I'm Reading Your Stuff: General News and Discussion Thread

[J.Drangal]

I'm hearing more and more from people who are a little fed up with the Joker...
Sure, TDK is almost 20 years old (damn...) but the memory of Ledger is still vivid, Leto left a bad taste and we also had the two Phillips films. So, I get ihow it can be enough to some, especially when we see all the very promising villains that have yet to be adapted. I have a friend like that who, at the end of Caped Crusader, threw his arms in the air : “sigh...the Joker again...”.

Now, of course, the character has a strong ability to be re-invented, and when it's done well, it's a hit. But I also think it would be smarter to leave the Joker as a side character : it's been mentioned a few times, but a Hannibal-like role in Silence of the Lambs wouldn't be bad.
And if he too escapes from his cell during the film, I won't need the eventual sequel to be about his hunt: the way I see it, the Joker is ALWAYS somewhere in Gotham up to something. It would be nice to see him treated in that way, as a menacing eternal presence rather than the main villain to be stopped.

On a more personal note, I have to admit that I'm not particularly hyped by what we've seen of Keoghan.
I kind of disliked his scene with the Riddler, which felt forced and almost like a fan-film to me, but on the other hand, I found the deleted scene with Batman to be very good. I actually think it should have stayed in the film as it foreshadows the revelation of the Riddler's admiration and identification with Batman, and is a clever mirror of the previous scene where Batman seems to imply that a corrupt cop like Commissioner Savage deserved his fate.
Anyway, my point is that I find this Joker a little too “try hard”. And the hinted concept of a misunderstood guy with a disfiguring disease is, to me, not so much a reinvention as an off-topic...
But I also have to recognize that it's so little and we're so early, tons of things could be added and/or detailed. Thus, I can't be definitive in my judgment.

 

[TheSmoothKnight]

Maybe I am easily amused but seeing people on multiple social media platforms compare Matt Reeves to BigFoot is hilarious to me lol

 

[BobJM]

Given how long it’ll take for us to get Part II, I don’t know that we should be holding anything off for the third film, but my thought was to progressively build Joker up through the trilogy.

Just a little trickle in the first film (between the ending and the deleted scene), a little bit larger/maybe Oz-level presence in Part II and then he really explodes in Part III, in (IMO) something that’s quite a bit like Morrison’s Arkham Asylum.

That's the hope—especially if Hugo Strange or Jeremiah Arkham ends up being the villain in Part II. I'd love to see a scene set in Arkham Asylum featuring the Joker, the Riddler, and Hangman—planting the seeds for a full-scale riot or even breakout in Part III.

 

[Boom]

Given how long it’ll take for us to get Part II, I don’t know that we should be holding anything off for the third film, but my thought was to progressively build Joker up through the trilogy.

Just a little trickle in the first film (between the ending and the deleted scene), a little bit larger/maybe Oz-level presence in Part II and then he really explodes in Part III, in (IMO) something that’s quite a bit like Morrison’s Arkham Asylum.

Yeah, my personal theory is there’s a big Arkham sub plot in II that sets up Joker as the overall big bad of the series in 3. I really do want this to be pretty stand alone or conclusive though.

Yeah. I am hoping that Part II is a big enough success that Gunn and Safran would be stupid not to do a third one, but just to be on the safe side I hope Part II ends with some sense of conclusion. Last thing I want is an obvious hook or cliffhanger for a sequel that never comes - especially if it heavily involves Arkham. You guys have no idea how badly I want a Batman movie that takes place primarily within Arkham. Batman meets Shutter Island. Movie practically writes itself.

Unless he and Gunn have some unspoken agreement behind-the-scenes to let him see this thing through, I do wonder how much revision Reeves had to make to his original concepts for Part II in light of all of this uncertainty now.

 

[BatLobster]

Idk Barry seems to have been hinting pretty heavily and gets all giddy whenever he's asked about The Batman II. I fully expect Joker to at least be stewing in the background in this one and getting more than one scene. Possibly a role with as much screentime Penguin in the first one on the high-end of where it could sit.

 

[Sawyer]

Yeah. I am hoping that Part II is a big enough success that Gunn and Safran would be stupid not to do a third one, but just to be on the safe side I hope Part II ends with some sense of conclusion. Last thing I want is an obvious hook or cliffhanger for a sequel that never comes - especially if it heavily involves Arkham. You guys have no idea how badly I want a Batman movie that takes place primarily within Arkham. Batman meets Shutter Island. Movie practically writes itself.

Unless he and Gunn have some unspoken agreement behind-the-scenes to let him see this thing through, I do wonder how much revision Reeves had to make to his original concepts for Part II in light of all of this uncertainty now.

Honestly, on my part, it’s less an uncertainty that Part III would happen and more thinking how long it will take to get here if it does. If it takes the same amount of time that Part II is, we’re not seeing that thing til 2032. This insane ass administration will probably have already gotten us killed by that point, they certainly tried their hardest in 2020.

