• Secure your account

    A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.

The Joker Thread - Part 1

You know, it’s funny, for as much as Pattinson’s age has been brought up relative to other Batman performances, I haven’t really seen any of that with the Joker, and it just occurred to me that Barry probably isn’t far off in age to what Heath was in TDK. He’s about to turn 30, Heath died just before he was going to turn 29.

About the same age, but something about Barry and his take just seems so much younger.

It's the facial features combined with the voice
 


This man was auditioning with vibes, and vibes alone.


I'll be honest, I wouldn't really call this an audition as this shows pretty much nothing but a gestural imitation of Alex DeLarge... I mean, this video may have shown his interest in the franchise to some producers, but the idea that it would have offer him the role of the Joker seems a bit like an "embellished" shortcut to the whole story... But hey, what do I know?

Keoghan’s Joker is a man made from his own experiences, both “a bit charming and a bit hurt”. Beneath heavy prosthetics that make him look like a maniac run through a meat grinder, Keoghan insisted his blue eyes stayed the same. “I wanted some sort of human in there behind the makeup,” he says. “I want people to relate to him… [to know] this is a façade he puts on.” The character is, to Keoghan, “a broken-down boy”.

Obviously, this is just a statement by Keoghan and we don't really know what Reeves will truly do with the character or if he ever uses him again.
But while I'm all for reinterpretation, and despite how well it worked for Todd Phillips and Joaquin Phoenix, I don't think the Joker should be presented as some sort of tragic figure once again. Or more specifically, so soon. The misunderstood, deranged outsider seeking revenge on the world is an interesting deviation with now an entire license currently built on it, so I think it would be a bit uninspired and repetitive to touch on it again...

Anyway, I enjoyed what I've seen so far of Keoghan's interpretation in his one scene, that's all that matters in the end.
 
Last edited:
I'll be honest, I wouldn't really call this an audition as this shows pretty muh nothing but a gestural imitation of Alex DeLarge... I mean, this video may have shown his interest in the franchise to some producers, but the idea that it would have offer him the role of the Joker seems a bit like an "embellished" shortcut to the whole story... But hey, what do I know?



Obviously, this is just a statement by Keoghan and we don't really know what Reeves will truly do with the character or if he ever uses him again.
But while I'm all for reinterpretation, and despite how well it worked for Todd Phillips and Joaquin Phoenix, I don't think the Joker should be presented as some sort of tragic figure once again. Or more specifically, so soon. The misunderstood, deranged outsider seeking revenge on the world is an interesting deviation with now an entire license currently built on it, so I think it would be a bit uninspired and repetitive to touch on it again...

Anyway, I enjoyed what I've seen so far of Keoghan's interpretation in his one scene, that's all that matters in the end.

I'm sure Sacred Deer is what got him cast.

As for the comments regarding this actual Joker, I think it's more that it's his flimsy excuse more than anything. He probably has a major victim complex.

It's also worth keeping in mind that even though Riddler had a tragic backstory too, the film very much still paints him as a terrible person. So I doubt they'd remove all agency from The Joker of all characters.
 
I'd speculate that the only thing the "audition tape" did was show Reeves that Keoghan wanted to be a part of the franchise. So you couple that with Keoghan's resume of playing total creeps (quite convincingly).

I sincerely doubt Reeves saw this and said, "Yep he's The Joker. Cast him."
 
But while I'm all for reinterpretation, and despite how well it worked for Todd Phillips and Joaquin Phoenix, I don't think the Joker should be presented as some sort of tragic figure once again. Or more specifically, so soon. The misunderstood, deranged outsider seeking revenge on the world is an interesting deviation with now an entire license currently built on it, so I think it would be a bit uninspired and repetitive to touch on it again...

Anyway, I enjoyed what I've seen so far of Keoghan's interpretation in his one scene, that's all that matters in the end.
Reeves had been writing the script for this while Phillips' thing was nearing the end of production. Probably one of those weird coincidences.
 
I'm sure Sacred Deer is what got him cast.

As for the comments regarding this actual Joker, I think it's more that it's his flimsy excuse more than anything. He probably has a major victim complex.

