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

[FunkMiller]

Of course there's no Batman and Thomas is alive. This is set before the Wayne's murder. How does that make it less close to the comic book counterpart? They aren't changing that.

You’re kidding, surely?

 

[Hollis Mason]

You’re kidding, surely?

Forgive me if i don't get it, but i don't see how it changes the thing so much. The events are still happening. Joker's origin was never set in a specific timeline. Or you think they're keeping Thomas alive?

 

[Predator jp]

You know, I actually think part of the reason Phillips and Phoenix have created such a different take on the character is to avoid too many character comparisons to Ledger’s performance... which is an extremely wise move.

for a second i thought you were talking about Letoker lol

 

[FunkMiller]

for a second i thought you were talking about Letoker lol

Sorry, who?

 

[Kane52630]

Exclusive: Check Out Custom ‘Joker’ Posters Created by Poster Posse

 

[Gothamsknight]

Wow, those are gorgeous!

 

[TheFuture]

m1ll3r I've no idea why you need to bring up the edgelord and Snyder fan digs at every opportunity.

The way I see the film is simple and I'm sure most on here view it the same; it is what it is which is basically an Elseworlds story. This won't be the Joker we know and love and that's OK, and this is also something that most who have followed the film on here from early on have accepted.

The unhapiness some seem to have feels like it's born out of a demand for a Joker that fits into a franchise and one that can stick around as a foil to Batman. We'd all love that, and it could still happen in the near future; but it not happening is not a valid reason to dump on this film's interpretation of a character. A character which has quite frankly been interpreted in a whole host of ludicrous ways already. From dreadlocked Joker to vampire Joker the character has been stretched every which way so I don't see the big deal here.

 

[TheFuture]

Just one other thing I'd add is that I'd personally be disappointed if the character comes across as "incel" (I really hate that word), but that doesn't necessarily mean a bad film has been made. A wonky interpretation of the character based on my own personal tastes yes, but a bad film no.

I look forward to digesting it for better or worse.

 

[Rocanrol]

Although every opinion depends on the eye of the beholder, I’m with Mill3r this time.

I don’t care that much for the origins of the Joker, I even think that one of his greatest strengths is his mysteriousness; but (and is a big but) the whole movie seems that it was another movie that was just jokerized. Even Phillips alluded this. The world setting has little to do with Gotham, just in name, the characters little have to do with Gotham, even the Joker. He is supposed to be a killer clown, yes, but also a criminal mastermind, philosophical and tactical. I get that they are focusing in the serial killer aspect, but the character that is paying homage will be represented flat.

Plus, no Batman. That lessens the character from the beginning, because you are already letting go his better half.

And just like Mill3r, I will most probably greatly enjoy this movie, but it will not be a joker movie. Just a Scorsese clone with clown make up.

 

[Maze]

A litte late to the party, my take : Almost everybody will agree that in the end, we need to see the movie, to see if the character is really disrespected ...Now , my view on the character origin will always be "Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another ... if I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!" Now bring on this Joker

 

[hellblazer103]

Although every opinion depends on the eye of the beholder, I’m with Mill3r this time.

I don’t care that much for the origins of the Joker, I even think that one of his greatest strengths is his mysteriousness; but (and is a big but) the whole movie seems that it was another movie that was just jokerized. Even Phillips alluded this. The world setting has little to do with Gotham, just in name, the characters little have to do with Gotham, even the Joker. He is supposed to be a killer clown, yes, but also a criminal mastermind, philosophical and tactical. I get that they are focusing in the serial killer aspect, but the character that is paying homage will be represented flat.

Plus, no Batman. That lessens the character from the beginning, because you are already letting go his better half.

And just like Mill3r, I will most probably greatly enjoy this movie, but it will not be a joker movie. Just a Scorsese clone with clown make up.

Then get rid of that ****ing avatar.

 

[Greens]

The world setting has little to do with Gotham, just in name

Huh? This looks more like Gotham to me than what we got in TDK or TDKR. Or the Schumacher films for that matter. So that sounds pretty good.

the characters little have to do with Gotham, even the Joker.

I mean.. the Waynes are in it. Yeah, most of the movie is filled with original characters but so what? I don't see how that has any bearing on Gotham. Who are famous Gothamites that aren't Batman or Batman villains? Just Gordon?

He is supposed to be a killer clown, yes, but also a criminal mastermind, philosophical and tactical. I get that they are focusing in the serial killer aspect, but the character that is paying homage will be represented flat.