 

[Boom]

Honestly, on my part, it’s less an uncertainty that Part III would happen and more thinking how long it will take to get here if it does. If it takes the same amount of time that Part II is, we’re not seeing that thing til 2032. This insane ass administration will probably have already gotten us killed by that point, they certainly tried their hardest in 2020.

True, though it's worth considering that the writing process for Part II was disrupted by both a writer's strike and whatever personal issue Reeves was going through. Assuming neither of these repeat themselves, the writing process for Part III might not be so lengthy.

Four years between sequels isn't a deal-breaker, but gosh the setbacks on this one had to have been taxing for everybody - Reeves not least of all. I wonder if his heart's even in it for another 5-6 years.

And of course this is all contingent on the earth not being blown to bits beforehand.

 

[BobJM]

To not get a Catwoman project out of this universe would be criminal, regardless whether there's a Pt. III or not.

I'm avoiding Superman reviews like the plague but from what little quotes/sound-bites I've seen online, it seems pretty apparent that dropping Pattinson into this universe would be bonkers. Unfortunate, yes, but I'm a maximalist--more is more, so bring on a DCU Batman.

Which then leads me to believe that Robin (any iteration) should be left for the DCU.

 

[J.Drangal]

True, though it's worth considering that the writing process for Part II was disrupted by both a writer's strike and whatever personal issue Reeves was going through. Assuming neither of these repeat themselves, the writing process for Part III might not be so lengthy.

Four years between sequels isn't a deal-breaker, but gosh the setbacks on this one had to have been taxing for everybody - Reeves not least of all. I wonder if his heart's even in it for another 5-6 years.

And of course this is all contingent on the earth not being blown to bits beforehand.

Honestly, I'd be pretty surprised if Reeves wanted to devote even more years to Batman after his next film.

I've no doubt he's passionate about what he's doing with the character but, obvioulsy, I don't think he himself had planned such a long process (for whatever reason). And without even saying the guy's old or anything like that, it would be completely understandable to me, from a career standpoint, if he didn't want to give the character more than a decade of creative exclusivity... But maybe he will.

We'll see ! But let's focus on the second chapter first....

 

[dhandler01]

I'm hearing more and more from people who are a little fed up with the Joker...
Sure, TDK is almost 20 years old (damn...) but the memory of Ledger is still vivid, Leto left a bad taste and we also had the two Phillips films. So, I get ihow it can be enough to some, especially when we see all the very promising villains that have yet to be adapted. I have a friend like that who, at the end of Caped Crusader, threw his arms in the air : “sigh...the Joker again...”.

Now, of course, the character has a strong ability to be re-invented, and when it's done well, it's a hit. But I also think it would be smarter to leave the Joker as a side character : it's been mentioned a few times, but a Hannibal-like role in Silence of the Lambs wouldn't be bad.
And if he too escapes from his cell during the film, I won't need the eventual sequel to be about his hunt: the way I see it, the Joker is ALWAYS somewhere in Gotham up to something. It would be nice to see him treated in that way, as a menacing eternal presence rather than the main villain to be stopped.

On a more personal note, I have to admit that I'm not particularly hyped by what we've seen of Keoghan.
I kind of disliked his scene with the Riddler, which felt forced and almost like a fan-film to me, but on the other hand, I found the deleted scene with Batman to be very good. I actually think it should have stayed in the film as it foreshadows the revelation of the Riddler's admiration and identification with Batman, and is a clever mirror of the previous scene where Batman seems to imply that a corrupt cop like Commissioner Savage deserved his fate.
Anyway, my point is that I find this Joker a little too “try hard”. And the hinted concept of a misunderstood guy with a disfiguring disease is, to me, not so much a reinvention as an off-topic...
But I also have to recognize that it's so little and we're so early, tons of things could be added and/or detailed. Thus, I can't be definitive in my judgment.

That scene became redundant, and I dont think it would have gone over well if Batman needed the help of The Joker to solve the mystery...not yet. We need to see "The World's Greatest Detective" be as such. Then, when something comes around that even he can't figure out...The Joker is there. I still believe that is what would have happened if Ledger hadn't died...

 

[dhandler01]

To not get a Catwoman project out of this universe would be criminal, regardless whether there's a Pt. III or not.

I'm avoiding Superman reviews like the plague but from what little quotes/sound-bites I've seen online, it seems pretty apparent that dropping Pattinson into this universe would be bonkers. Unfortunate, yes, but I'm a maximalist--more is more, so bring on a DCU Batman.

Which then leads me to believe that Robin (any iteration) should be left for the DCU.

It would not work. He would need to lighten up a lot as he ages. Not Adam West levels but...well...no spoilers but if you know who is in Superman from trailers you get the type of Batman you need.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

That scene became redundant, and I dont think it would have gone over well if Batman needed the help of The Joker to solve the mystery...not yet. We need to see "The World's Greatest Detective" be as such. Then, when something comes around that even he can't figure out...The Joker is there. I still believe that is what would have happened if Ledger hadn't died...

