View Single Post
Old 04-07-2013, 03:14 PM   #629
Banned User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 507
Default Re: am I the only one who DIDN'T think Nicholson nailed joker??

Originally Posted by The Joker View Post
That is exactly what I'm talking about. Joker's been wanting to keep Batman around for fun since the 70's. See the infamous 'The Laughing Fish' story for example.

Or I can show you come scans if you want. I always have the proof to back these things up.
Ok, man, I believe you, but that wasn't my point anyway. It's an interesting new twist, and at least some of it was incorporated into Batman '89.

What you mean like the Waynes and their son are shot down in an alley by a gun man, only this guy turns out to be the Joker years later? You mean different circumstances like that?
Well it's not that they get abducted by aliens or something..

Don't try and split hairs. His origin in the comics was established. Dini found his character and origin really lacking in depth and dimension so he rewrote it. Fans loved it. DC loved it. They put it in the comics.
No, MR ZERO'S origin was established. Yeah, same character, but the same thing was done with Mad Hatter, who was retconned into an imposter for the new interpretation.

It's not harder at all. Why would it be? The length of time it was around has no bearing. A retcon is a retcon. You're changing something in established continuity.
It does make a difference if it's just a joke villain who only had one or two appearances in the comics in a short time span VERSUS a solid piece of the mythos around since '39 and had lasted way longer, up until recently. A BIG DIFFERENCE.

That is a change. Joker having a love interest he met in Arkham. Harley appeared out of the blue as Joker's girl in the middle of the big 'No Man's Land' storyline. In the year after it ended, they wrote a back story for her on how she first met him.
It's not affecting the established continuity, though. It doesn't change the origin of Joker, for example.

OutRiddled is offline   Reply With Quote