Knight even begins

But, what if Batman created the Joker between the time of the train wreck and meeting with Gordon. I mean, people have been saying that batman meets gordon one or two weeks later.

[GreenKToo]

no flashback.it takes away the mystery of him.

[Miranda Fox]

But, what if Batman created the Joker between the time of the train wreck and meeting with Gordon. I mean, people have been saying that batman meets gordon one or two weeks later.
It's not impossible.

I do wonder if Nolan and Goyer didn't paint themselves into a corner here - if they say this chemical plant robbery happened between then and the rooftop meeting, it is going to seem like a bit of a retcon.

IMO, it would make more sense to tie his origin in to the events of BB in other ways, if that's the way to go. Maybe he was one of the inmates at Arkham? One thing does seem clear - he didn't appear till after that.

[COMPO]

yeah and we see his origins as Batman tries to capture him. And the Joker reveals to Batman that Leslie is his mother, and that she committed him to a mental institution as a child after he murdered his father, who was abusing her.

And there is a stand off between leslie and Batman. Leslie won't budge in allowing Batman to bring harm to Joker. And Batman won't budge to the fact that he has to bring Joker down.

[the_joker]

I strongly feel there should be a chemical dip, which in turn will need some origin story. Because it will look lame (and confusing for those who haven't seen B89) if the Joker with pale white skin and green hair is running around Gotham with no explanation to why he looks like he does.

[L0ngsh0t]

It's not impossible.

I do wonder if Nolan and Goyer didn't paint themselves into a corner here - if they say this chemical plant robbery happened between then and the rooftop meeting, it is going to seem like a bit of a retcon.

IMO, it would make more sense to tie his origin in to the events of BB in other ways, if that's the way to go. Maybe he was one of the inmates at Arkham? One thing does seem clear - he didn't appear till after that.

If there is a back story I agree with the second part here.

But I am still a 100 percent on going Halloween 1978 on the bit with joker, if you follow me, it wasn't until Halloween 2 that we find out pretty much all of the backstory we know about Micheal Meyers, and from then on he has a purpose, and isn't nearly as frightning, or as creepy, as the emotionless, sentinal that he was in 1. Now I am not saying we make the Joker, an emotionless mute guy, but I do not initially want a motive, or reason the joker does what he does, he just does it, he just is a psychopathic maniac. Now once the relationship between him, and Batman grows, then maybe by the end of the flick his reason is to defeat batman or something.

[Babs Gordon]

I have to agree with that "inmate in arkham" quasi origin too. I'd really prefer not to know much about him though. I'd like to see Batman try to figure him out... where he came from etc. not just his current MO.

[Ronny Shade]

I think Joker should show up with no explaination and lie about how he got that way

[Eddie Dean]

I think Joker should show up with no explaination and lie about how he got that way
I could dig that.

[NinjaTurtleFan]

It's not impossible.

I do wonder if Nolan and Goyer didn't paint themselves into a corner here - if they say this chemical plant robbery happened between then and the rooftop meeting, it is going to seem like a bit of a retcon.

IMO, it would make more sense to tie his origin in to the events of BB in other ways, if that's the way to go. Maybe he was one of the inmates at Arkham? One thing does seem clear - he didn't appear till after that.

Could work but I do agree Nolan and Goyer have sort of painted themselves into a corner. They're either going to have to deliver flashbacks of The Joker's life predating before the accident happen, or they have it where he is a escaped inmate from Arkham on the lam, who is still under the affects of Scarecrow's fear serum. He hides out in an abandoned chemical plant, Batman meets him there, but when The Joker sees him he thinks he's staring at a giant vampire bat like Dracula and jumps into the chemical vat.

This would make sense, but it would totally disregard any origin and Joker's life prior to the accident would only be a mystery. I want the guy to be a guy who you laugh with, but also hate and despise and want to die, but yet you feel sympathetic for.

To me The Joker is like a tortured, disconnected soul. I want to see a meek, mild-mannered man, who has had to put up with so many life struggles that he suddenly just snaps one day.

Like I stated before I want a guy who is struggling standup comedian who works a humdrum job at the chemical plant. He has a pregnant wife who doesn't believe in his dream to make it big, he's going to get evicted from his apartment because he can't pay the rent, he owes a cardshark who's a friend of Sal Maroni's alot of dough, and he needs to make ends meat before he gets his legs broken.

So he joins the mob and then he dons a red mask (not a hood) and then we know the rest.

