The Dark Knight Rises Should There Be A ‘Joker’ Spin-Off Film? Brett Ratner Thinks So

[OwlBoy]

I don't think you're actually allowed to do that to people

 

[Sawyer]

I don't think you're actually allowed to do that to people

So long as you're not caught, anything is legal.

Plus, Ratner isnt like most people.

 

[gwynplaine]

Exactly, plus the guitar hero movie he making.

I hope they make a GTA 4 movie, like a eastern european scarface or something, and certainly not directed by Ratnert:.

 

[CaptainClown]

I would want to see an eastern european crime movie not really a gta 4 movie oh and Ratner is ok with um grounded movies like Red Dragon so I wouldn't have that much doubt in him.

 

[gwynplaine]

I would want to see an eastern european crime movie not really a gta 4 movie oh and Ratner is ok with um grounded movies like Red Dragon so I wouldn't have that much doubt in him.

Eastern promises was pretty good but I want a saga like the Godfather or scarface and Bellic is a pretty charismatic character imo.
As for red dragon, it was indeed not that bad even tho I had a hard time believing in Fiennes (a great actor) as Dollarhyde.

 

[CaptainClown]

I dunno I really like Red Dragon and felt it was just really good overall. Eastern Promises was pretty good but didn't feel like other crime dramas, more cloak and dagger kind of stuff. Also Niko is like bi polar and felt that whole revenge aspect was weak

 

[gwynplaine]

I dunno I really like Red Dragon and felt it was just really good overall. Eastern Promises was pretty good but didn't feel like other crime dramas, more cloak and dagger kind of stuff. Also Niko is like bi polar and felt that whole revenge aspect was weak

I'm just about 30 % into the game so I suppose I'll probably agree with you later ont:. I prefered red dragon to manhunter but i think i'm in a minority.

 

[SNIKT1950]

There shouldn't be a Joker spin-off because Heath is dead.

If Heath was alive then YES.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

????? What??!?!!?! So because Heath is dead there shouldn't be a Joker film? Is that the only reason you can come up with?

I think a Joker film that isn't part of the Nolan-verse would be brilliant, as long as its all trippy and nightmarish, I wouldn't want to see a realistic film on the Joker

 

[The Guard]

Vaughn wanted to shoot that script?

Well, technically, no. He didn't. He got excited, and in a matter of a few days wrote his own draft with Kinberg and Penn with elements that, save for a few of them, never got past the first level of production. Last I knew, Vaughn wanted a movie where Storm and Wolverine fall in love (and have sex, which some people blame on Tom Rothman's desire), a ton of main characters died (and a ton were introduced cameo style), and in general, things weren't any better than what we ended up with. The Cyclops/Xavier deaths were there, and Storm was rumored to perish as well as Rogue in Vaughn's take. In short, all the things that happened in X3 still happened. And FOX essentially told him "That's not going to happen, we have an X3 script already (written by Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn before a director was ever settled on), we'll take some of your ideas, but not the key ones we differ on. THIS is the movie we're going to make". That's my understanding of the situation, and to my knowledge, nearly every article/review/insider report about the film reflects that.

I always assumed he bailed because he didn't like the film the studio wanted to make, but Ratner had no problem with it and just filmed the thing.

Given the timing, Matthew Vaughn appears to have bailed because he didn't think the movie could be shot appropriately in the timeframe FOX wanted. Those were the rumors right before he left the project, and then he left the project. Family reasons were cited, but that appears to have been something of a cover. Maybe there were some creative differences, and that's why he actually left, but as I recall, he wasn't bailing until FOX decided it wanted to compete with SUPERMAN RETURNS. At the time, he'd cast several of the key newcomers. So I don't think it was entirely a creative difference.

Yes, he's a hired gun if that's the case. You don't have a problem with that kind of director?

Hired gun in what sense? That the man is paid to direct films? Or that he's paid to direct films other people walk off of?

No, I don't have a problem with Brett being paid to direct a movie, because he's a professional director. And no, I don't have a problem with Brett Ratner coming into X3, knowing the script was what FOX wanted and directing it to the best of his ability. Why would I? That's how directors and studios tend to work, and this was clearly a "special" case. That said, Ratner did make a few key changes, with FOX's apparent blessing, cutting a Washington DC sequence (may be budgetary) and moving the bridge sequence from the middle of the movie to the end of the film. He also added a few characters to the Brotherhood.

What am I supposed to have a problem with, exactly? That he didn't stand up to FOX as much as he could have? As much as I'd like to pretend that every director making a major superhero movie gets to have all the say...and gets to have a hand in the creative process...that's just not how it tends to work with FOX's bigger budget superhero movies.

With X3, I have a problem with the studio, and Vaughn (who, as a professional, took on a project he apparently wasn't sure he could finish, and then badmouthed the man who came in to clean up his mess afterward). Not Ratner. Ratner did a heck of a job, considering what he had to work with, which wasn't all bad, but was a mixed bag, at best.

 

[SNIKT1950]

Not technically, last I knew, Vaughn wanted to shoot one where Storm and Wolverine fall in love, and all the things that happened in X3 still happened. And FOX told him "That's not going to happen, we have an X3 script already, we're making this movie".