Was he born a criminal mastermind? Not really. In what most people accept as his origin he was pretty much a loser until he became the Joker. Sounds familiar to me.

Plus, no Batman. That lessens the character from the beginning, because you are already letting go his better half.

Can't argue with that. I personally don't mind, but I understand how you can feel that way.

 

[Rorschach2012]

This version of Joker looks awesome, so it does kinda sting that we don’t have an R rated Batman alongside him. I’d be happy to see other Batman villains within this world Phillips has created.

 

[Boom]

 

[Pennywise]

Beautiful!

 

[Brother Jack]

Huh? This looks more like Gotham to me than what we got in TDK or TDKR. Or the Schumacher films for that matter. So that sounds pretty good.

It looks like the Gotham of Miller's Year One, which was more or less identical to 80's New York.

 

[FunkMiller]

m1ll3r I've no idea why you need to bring up the edgelord and Snyder fan digs at every opportunity.

The way I see the film is simple and I'm sure most on here view it the same; it is what it is which is basically an Elseworlds story. This won't be the Joker we know and love and that's OK, and this is also something that most who have followed the film on here from early on have accepted.

The unhapiness some seem to have feels like it's born out of a demand for a Joker that fits into a franchise and one that can stick around as a foil to Batman. We'd all love that, and it could still happen in the near future; but it not happening is not a valid reason to dump on this film's interpretation of a character. A character which has quite frankly been interpreted in a whole host of ludicrous ways already. From dreadlocked Joker to vampire Joker the character has been stretched every which way so I don't see the big deal here.

I’m haven’t really dumped on the interpretation, if you actually read my posts. I’m probably looking forward to seeing Phoenix’s performance as much as anyone.

It’s not a black and white position, you know. You can be positive about an upcoming film, but also be allowed to express reservations about it. That’s where I am. I worry that positioning The Joker as a protagonist (which I’ll remind you that none of the examples you, or anybody else have given do) and attempting to justify his actions as a man fighting back against the bullies and the corrupt system is problematic at best. But that’s what happens when you remove Batman from the equation, which I believe is a mistake.

Having said that, I am very interested in the style and tone this film is taking, and am very much looking forward to watching Phoenix portray a neurologically sick man’s descent into madness.

 

[Jekecy]

That IMAX branding is obnoxious, but i might have to snag this for the man-cave. I wonder if there's an equivalent poster for TDK which has a similar shot. Would be a nice twin setup to have.

 

[Rocanrol]

Then get rid of that ****ing avatar.

Mmm no. Why would I? I cannot express reservations or critique some aspect of the film? I gotta be a hardcore fanboy or an ardent detractor? You are funny. But in a Goodfellas kind of way if you catch my drift.

Huh? This looks more like Gotham to me than what we got in TDK or TDKR. Or the Schumacher films for that matter. So that sounds pretty good.

Yes, I guess you are correct in that regard, I was visualizing Arkham and the whole clown movement. But you are right that it does look filthy, dark and gritty. Gotham should look like a dumpster where it matters.

I mean.. the Waynes are in it. Yeah, most of the movie is filled with original characters but so what? I don't see how that has any bearing on Gotham. Who are famous Gothamites that aren't Batman or Batman villains? Just Gordon?

The Wayne are in it but Thomas is a Trump-like figure that it’s meshed into politics? Bruce is 10 years old?

Those are not the Waynes at all.

Spoiler

And the fact that the Waynes are killed during this time and setting is awfully synced aswell. Joker creating Batman? Ugh no thanks, Burton tried that crap 30 years ago and thankfully it didn’t stick.

Also the character, pre joker and joker, is totally reinvented (I don’t have that much of a problem per se with this except for the loss of depth), which wouldn’t be a problem if it weren’t that everything has been reinvented.

Was he born a criminal mastermind? Not really. In what most people accept as his origin he was pretty much a loser until he became the Joker. Sounds familiar to me.

But even the killing joke has the care, forethought and development of an already established Joker within the story, to help mediate with this “no joker all joke” loser. You have Batman, Gordon, Barbara, to help tell this tale of violence and madness. And the finishing product of this story is the peaked Joker we see at the beginning and end of the story.

Can't argue with that. I personally don't mind, but I understand how you can feel that way.

(Y)

 

[TMP98]

lmao Rotten Tomatoes actually changed the BBC review to a fresh. 77% fresh now

 

[Hollis Mason]

I’m haven’t really dumped on the interpretation, if you actually read my posts. I’m probably looking forward to seeing Phoenix’s performance as much as anyone.

