Joker "The Joker" in development with Todd Phillips and Martin Scorsese attached? - Part 2

I mean this isnt exactly a flattering first reveal either lol:
heath-ledger-joker1-720x450.jpg

I loved it. Dark, nasty, horrifying. It’s far better than Phoenix’s reveal - which I’m feeling more and more is Ledger Joker crossed with John Wayne Gacy.
 
I mean this isnt exactly a flattering first reveal either lol:
heath-ledger-joker1-720x450.jpg

I loved it. It was creepy and reminded me of Joker's first appearance in the comics. In the meantime people were setting themselves on fire. Good times!

But yeah, the reaction to this reveal is not much different than the one in 2007. I'm sensing a glitch in the Matrix.
 
I mean this isnt exactly a flattering first reveal either lol:
heath-ledger-joker1-720x450.jpg

I remember when this pic first came out some people were also saying this was mostly likely just test makeup.

So I wouldnt be surprised if the new image is more or less the final look.
 
I see the usual suspects who don't give a crap about the movie popped up to say they still don't give a crap about the movie. Boy do I hate being right sometimes. :o
 
The thing that keeps me optimistic about this project is that Joaquin seems like he chooses his films carefully and that he must of seen something in the script and in Todd’s vision and the character of the Joker that their take on this iteration could be pretty special.
 
I have to say, I’m amazed they’re going with grease paint, long hair, and a grimy look again. It really is very close to what Ledger and Nolan did, once you get past the different make up design.
 
I think whether or not it's the Joker's final look in the movie, we're gonna be seeing this anyway. Or some slight variation. And well, the Joker IS pretty much a serial killer in clown make-up. This reminds me so much of Heath Ledger's Joker reveal on WhySoSerious.com. :funny:
I see what you're saying, but at the end of the day, Ledger was still attached to a Batman sequel. If you didn't like his look, that was one thing(I loved it), as it was still very much within a Batman story. This is outside of a Batman story, where he wont even be apart of this movie, and we have a guy named Arthur, who puts on clown makeup, that looks nothing like The Joker....but it's supposed to be The Joker? I was really open to this movie, but now I'm really not understanding the point of even tying it to The Joker.

And I'm not mad or anything, I'm just genuinely confused, now. This doesn't necessarily make me more excited for it, I'm just way more confused. I honestly don't get it. I think I'll just bow out, until I hear more. This isn't making sense to me.

No. It takes place in New York. 1981.
Wait, seriously? This isn't even in Gotham?
 
Nowhere have I read that this movie takes place in New York City. Heck, you got the Amusement Mile which is a location in Gotham in the comics.
 
Nowhere have I read that this movie takes place in New York City. Heck, you got the Amusement Mile which is a location in Gotham in the comics.

Neither have I.

And the beauty is there is so much mystery around the Joker's alter-ego, that you can play around it any way you want. I wouldn't write this off as a Joker movie just yet, simply because we haven't even seen a damn teaser trailer.
 
I also don't remember reading it's set in New York.
 
So I take it... this movie will be rated PG-13? :oldrazz:
Set photos did show Arthur smoking and anti smoking groups are pretty hard on the mpaa from letting tobacco use in movies be G, PG, or PG-13.
 
Neither have I.

And the beauty is there is so much mystery around the Joker's alter-ego, that you can play around it any way you want. I wouldn't write this off as a Joker movie just yet, simply because we haven't even seen a damn teaser trailer.

But the DCEU, man! It sucks and I have no faith in it and while I have literally no interest in this movie, I'll still come onto this thread to crap all over it in a hyperbolic manner without seeing a lick of concrete footage first. You know, like a true fan would do. :o
 
Scott Synder's thoughts basically reflect mine:
It does make sense that Snyder would say that playing it safe is the boring route to go. He did cut off the Joker's face and have him wear it as a mask.
 
I see what you're saying, but at the end of the day, Ledger was still attached to a Batman sequel. If you didn't like his look, that was one thing(I loved it), as it was still very much within a Batman story. This is outside of a Batman story, where he wont even be apart of this movie, and we have a guy named Arthur, who puts on clown makeup, that looks nothing like The Joker....but it's supposed to be The Joker? I was really open to this movie, but now I'm really not understanding the point of even tying it to The Joker.

I remain unconvinced that this is the case. Until I hear someone official say Batman isn’t involved.

Batman will play a role in this movie one way or another, I think.
 
Remember when people said that the fear toxin would give us the "permawhite" Joker in the Dark Knight? :hehe:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,346
Messages
22,089,405
Members
45,886
Latest member
Elchido
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"