[raybia]

I really want joker's origin in the movie. Not flashback but in the movie itself. Batman fights this guy but he fell into a vat of chemicals. Then he becomes the joker. That would give more reasons for the joker to hunt and kill batman. All this destroying the city stuff is boring. The joker could hold rachael hostage as a trap to kill batman but he ends up shooting rachael after the plan foiled.


Yeah, lets see the moment he was actually conceived.

[Ronny Shade]

problem: Joker already exists by the end of BB.

[raybia]

problem: Joker already exists by the end of BB.

No, I meant a flashback to Mr. and Mrs. J. Kerr on their wedding night. :woot:

[L0ngsh0t]

remember, at the end if Batman Begins, the joker had already a double homicide record, and was already leaving joker cards at the scene of his crimes...leaves me to beleive that he doesnt need an origin, because he already is the joker before The Dark Knight even begins

This is true

just let him be, I agree, he is already there

[Fatal Hilarity]

This may have been considered or done but how about The Joker telling his story while he is on trial? Maybe as a way to gain the hearts of the jury by showing what terrible things have happened to cause his insanity. This way the origin doesn't have to be in TDK at all or at least not until the very end. His telling of the story could possibly clarify some confusing bits that had accured during the film..... or have the entire movie be a narration by the Joker telling his story (TDK) to the Jury. Scratch that....

[Spider-Kurt!]

To quote myself a while back in the sequel's thread...


"I'd like to see the Joker on trail at the beginning of the third movie and then introduce the Killing Joke orgin but not making it clear if it's the truth or not. Joker scars Dent,escapes and is hunted by Two Face.Batman then has to deal with capturing both villians."

[batman7289]

seein kerr would rock

[Motown Marvel]

problem: Joker already exists by the end of BB.
not necessarily. a killer who uses a joker calling card exists.....it doesnt mean he's the joker yet. i think it'd be nice if the calling card is used by the red hood gang. red hood gang picks up a desperate and failing comedian to help pull a job for quick cash, batman comes....etc....

[StorminNorman]

not necessarily. a killer who uses a joker calling card exists.....it doesnt mean he's the joker yet. i think it'd be nice if the calling card is used by the red hood gang. red hood gang picks up a desperate and failing comedian to help pull a job for quick cash, batman comes....etc....

If the Joker is not THE JOKER at the end of Batman Begins then the Dark Knight is crap. Period. You can not have a killer use the Joker card as a calling card and then BECOME the Joker after a freak accident.

[Ronny Shade]

Yeah. You use a joker as a calling card and then you just happen to be horribly disfigured to look exactly like a clown? nuh uh.

[Motown Marvel]

If the Joker is not THE JOKER at the end of Batman Begins then the Dark Knight is crap. Period. You can not have a killer use the Joker card as a calling card and then BECOME the Joker after a freak accident.
wow. really? so, no matter how good DK ends up being, you'll consider it total crap if the joker doesnt exist already?

[L0ngsh0t]

wow. really? so, no matter how good DK ends up being, you'll consider it total crap if the joker doesnt exist already?

Haha nice, thats what talking in absolutes gets you Norman, yeah, what if its best movie ever, and it is unanimously award the best movie on the planet by 4 billion people in the world, the first award of its kind ever, they name it the NolansKnight award because the movie is so ****ing good, what if it cures cancer? But there is just one problem...the Joker doesn't exist at the end of BB


I do agree its not the best way to go, but if the moive cures cancer, I think I could be swayed into thinking its not complete crap

[Ronny Shade]

He was saying that the plot contrivances that would necessarily come from the Joker not existing at the end of BB would more than likely create gaping holes in the plot structure and therefore drastically weaken the impact and quality of the film.

[Cosmic]

I hope to see the Joker as a mysterious, diabolically evil character. I think they should avoid explaining or revealing too much.

[Ronny Shade]

join us, brother!

[Eastwood]

i think the joker should have a origin no flash backs a real origin and show how he turns into the joker i don't want him to start the movie looking like the joker

[StorminNorman]

i think the joker should have a origin no flash backs a real origin and show how he turns into the joker i don't want him to start the movie looking like the joker

But according to Batman Begins - he is the Joker already.:ninja:

[DeFett]

I wonder how much time has passed from the Train wreck to the meeting on the roof?

For some reason I always get the feeling that a couple of months have passed as Gordon is promoted, and talks about escalation, haven't found Crane yet?

The reason I ask because I wonder if they will try and tie in The Jokers origin with the fear gas plaguing The Narrows.

[WeaponXProject]

Also, Stormin', you and I have talked about TDK staying a Batman movie and I think if Nolan showed Joker's origin from the beginning of this movie to explain it would put Nolan back in place as Burton did with the first Batman movie being a Joker movie. I personally wouldn't mind it bc I like the explanations of villains becomming villains but it could overshadow Batty.