It’s not a black and white position, you know. You can be positive about an upcoming film, but also be allowed to express reservations about it. That’s where I am. I worry that positioning The Joker as a protagonist (which I’ll remind you that none of the examples you, or anybody else have given do) and attempting to justify his actions as a man fighting back against the bullies and the corrupt system is problematic at best. But that’s what happens when you remove Batman from the equation, which I believe is a mistake.

Having said that, I am very interested in the style and tone this film is taking, and am very much looking forward to watching Phoenix portray a neurologically sick man’s descent into madness.

I don't want to sound rude, i really don't, but right now it only feels like you're trying to find reasons to hate this movie. You say you're excited, yet every single one of your posts is you nitpicking a reason to say this movie isn't about the Joker or a monologue about some random problem you just found about this film. And you go as far as saying the characteristics of a tragic villain arc, something than has been done since Shakespeare, are problematic. Do you realize how ridiculous does that sound? I repeat, i don't want to sound rude, but seriouly man, i don't know what you were expecting.

Before you said no one wanted to see real versions of this character, yet you praise Ledger, which is exactly that: a realistic version of the Joker. Doesn't make sense to me. Kinda feels like the only reason you criticize this movie isn't because it isn't loyal to the comics, but because it isn't Ledger or a Nolan film. Let's be honest, man, TDK Trilogy isn't loyal to the comics. They added and changed alot, and created something new, original, and special. Why can't you see this movie is trying to do the same? Why does TDK get a pass and this movie doesn't? You see, that's the thing i don't understand. It doesn't make sense.

 

[FunkMiller]

I don't want to sound rude, i really don't, but right now it only feels like you're trying to find reasons to hate this movie. You say you're excited, yet every single one of your posts is you nitpicking a reason to say this movie isn't about the Joker or a monologue about some random problem you just found about this film. And you go as far as saying the characteristics of a tragic villain arc, something than has been done since Shakespeare, are problematic. Do you realize how ridiculous does that sound? I repeat, i don't want to sound rude, but seriouly man, i don't know what you were expecting.

Before you said no one wanted to see real versions of this character, yet you praise Ledger, which is exactly that: a realistic version of the Joker. Doesn't make sense to me. Kinda feels like the only reason you criticize this movie isn't because it isn't loyal to the comics, but because it isn't Ledger or a Nolan film. Let's be honest, man, TDK Trilogy isn't loyal to the comics. They added and changed alot, and created something new, original, and special. Why can't you see this movie is trying to do the same? Why does TDK get a pass and this movie doesn't? You see, that's the thing i don't understand. It doesn't make sense.

You know, you do sound rude, actually ...and someone who clearly won’t hear a critical thing said about a movie he hasn’t seen yet. This conversation is therefore over. Have a good day.

 

[Hollis Mason]

You know, you do sound rude, actually ...and someone who clearly won’t hear a critical thing said about a movie he hasn’t seen yet. This conversation is therefore over. Have a good day.

There's a big difference with being critical about a movie, and nitpicking and looking for reasons to dislike a movie. Many here have expressed concers about the film. But the fact that you are the only one that repeat s them almost every week, and every single one of your post is the same, kinda makes it look bad, doesn't it? Why do you think many of the users here seem to agree? The point is that you're not being critical about this film or it's quality. You're being critical about this film not not being what you want it to be and how you want it to be. And the reasons you're doing that aren't that good. I already said why they don't make sense.

You haven't answered to a single thing of what i said. Everytime i make a point you ignore it and repeat the same old argument. So i guess it's truth, you don't criticize this film because it isn't loyal to the comics. You criticize it because it isn't Ledger. Don't tell me you're one of those Nolan fans that hail TDK as the epitome of perfection and hate everything else because they feel threatened it *might* be better than their precious trilogy. You sound smart, and i think it's not like that. But don't get surprised people get annoyed with your attitude, or even offended.

I really didn't want to sound rude, btw. That's why i edited my post so much. But if i offended you, then i'm sorry.

 

[Orb]

Proper look at the IMAX poster

 

[The Joker]

The way I see the film is simple and I'm sure most on here view it the same; it is what it is which is basically an Elseworlds story. This won't be the Joker we know and love and that's OK, and this is also something that most who have followed the film on here from early on have accepted.

This. That is the way to enjoy this movie. Don't think of it as being, or even trying to be any kind of faithful adaption of the Joker. They have explicitly said several times that its not. They're not putting on any pretenses here. Just look at it as an elseworlds/what if type movie.