Jared Leto IS The Joker - Part 9

[Majik1387]

 

[Rodrigo90]

It's not so against the norm then, is it?

 

[Majik1387]

I never said it was.

Honestly, at this point, I can see Leto playing two Jokers. The true Joker that killed whichever Robin it was that was "killed" and the Robin turned Joker.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I never said it was.

Honestly, at this point, I can see Leto playing two Jokers. The true Joker that killed whichever Robin it was that was "killed" and the Robin turned Joker.

Yeah, that could be a cool thing to see actually. It would add one hell of a twist and would fit in with what Affleck says about the good guys in the BvS trailer.

 

[The Joker]

I'm glad to see people keeping the theory alive. Some people call me an idiot, others call me a master troll -- just for bringing up the theory that Joker = Robin, and Robin = son of gordon. Either way, we'll never see this idea coming at you until it's too late in the theatre

I strongly think the flashback we'll get isn't of a joker killing Jason, but of someone killing Commisioner gordon while Gordon's son is trying to help Batman as Robin (think Batgirl in The Batman cartoon), and whoever his son is (either Jim Gordon Jr, Richard Gordon or Jason Gordon) will go crazy like Dick did in TDKR. Batman feels responsible, puts the kid in a mental institution to get better, but instead he gets worse and turns into the joker. The writings on the suit/body, the 'damaged', is the spectacle of a fallen Robin going crazy. No good guys are left, none stayed that way, and Batman ultimatley retires for the first time because of this horrific chain of events. (Oh yeah, Alfred talking about cruelty is reminding Bruce about Robin in this case too). You see, IT ALL WORKS!


I won't re-iterate all the reasons this works, but just offer up what Christopher Nolan said -- Robin as a character is unfilmable. You give the general public Bruce at a Circus (Circuses are largely de funct now, or outright protested), or you have this weird thing where Bruce picks up stray kids and trains them because... reasons? And even if you changed the Robin backstory to something cool/new/different, Batman having a sidekick in a big screen movie just lessens the Batman character in a movie setting (movie screen time is precious, we need to see how awesome Batman is before giving him help). And in this case, when we do give Batman help, we want Batman and Superman teaming up and sharing screen time, not Batman training a wet-behind-the-ears Robin, or ole Robins, or bringing new Robins. It works in the comics where you can go book by book and build it up, but for 2-3 hours at a go, ever few years - no way.


Let's at least all agree that whatever Robin we get, he'll be on screen for less than 15 minutes and then go away/die, leaving Batman alone.

Only to highlight that for all intents of purposes, whatever Robin exists in the DCCU, it's equivalent to Thomas/Martha Wayne. We may see him, something happens, and the audience is left to see Bruce deal with it. Whatever this event is, will obviously be relevant to both BvS and SS given the minimal visual tie in of the Ha Ha Ha's. If it's nothing more then that, a traumatic event to help set the tone - and give a little bit of non-controversial backstory, then fine. I'll be a happy camper, but I think it'll be a missed story telling opportunity.

In a large sense, DC movies highlight consequences. Batman Begins/TDK hit this nail on the head w/ the escalation path to the joker, bringing down the mob, etc.

MOS plays on this nicely with what appeared to be a rather standard alien invasion/destruction scenario is actually a brilliant setup for BvS. Even after watching the trailer, we can go back and watch MoS and see action/consequence dynamics. (Pa Kent essentially commits suicide to protec the secret, Superman destroys the drone and clearly says things will be on his terms). Likely the consequence of that will be the opening act of BvS.

So that leaves Batman, whatever happened to Robin, and Batman's ultimate villian the Joker. Retelling the story akin to The Batman where Batman's first sidekick is Gordon's son, helps bring in the consequence of Gordon's actions (he bends the law a bit and enables Batman, his son/daughter look up and join Batman). Rather than a mysterious social commentary on Batman's actions like in TDK, we could get something direct -- you sign up to work w/ Batman, you risk getting in harms way and something bad happening.

Anyway, this is just a way to tighten up the plot lines and help push Batman into the Justice League, rather than what we often see - "I'm a part time member... i better get back to Gotham. I'm needed in Gotham." If we see Bruce peace out of something in JL because he's needed in Gotham, that'll be pretty weak.