[Ibn]

I really want joker's origin in the movie. Not flashback but in the movie itself. Batman fights this guy but he fell into a vat of chemicals. Then he becomes the joker. That would give more reasons for the joker to hunt and kill batman. All this destroying the city stuff is boring. The joker could hold rachael hostage as a trap to kill batman but he ends up shooting rachael after the plan foiled.

Thank God I'm not alone.:word:

[Ibn]

I wonder how much time has passed from the Train wreck to the meeting on the roof?

For some reason I always get the feeling that a couple of months have passed as Gordon is promoted, and talks about escalation, haven't found Crane yet?

The reason I ask because I wonder if they will try and tie in The Jokers origin with the fear gas plaguing The Narrows.

YOOOOOO!!! Did you do that avatar? THAT **** IS CRAZY!

[Miranda Fox]

I wonder how much time has passed from the Train wreck to the meeting on the roof?

For some reason I always get the feeling that a couple of months have passed as Gordon is promoted, and talks about escalation, haven't found Crane yet?

The reason I ask because I wonder if they will try and tie in The Jokers origin with the fear gas plaguing The Narrows.
It would be as good as any. Who knows what happened to those people - it's hardly a stretch that some chemical plant worker fell in to the basin while under the influence of it. Also, it's possible Batman may never find out who he is and the whole Narrows being lost situation makes that feasible - I doubt anyone knows how many people are missing in there, never mind their names.

IMO, the fact the Joker didn't show up till after this is a big clue.

[Ronny Shade]

I wonder how much time has passed from the Train wreck to the meeting on the roof?

For some reason I always get the feeling that a couple of months have passed as Gordon is promoted, and talks about escalation, haven't found Crane yet?

The reason I ask because I wonder if they will try and tie in The Jokers origin with the fear gas plaguing The Narrows.
Batman and Gordon obviously hadn't seen each other since the train part. The narrows situation was still obviously unresolved. It couldn't have been too long.

[Ronny Shade]

IMO, the fact the Joker didn't show up till after this is a big clue.
Year One ends almost exactly the same way. Does that mean Joker is an estranged Falcone henchman?

[Miranda Fox]

Year One ends almost exactly the same way. Does that mean Joker is an estranged Falcone henchman?

Fine, Mr. Nitpicky. But I stand by what I said.:p

[Ronny Shade]

It's possible. I just worry about Fear gas turning into the "meteor-rock" of this franchise. Though I doubt it will.

[Miranda Fox]

It's possible. I just worry about Fear gas turning into the "meteor-rock" of this franchise. Though I doubt it will.

Oh god no...

I take it back. Anything but that.

I still like Smallville though...

[Ronny Shade]

Yeah, but the thing is, Smallville kinda sucks. I love it, but it kinda sucks.

[Miranda Fox]

Yeah, but the thing is, Smallville kinda sucks. I love it, but it kinda sucks.
Lol, yeah, no arguments here. I think if they didn't have such an awesome Lex in Michael Rosenbaum, I wouldn't bother.

Anyway, if the rooftop scene was a few months after, then my theory dies. Maybe that's just what we were supposed to think, hence the ambiguity of 'how long after.'

[Ronny Shade]

not necessarily. I mean imagine if you were disfigured and turned into an evil clown. Would you really do an armed robbery/double homicide right away? It might take you a few months to work through your issues and realize you're completely insane.

[Miranda Fox]

not necessarily. I mean imagine if you were disfigured and turned into an evil clown. Would you really do an armed robbery/double homicide right away? It might take you a few months to work through your issues and realize you're completely insane.
Very true.

Here's an idea - what if his disfigurement happened before, say, Bruce came back? If the Joker really is out for revenge, could've just being biding his time.

Which raises another question - was the armed robbery random or could there have been a reason or even just a cover to kill? With the Joker, the former is most likely, but I can't help but wonder.

[Ronny Shade]

He was probably robbing the place so he could make joker toxin and when nobody laughed at his joke, he shot them.

[Miranda Fox]

He was probably robbing the place so he could make joker toxin and when nobody laughed at his joke, he shot them.

Now, that? Would be wicked!:D

[Ronny Shade]

I'm open to co-writing if the Nolans ever call me.

[Miranda Fox]

I'm open to co-writing if the Nolans ever call me.

If they don't, it's a crime! ;)

[COMPO]

Very true.

Here's an idea - what if his disfigurement happened before, say, Bruce came back? If the Joker really is out for revenge, could've just being biding his time.