Given the timing, Matthew Vaughn clearly bailed because he didn't think he could shoot the movie appropriately in the timeframe FOX wanted. Maybe there were some creative differences, and that's why he left, but as I recall, he wasn't bailing until FOX decided it wanted to compete with SUPERMAN RETURNS.

Hired gun in what sense? That the man is paid to direct films? Or that he's paid to direct films other people walk off of?

No, I don't have a problem with Brett Ratner coming into X3, knowing the script was what FOX wanted and directing it to the best of his ability. Why would I?

As much as I'd like to pretend that every director making a major superhero movie gets to have all the say...and gets to have a hand in the creative process...that's just not how it works with FOX's bigger budget superhero movies.

With X3, I have a problem with the studio. Not Ratner. Ratner did a heck of a job, considering what he had to work with, which wasn't all bad, but was a mixed bag, at best.

Awesome post.

I agree completely.

 

[Darknightnomis]

There shouldn't be a Joker spin-off because Heath is dead.

If Heath was alive then YES.

I miss Heath terribley and is extremly sad that we don't have him with us anymore nor will we be able to appreciate his incredible acting ability as the Joker again, but the tragedy that happen to him should not impeded that there ever being a movie about the Joker.

The Joker is a character that will stil be around after all of us are gone. Another interpertation is inevitable.

 

[Ronny Shade]

Brett Ratner is a total idiot.

 

[Ronny Shade]

The reason Joker worked so well in TDK is because he had a Batman to play off of.

also I don't want to see somebody else's Heath impression.

 

[ND Irish]

yea wait to see hows this alledged 'Venom" movie is & you'll likely see that a solo Joker movie w/out Batman as the main character would not work well IMO.

 

[Crook]

The reason Joker worked so well in TDK is because he had a Batman to play off of.

That's bullcrap. Joker was the one driving the entire film, it was his stage. In the context of the film and outside, through Heath's performance. Moreover, him and Batman hardly interacted with one another. Out of any character in the mythos, Joker is one of the few that can stand on his own.

yea wait to see hows this alledged 'Venom" movie is & you'll likely see that a solo Joker movie w/out Batman as the main character would not work well IMO.

This would imply that a Joker story relies on Batman to be of quality. Again, completely false.

 

[deathfromabove]

That's bullcrap. Joker was the one driving the entire film, it was his stage. In the context of the film and outside, through Heath's performance. Moreover, him and Batman hardly interacted with one another. Out of any character in the mythos, Joker is one of the few that can stand on his own.


This would imply that a Joker story relies on Batman to be of quality. Again, completely false.

in that case can we name one great joker story in which batman does not appear?

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Well The Killing Joke was entirely about Joker, yea Batman was in it, but not alot. And that graphic novel is recognized as one of the greatest ever.

I think if they did make a film about Joker it should be a one shot, not in canon with Nolans films. They should make it as a one shot comic in film form, maybe a twisted, nightmarish love story with Joker and Harley in the mould of Natural Born Killers. Maybe based on "Mad Love", Batman could still be a off-screen presence and still carry weight. I think something like that would be brilliant.

Oh yea lets not forget that Lee Bermejos Joker story doesn't have Batman in it atall.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

bloody double post!!

 

[Crook]

in that case can we name one great joker story in which batman does not appear?

Great? None really to mind. Sadly, it hasn't been done often, and when it does, the characterization of Joker is very poor. Two stories that come to mind though, that feature Batman, but very little, are TKJ and "The Clown at Midnight" (though the latter I may be hazy on). Both feature Joker, rather than having him as a supporting castmate. "Joker's 5-Way Revenge" and "Mad Love" are also others. Come to think of it, there are plenty of good stories with Joker front-and-center, just not solo.

I think Bermejo's Joker book is coming out soon though, and that should be good. It's hard to imagine that the character can't work solo, when he's such an interesting personality by himself.

 

[Ronny Shade]

That's bullcrap. Joker was the one driving the entire film, it was his stage. In the context of the film and outside, through Heath's performance. Moreover, him and Batman hardly interacted with one another. Out of any character in the mythos, Joker is one of the few that can stand on his own.


This would imply that a Joker story relies on Batman to be of quality. Again, completely false.

I think that characters and therefore the stories they inhabit are about their interaction. Joker is a great character for Batman, but Batman is even greater a character for the Joker. They take each other to new heights. My question is since Joker and Batman are a)good for each other and b)linked because they're from the same story...why make a Joker movie without batman?

 

[mclay18]

Awesome post.

I agree completely.

Yeah. I'm amazed at the hate fans are leveling at Ratner when essentially it was the studio's fault for the decisions they made going into production. I think if Ratner was given a quality script for X3 (without studio intervention), I think people would've been kinder on him and the film would've turned out much better.

To me, X3 wasn't bad, mediocre or awful. It was a missed opportunity, at worst and fairly entertaining at best.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea but I feel the great thing about Batman is that he doesn't have to physically be seen to have a presence.

 

[CaptainClown]

Yea but I feel the great thing about Batman is that he doesn't have to physically be seen to have a presence.

GOTHAM CENTRAL!

sorry I promote that series too much.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

LOL. I havn't actually read that series yet. So is Batman not in it alot?