So getting back to the Joker -- if you think about the Under the Red Hood animated movie. In it's climactic end, Jason Todd tries to force Batman to first answer why he won't kill the Joker, and then manipulate him into killing him. The answer he gives falls somewhat flat... "if i do that, I'll never come back." As if Batman letting harm happen to the Joker would immediately turn him into some blood-thirsty murderous villain-like vigilante.

i say, we want a heart-wrenching reason Batman won't kill the joker (or otherwise indirectly let him die a-la Ras in Batman Begins). One of the best reasons would be, deep down, he wants to save him/loves him/etc, and what better way to do that than to have Joker be once his side-kick, one of his few friends. No cops out "your one rule", no wish-washy Anakin scenario ("If i go to that dark side, my next step is to kill younglings).

so yeah, I think Joker was once Robin. I hope they tighten the plot and involve Gordon so we don't have extra Bat stuff hanging around Gotham to drag Bruce back there. And most of all, I want to see something new that we haven't seen before in comics/animated form. If we get Robin flashbacks, and a Red hood "ta da" moment with 0 build up, that'd be pretty lame - a handful of deus ex machinas to placate the fans, but we won't care.

This is the most interesting this thread has been in a long time.

I don't buy the robin is joker theory, but it's FAR from stupid.

It's not my preference but there is a lot of storytelling potential if that is the case.

Again, I don't think it's true, but the theory is very interesting and definitely not dumb like many of you make it out to be.

Agreed.

 

[Naked Shia]

 

[Majik1387]

Empty post?

 

[Astro13Zombie]

I don't buy the robin is joker theory, but it's FAR from stupid.

Incorrect.
It's incredibly ****ing stupid.

 

[Wildcard]

Incorrect.
It's incredibly ****ing stupid.

Bingo.

 

[Travesty]

Incorrect.
It's incredibly ****ing stupid.

I agree, which is why it fits in line with the tats and grillzzz.

 

[The Joker]

I agree, which is why it fits in line with the tats and grillzzz.

 

[Samurai_Adam]

I don't buy the robin is joker theory, but it's FAR from stupid.

It's not my preference but there is a lot of storytelling potential if that is the case.

Again, I don't think it's true, but the theory is very interesting and definitely not dumb like many of you make it out to be.

I completely agree.

 

[Juke Box Hero]

Theory: Busted

 

[Broseph44]

I don't buy the robin is joker theory, but it's FAR from stupid.

It's not my preference but there is a lot of storytelling potential if that is the case.

Again, I don't think it's true, but the theory is very interesting and definitely not dumb like many of you make it out to be.

False. It definitely is as dumb as many of us make it out to be.

Theory: Busted

hahaha yesssss

 

[DOBSON10]

The fact that I agree with Astro and Broseph on something makes me want to punch myself in the face, but this is a pretty stupid theory. There is literally no evidence that points to The Joker being Jason Todd. None that makes any sense or isn't a complete reach anyway.

 

[roach]

The fact that I agree with Astro and Broseph makes me want to punch myself in the face, but this is a pretty stupid theory. There is literally no evidence that points to The Joker being Jason Todd. None that makes any sense or isn't a complete reach anyway.

I am pretty sure it's all but a few people that believe in this theory

 

[MasterChief2829]

I am pretty sure it's all but a few people that believe in this theory

Maybe here, but it's all I see people talking about when I see discussion on Leto's joker in comments elsewhere like on youtube,tumblr,twitter, etc. It's annoying af.

 

[jaymes_e06]

Theory: Busted

It's so obvious!

 

[Majik1387]

The fact that I agree with Astro and Broseph on something makes me want to punch myself in the face, but this is a pretty stupid theory. There is literally no evidence that points to The Joker being Jason Todd.

Except for the comics, cartoons, video games........................

 

[Astro13Zombie]

The fact that I agree with Astro and Broseph on something makes me want to punch myself in the face, but this is a pretty stupid theory. There is literally no evidence that points to The Joker being Jason Todd. None that makes any sense or isn't a complete reach anyway.

 

[Brian Braddock]

Theory: Busted

And it's raining. So that's HYDRO-MAN confirmed. Marvel are going to be pissed.

 

[DOBSON10]

Except for the comics, cartoons, video games........................

This isn't the comics, cartoons or video games. There is no proof that The Joker in THIS movie is Jason Todd.

 

[Rodrigo90]

There's nothing to say he is, and there's nothing to say he isn't...
Just the J on the cheek and the vague dialogue from BvS

 

[matt47]

The only thing that's got me a bit...weirdly sorta kinda considering it...is the fact that Joker has scratches, scars in the same spots where the marks on the Robin suit are.

 

[Brian Braddock]

Maybe he scarred himself in reference to the wounds he inflicted upon Robin.