Jared Leto IS The Joker - Part 10

Status
Not open for further replies.
You don't have to entertain anything, especially on a subject you clearly don't agree or believe in.

You clearly posted your distastes the couple of times prior that the theory has been brought up, and that's fine. You clearly have nothing more to say to a theory that you simply disagree with other than repeating yourself ad nauseum.

I understand the Joker is a character you enjoy and all, but do you think maybe, just maybe, it's kind of odd that any time there's any real activity going on in this thread is when it has to do with the Jason Todd theory; I honestly think you, and many of the other negative nancies are just mad that the Jason Todd theory topic is more interesting than the few things we have been shown of Leto's Joker.

I mean let's see what we got; snapchat pic leak, the reveal pic, him holding a camera ala Killing Joke, some set pics with Harley and Batman on a car, and what was shown in the SS trailer.
I mean I get it, it's annoying there's not much more to talk about, but I'm not really sure how posters talking about a theory has gotten you, and other anti-theory posters, so upset and hostile.
 
Majik1387 said:
You all lost any classy responses the moment you continuously bashed posters, one in particular, who can see how the theory could be possible and work.
Click to expand...
Everyone is debating an idea he probably didn't start.

Majik1387 said:
Yet when Nolan did it, it was genius...
Click to expand...
You mean the Basil Karlo motif?
He took the knife and the facial make-up, not much else.
 
ThePhantasm said:
He doesn't see how the theory could be possible and work. He's yet to suggest a single version that would work. And he's in fact said now that he doesn't even like the idea and doesn't think it will happen.

So I'm supposed to entertain a generically articulated remote possibility that this idea would somehow not change the Joker character significantly and that this would somehow be a good idea? No.

But thanks for clarifying that you don't particularly care about the character, and would be willing to see the character ruined just to spite those who disagree with this poorly defended "theory."
Click to expand...

Pretty much all i'm saying is that we don't know until we see it. I'm not saying i have an idea. I'm saying that it's not impossible for someone to have an idea that could work. Just because you can't possibly think of anything, doesn't mean a more creative mind than yours couldn't. You're too absorbed by your own lack of imagination.
 
I'm getting the vibe of the William Fetchner as Shredder debate again here.
Only that one was meant to be Shredder before the story changes that to satisfy angry fans.
Majik1387 said:
They combined Ducard and Ra's Al Ghul into one.......
Click to expand...
Ducard appears in one story arc, he doesn't have the big history the likes of Joker or Jason have.
 
Ducard is a false identity in the movies; he is an actual comic character unrelated to Ra's...
 
Bizarro! said:
I think you have a very simplistic and limited view of what could be done with The Joker and Jason Todd. Perhaps a more creative mind, like a really good writer, could crack the code and offer us an engaging story that managed to kept intact some of the most interesting elements about Joker/Batman relationship and possibly create new ones.

I agree with you when it comes to the loss of mystique . But to me that happens everytime you give Joker a backstory. Could Jason Todd being The Joker make the character less interesting? To me, possibly. But i can say the same about every Joker origin that i've known until this day. To me the ideal Joker is what we saw in TDK.
Click to expand...

Of course it's a simplistic overview, it's not some full run down of these characters and what makes them the characters they are. It's 2 am and I do not have the patience to bother with that, especially considering anything and everything I can say has been said already by this point. Creativity has nothing to do with it, sometimes a bad idea is just that. A bad idea. You can take every single bad idea out there and just say "well perhaps someone creative could do it" but it doesn't magically improve the idea.
 
Majik1387 said:
I honestly think you, and many of the other negative nancies are just mad that the Jason Todd theory topic is more interesting than the few things we have been shown of Leto's Joker.
Click to expand...

hahahaha... no
 
Majik1387 said:
Ducard is a false identity in the movies; he is an actual comic character...
Click to expand...

I know that.

Are you suggesting that Joker is only going to pretend to be Jason Todd? That Jason is a false identity? Or are you admitting that your Ducard analogy isn't really relevant?
 
Snow Queen said:
You can take every single bad idea out there and just say "well perhaps someone creative could do it" but it doesn't magically improve the idea.
Click to expand...

exactly :up: :up:

We've stated repeatedly why this is a bad idea, and the only argument that we get in response is "well maybe there's some way that they could make it work that no one can think of"

That's not an argument, its begging the question.
 
What I'm saying is, WB has already been okay with amalgamating two characters for a comic movie once already one way; it is entirely possible they are open to the possibility again in another different way.

If you can not understand that possibility, that is entirely on your education.
 
A false identity is not an amalgamation of characters. Try again.
 
No one here is a fan of the idea of Batman's arch nemesis being a former sidekick of his.
That's.... awkward.
 
Majik1387 said:
A false identity based on an actual character is an amalgamation.

Same thing happened with Burton's Joker being Joe Chill.
Click to expand...

Nope. Burton's Joker and Joe Chill are entirely different characters, even if they share a common plot function of murdering the Waynes. Exchanging one character for another in a story role is not an amalgamation or combination.
 
It's not exchanging a character if the character is doing the same things as both characters combined. That's called an amalgamation.
 
Majik1387 said:
It's not exchanging a character if the character is doing the same things as both characters combined. That's called an amalgamation.
Click to expand...

No. Characters are defined by more than their contribution to the plot. Jack Napier behaves nothing like Joe Chill in B89. There's not a single element of Chill in the Napier character. The only similarity is in a plot function.

That's not an amalgamation. But you seem to be proving my point with these parallels. A "Joker as Jason" would either being Joker-in-name-only or Jason-in-name-only.
 
It's like were all adding fuel to the fire that Bizarro! started...
 
Bizarro did nothing but mention a theory that got Phantasm in a tangent.
 
jokesonm3 said:
It's like were all adding fuel to the fire that Bizarro! started...
Click to expand...

1C8R6z1.gif

:o
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
Jared Leto IS The Joker - - - - - - - - - Part 18
14 15 16
Replies
399
Views
111K
katara
K
T
  • Locked
Jared Leto IS The Joker - - - - - - - - Part 17
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
161K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
Jared Leto IS The Joker - - - - - - - Part 16
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
108K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
Jared Leto IS The Joker - - - - - - Part 15
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
90K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
Jared Leto IS The Joker - - - - - Part 14
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
136K
Thread Manager
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 6,421 (members: 21, guests: 6,400)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,388
Messages
22,095,684
Members
45,890
Latest member
amadeuscho55

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"