
I really enjoyed reading your perspective of the Joker, Rodrigo. Fantastic.


I did get the gist of it. It's not rocket science. Nobody's been able to show where I am supposedly off here.
The last sentence summed up the whole point of what he said. Jared Leto embodies all those Joker traits for him. I challenged how he does, and I just got insulted for it.
Insecurities galore in here. Must not challenge anything pro about Leto. Even when the analogy made no sense, not to Leto as a person, or for how he's going to play the Joker because we don't know that yet.
So keep rolling your eyes. It validates your position so well.
First, you were hardly insulted, so don't act like a crybaby and second, don't resort to that quasi-psychological "I am obviously right, but you are all insecure and are projecting" method. It is cheap.
And it has nothing to do about being pro Leto or against Ledger. I actually agree with some points you made, some of the things Rocketman mentioned were used in characterization of Ledger's Joker, though differently, as this version was definitely more grungy and messy, which I find worked very well with the whole idea that Joker is a personification of chaos in TDK. I liked this version a lot, but am ready for a different one now, a more gentlemen-like and theatrical in a different, flamboyant and over the top way that is more in line with comics' Joker that TDK one. So I got Rocketman's point on this and it is a valid one.
And I also think Leto is a good choice and can embody this version quite naturally, and not just because he's a method actor known to lose himself in his roles. When imagined, comic book Joker seems to fit him like a glove. Analogy makes perfect sense if you're familiar with Leto's acting and previous roles. Who knows, maybe Ledger could embody this version too, but they went in a different direction with his character so we'll never know.
Did you go in a time machine and see Leto's Joker?
So you're telling me that this response:
Was a properly asked, civilized question, meant to encourage respective exchange of thoughts and we attacked you ("insulted", as you worded it) for no reason at all.
Right.
Yeah definitely. It was meant to be funny not insulting since you'd need a time machine to know whether or not Leto embodies all those Joker things he spent two paragraphs discussing.
If I wanted to be insulting I'd call him stupid for making a big deceleration like that based on nothing. Or call his post philistine.
Yeah, I got the "joke". So you completely deny that your post was aggressive and condescending from the start?
If you truly believe it is not the case, I must tell you that it certainly reads that way. There's more than just calling someone names.
I totally deny it. If I wanted to be aggressive or condescending I wouldn't bother answering all the things he said and explaining my own P.O.V. to him about them. I'd just do what the rest of you did in here to me. Rubbish his post by calling it names, or post eye rolling smilies, or sigh at it.
All I did was explain my P.O.V. and ask why he believed Leto was all those Joker things when we haven't seen nothing yet.
Thanks. If it did seem nasty then it wasn't meant to. In the spirit of peace I'll say sorry if it looked that way. I thought a time machine comment would be obvious as humour. I was going to post a Back to the Future Dyelorean pic but I was too lazy to look for one after posting all the other responses to his points.
 
	 
	 
				