Joker also straight up explains Riddler’s motives and the movies themes in detail waaaaay too early. It’s a really good scene but it was absolutely the right call to cut it.

 

[Boom]

Yeah. Unfortunately, left on its own I think the scene with him and Nashton in Arkham should've been cut too. I appreciate Reeves' thought process behind it but it definitely read as sequel baiting. It's the one scene in the movie that feels off to me.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Yeah. Unfortunately, left on its own I think the scene with him and Nashton in Arkham should've been cut too. I appreciate Reeves' thought process behind it but it definitely read as sequel baiting.

It absolutely is. Tbh, it's nice that the movie doesn't have a post-credits scene in a way but that is absolutely a post-credits scene.

I don't think its totally irrelevant though. Nashton's desperate parasocial lust to have a buddy transferring to Joker is a good character beat. I'm in a minority of liking it more than the big full scene.

 

[Boom]

It absolutely is. Tbh, it's nice that the movie doesn't have a post-credits scene in a way but that is absolutely a post-credits scene.

I don't think its totally irrelevant though. Nashton's desperate parasocial lust to have a buddy transferring to Joker is a good character beat. I'm in a minority of liking it more than the big full scene.

You know what? You're right. Would've worked great as an end-credits scene.

Fair point on your second note.

 

[dhandler01]

Joker also straight up explains Riddler’s motives and the movies themes in detail waaaaay too early. It’s a really good scene but it was absolutely the right call to cut it.

Its an awesome scene...and yeah Joker is the total exposition dump! One day a scene like that will fit and people will lose their minds

 

[WayneMB]

well considering that riddler/joker scene bookends Nashton's arc, it being a post-credit scene makes no sense. and i don't see how that's a sequel bait

 

[SwordOfMorning]

well considering that riddler/joker scene bookends Nashton's arc, it being a post-credit scene makes no sense. and i don't see how that's a sequel bait

It’s both. It can have both a narrative purpose and also exist to tease a character for the next movie. Not mutually exclusive.

 

[J.Drangal]

That scene became redundant, and I dont think it would have gone over well if Batman needed the help of The Joker to solve the mystery...not yet. We need to see "The World's Greatest Detective" be as such. Then, when something comes around that even he can't figure out...The Joker is there. I still believe that is what would have happened if Ledger hadn't died...

Joker also straight up explains Riddler’s motives and the movies themes in detail waaaaay too early. It’s a really good scene but it was absolutely the right call to cut it.

Those are fair points!

And thinking about it fully now, what you say @dhandler01 in particular reminds me of a “problem” I actually had initially with this scene and had forgotten.
We're dealing with a Batman who, despite his relationship with Gordon, isn't accepted by the authorities yet, at crime scenes, etc. So it would also have been kind of odd to see him having to flee before the police arrive at the morgue, when he inspects Savage's corpse there, to have him moving freely inside Arkham to meet the Joker in the very next scene...

So yeah, it's a well-crafted scene, but there were indeed several things against its inclusion in the final cut.

 

[AndyTrevino]

I’m the minority with this opinion, but if we get Freeze, I’d prefer the New 52 twist. It’s the same tragic love story with Nora but then it’s revealed that Victor never knew her and is just obsessed with the idea of her.

Otherwise, are people just hoping for a Heart of Ice adaptation if Freeze is the villain?

Pretty much. Freeze is one of the few iconic Batman villains who isn't a psycho or some creep and I'd hate to change that.

 

[AndyTrevino]

I did a deep dive into cryonics last year, and everything I've read and seen convinced me that a realistic Mr. Freeze would be extremely unsettling. With that said, I don't know how Freeze would factor into the "epic crime saga" angle.

Any examples?

 

[AndyTrevino]

Now that we’ve reached this moment where we’re actively getting faked out by casting, I do actually kind of wonder how much new blood we’re in for in the sequel.

It felt like we were given so much more in The Batman than I ever believed we would get going in (Catwoman and Riddler AND Penguin AND Falcone AND A JOKER APPEARANCE), that I wonder if Reeves is going to keep that up by introducing a number of new characters to the fray.

I actually feel like that's much more likely for a hypothetical third film than this one. You'll inevitably see some new faces in the anti-corruption task force, Harvey Dent, whoever the villain is/villains are, etc.

The hypothetical third film is likely going to be the culmination of the corruption causing Gotham to topple and will inevitably feature The Joker in a super substantial role.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Pretty much. Freeze is one of the few iconic Batman villains who isn't a psycho or some creep and I'd hate to change that.

Freeze being a creepy stalker psycho is awful. So boring.

 

[AndyTrevino]

That's the hope—especially if Hugo Strange or Jeremiah Arkham ends up being the villain in Part II. I'd love to see a scene set in Arkham Asylum featuring the Joker, the Riddler, and Hangman—planting the seeds for a full-scale riot or even breakout in Part III.

I don't see Sofia wanting anything to do with someone as psychotic as John Doe.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Please no Penguin crossover stuff in the actual movies. That feels cheap and fan servicey.