Which raises another question - was the armed robbery random or could there have been a reason or even just a cover to kill? With the Joker, the former is most likely, but I can't help but wonder.

Maybe, so he can have a cut on the arms deal?

[strider]

Maybe, so he can have a cut on the arms deal?

I really dont think Joker will be "disfigured" or look like a stupid crazy clown....theatrics said Gordon, meaning to me that he's using a type of custom/disguise but underneath he's quite cunning and normal looking. I think he's going to be involved/against some how with the mob which always leads to Batman. I dont even think he cares all that much about bats at the end of BB. He will when Bats starts to get more involved in catching him.

I think Ledger is reading the Killing Joker just to get some decent ideas on the Joker. I dont think they will use TKJ for plot ideas....If the Joker is to be more like the his first two comic appearances then I hope he's a good fighter/brawler/theif and can hold his own vs Bats.

[cryptic name]

I really dont think Joker will be "disfigured" or look like a stupid crazy clown....theatrics said Gordon, meaning to me that he's using a type of custom/disguise but underneath he's quite cunning and normal looking. I think he's going to be involved/against some how with the mob which always leads to Batman. I dont even think he cares all that much about bats at the end of BB. He will when Bats starts to get more involved in catching him.

I think Ledger is reading the Killing Joker just to get some decent ideas on the Joker. I dont think they will use TKJ for plot ideas....If the Joker is to be more like the his first two comic appearances then I hope he's a good fighter/brawler/theif and can hold his own vs Bats.

christ, i hope not. nolan can't be pretentious enough to think he can make such a horrible change

[NinjaTurtleFan]

I really dont think Joker will be "disfigured" or look like a stupid crazy clown....theatrics said Gordon, meaning to me that he's using a type of custom/disguise but underneath he's quite cunning and normal looking. I think he's going to be involved/against some how with the mob which always leads to Batman. I dont even think he cares all that much about bats at the end of BB. He will when Bats starts to get more involved in catching him.

I think Ledger is reading the Killing Joker just to get some decent ideas on the Joker. I dont think they will use TKJ for plot ideas....If the Joker is to be more like the his first two comic appearances then I hope he's a good fighter/brawler/theif and can hold his own vs Bats.

If Joker didn't have the disfigured look than what would he be? Some sexually confused killer who likes to wear white makeup and lipstick and dye his hair grass green? Because I sure as hell do not want to see that.

It'd better be the chemical plant skin alteration or else Nolan has lost a fan.

[Miranda Fox]

I imagine the reason Gordon referred to his theatrics is because when somebody sees a guy who looks like a clown, they will naturally assume it's makeup not 'it's chemical burns.' I don't see why that remark has been interpretated as 'he's going to wear makeup!!!!11one'

It also could be something to do with the over the top way the victims were assaulted but, obviously, we won't know till 2008.

[DeFett]

It's possible. I just worry about Fear gas turning into the "meteor-rock" of this franchise. Though I doubt it will.

Yes, it does sound like that. It will be interesting thought if they pick up with The Narrows storyline maybe tie it into the capturing of Crane.

[Eastwood]

my origin would be having gordon telling batman about the joker

[L0ngsh0t]

My origin would have an alien spaceship land in the middle of gotham, and they open a slide door, standing in the middle of the door way is the Joker, then a giant boot is lowered, cranked back, and kicks him in the ass, and he falls out of the space craft.

[SilentType]

I think that they should go without an origin. It would be a good change of pace for a superhero movie. Plus, it allows you to ignore the entire "guy with makeup VS contrived chemical alteration" dilemma.

[Ronny Shade]

My origin would have an alien spaceship land in the middle of gotham, and they open a slide door, standing in the middle of the door way is the Joker, then a giant boot is lowered, cranked back, and kicks him in the ass, and he falls out of the space craft.
lol!

[NinjaTurtleFan]

Very true.

Here's an idea - what if his disfigurement happened before, say, Bruce came back? If the Joker really is out for revenge, could've just being biding his time.

Which raises another question - was the armed robbery random or could there have been a reason or even just a cover to kill? With the Joker, the former is most likely, but I can't help but wonder.

Makes sense about the origin happening before Bruce comes back and Batman comes to save Gotham.

However, I feel like he hasn't turned yet, even if The Joker card is there. Some serial killers have been known to leave their mark at the crime scene whether it be an item like a playing card or a rose, a piece of hair, or a note.

If Nolan was going to use "The Killing Joke" he'd have to either skip the whole origin and find different pages and panels to use, or he'd have to switch it where the origin happened long before Batman and Bruce, where Gordon was taking the place of Batman as the city's defender, but then blew it when he let the criminal jump into a vat of chemicals instead of arresting him.