It's also worth keeping in mind that even though Riddler had a tragic backstory too, the film very much still paints him as a terrible person. So I doubt they'd remove all agency from The Joker of all characters.

Oh absolutely.
Maybe I misspoke, I didn't mean to imply that the Joker would be completely transformed into a "good guy in the end" type of character. Even in Phillips' film, although many view his take as a sort of social symbol, it is clear to me that his Joker is as much a victim as he is self-indulgent in his spiral of violence.
My point was rather that, in my opinion, the Joker doesn't need this kind of nuance or subtlety, especially in the context of an another cinematic take totally dedicated to this.

Which leads to...

Reeves had been writing the script for this while Phillips' thing was nearing the end of production. Probably one of those weird coincidences.

It's true.
But to be honest, I don't think Reeves has really developed his Joker this deep already, as he's just a (seemingly disposable) plot element in this first film. And overall, I honestly don't think he has neither laid as much groundwork as others think in terms of his whole bat-universe. He certainly has ideas, but there are probably still some moving parts...

Anyway, there's nothing really to debate here as it's pure speculation ahah.
Whether Reeves decides to go in a similar direction or not for his Clown of Crime, in the end what matters is that it all fits into one vision. It's becoming so rare to find a bit of personality and sincerity in all these cinematic adaptations that what Reeves does here is a true breath of fresh air.
I just hope that he'll keep the energy necessary for his ambition. Especially in the context of an increasingly unstable studio which, despite what is said, always retains a certain risk of interference and which may have to be fought regarding certain creative choices.
 
Last edited:
What if all this tragic stuff is another one of his manipulation tactics?
 
What if all this tragic stuff is another one of his manipulation tactics?

Could be !
After all, this is in character as we saw him playing this card (I know...) to get Harley at Arkham. ^^

If I let my mind wander about a bat-villain with a freakish physique, playing on pathos to fool Gotham, then the Penguin from Batman Returns pops up right away! Hey, there's worst reference ! :funny:

Off topic but damn, I love both Burton's Batman movies so much... I don't know how many times I saw them growing up. It's practically ingrained in my DNA. Like literally, if you look at me under a microscope, I'm pretty sure you could find some bat shaped cells here and there. All the drama surrounding Keaton's return is such a shame...
 
Last edited:
Oscar buzz for our boy.

giphy.gif
 
With “The Batman,” you became the latest in a long line of actors to play the Joker. How do you know you can bring something new to the role?

It was intimidating. But if you stay true to yourself, that in itself is new. I know that sounds pretty lame, but I’m a big believer that if I’m myself, whatever I do is going to be completely fresh and unique. You build the character up before production, get familiar with their world, build a mood board, listen to the music they do, kind of dress like them, answer all the copybook questions you’ve written down — and then go on set and let the instincts takeover.

Do you feel you have enough there to do an entire film as that role? If they do “The Batman 2” with Joker as the villain?

That would be a dream, I tell you. I already have a back story that I’ve created in case it does happen — a totally fresh way of playing him.

Barry Keoghan Doesn’t Mean to Be a Scene-Stealer
 
I really hope he gets that chance, just not in The Batman 2.
At least not as the primary/sole antagonist.

But if the movie is set inside Arkham Asylum and the Joker is part of an ensemble of villains? Go for it.
 
I think Keoghan’s Joker will end up being a recurring presence throughout Reeves and Pattinson’s run, climaxing with a Joker vs. Batman story, rather than hitting that mark in the first or second movie.

But I have no doubt he’ll be in the next film in some form.
 
Can't imagine he won't be in the sequel in a reasonably large role. I doubt he'll be the big bad but I even feel like people are severely underestimating the possibility he will be.
 
That deleted scene teased it, so imo in the sequel he should be like Hannibal Lecter in Silence Of The Lambs, helping Batman profile another villain (like the Calendar Man in Long Halloween), and then get out at the end, teasing that he will be the big bad for the third one. That seemed to be the role they wanted for him in The Batman anyway.
 

That they were originally going to use contacts is very interesting. I wonder what they looked like, or what color they were considering Barry said he wanted to "keep them blue".
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,644
Messages
21,780,087
Members
45,618
Latest member
stryderzer0
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"