[COMPO]

hey, what if we see joker changed into the Joker. But, beforet hat we see him wearing make up so taht he's like a clown. ANd when he falls on the vat of chemicals tehy all bleach to his skin and he goes insane.

[El Payaso]

^ Hehehe. Oh the irony.

[The Question]

Makes sense about the origin happening before Bruce comes back and Batman comes to save Gotham.

However, I feel like he hasn't turned yet, even if The Joker card is there. Some serial killers have been known to leave their mark at the crime scene whether it be an item like a playing card or a rose, a piece of hair, or a note.

If Nolan was going to use "The Killing Joke" he'd have to either skip the whole origin and find different pages and panels to use, or he'd have to switch it where the origin happened long before Batman and Bruce, where Gordon was taking the place of Batman as the city's defender, but then blew it when he let the criminal jump into a vat of chemicals instead of arresting him.

Or maybe he could just leave Batman out of it all together. Batman being there isn't completely necessairy for The Joker's origin.

[COMPO]

its necessary for their relationship.

[Crooklyn]

its necessary for their relationship.
....no, it's not.

[GDM]

I don't think will have an Joker origin. Since the Joker was already introduced in BB and had already committed a couple of crimes I think Batman will try to figure out his origin himself and for the personal connection I think Joker will become angry at bats for chasing him and trying to catch him. Batman probably gets closer to catching Joker, screws up some of Joker's plans and that makes him angry. I think....

[COMPO]

....no, it's not.

Well, it give good character development for Bruce. He'll feel guilty when he finds out he created Joker.

Oh, and nice Addy. Who is it?

[The Question]

Well, it give good character development for Bruce. He'll feel guilty when he finds out he created Joker.

Oh, and nice Addy. Who is it?

But he really didn't create The Joker. It isn't hi fault that The Joker already had the necessairy psychological problems for the trauma of his accident to make him crazy. Hell, it's not entirely his fault that he had his accident. Had The Joker not gotten his chemical bath, he probably would have snapped later on anyway.

[cryptic name]

Whether the accident really was Batman's fault or not is irrelevant, the point is that Joker blames Batman, and the idea that maybe his presence has caused men like the Joker to become what they are causes Bats a great deal of inner turmoil. So, while maybe not essential, not having Batman involved in the creation of the Joker takes away a great amount of dramatic weapons for Nolan to use.

[K.B.]

I think Nolan is pretentious enough to make that massive change by putting him in a costume/mask. Dosent anyone remeber when BB came out and everyone was asking about the Joker and him and Goyer said he won't look like you'd expect and that he will look more like the playing card?

[Miranda Fox]

I think Nolan is pretentious enough to make that massive change by putting him in a costume/mask. Dosent anyone remeber when BB came out and everyone was asking about the Joker and him and Goyer said he won't look like you'd expect and that he will look more like the playing card?

No. Mainly because neither of them never, ever said that.

Oh, dear god, this really is Prisoner of Azkaban all over again...and there I was thinking how much I missed the days of arguing with idiots who had to make 'facts' to back up their hatred of the director.

Yay.

[The Question]

Whether the accident really was Batman's fault or not is irrelevant, the point is that Joker blames Batman, and the idea that maybe his presence has caused men like the Joker to become what they are causes Bats a great deal of inner turmoil. So, while maybe not essential, not having Batman involved in the creation of the Joker takes away a great amount of dramatic weapons for Nolan to use.

But The Joker doesn't blame Batman for anything. If anything, he'd see the accident as a moment that opened his eyes. After the accident, as he sees it, he transcended. Transcended the restraints of sanity and morality. Now he does what he wants, when he wants, and gives no regard to anything but his own whims. Really, if he did hold Batman responsible, he'd thank him.

[COMPO]

i've got an idea for the joker. What if at the beginning of the movie we saw him being turned into the joker. And he disappears and goes into the shadows and everyone thinks its a copycat killer killing people until....

ba.ba.baaaaam It reallly is the jOker.

[LadyMoira]

Personally, I kind of like it better having the Joker's origin go unexplained; as in here's this terrifying green-haired sociopath-and nobody knows where he came from or what shaped him into being the living incarnate of evil and madness clad in purple we all know and love.

[Abe Rush]

I too, think they should leave his origin out of The Dark Knight and maybe put something together for the 3rd, although it should be short and not necessarily true. He should be as much of a mystery to "the average viewer" as Batman is a mystery to the citizens of Gotham city.

[Taiwarriorz21]

I think that it would be good to kind of show Joker's background and history.