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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Might be cool if they did a "multiple choice" origin movie for him. Say some of his thugs or cops talking about what they'd heard about him (similar to how they talk about in the TDK opening). Each tells a different version, they argue about it etc. At the end, Joker wipes them all out and tells the remaining one the "truth" (but also says or does something that contradicts even that). So we're leaning toward one, but are never sure.

Could be great. Or could be an unnecessary expansion of stuff that was hinted at in TDK.
 
It's a valid idea but I think a more straightforward story has a much better chance of success.
 
So people are fine with Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Catwoman, Penguin, Riddler, Poison Ivy, The Flash, Green Lantern, Green Arrow, Nightwing, Bane
all given an origin but Joker is God and knowing his origin ruins the story? Isn't Joker still the same character whether you know how he got started or not?
How exactly does finally knowing how Joker got started ruin the character? :loco:

Because those are all characters who have known origins as part of their concepts. A major part of the Joker's appeal is that we don't need to know his backstory. That's why the "Wanna know how I got these scars?" running gag is so effective.

Even the 89 version doesn't go too in depth. We know he's a power hungry gangster named Jack Napier but we didn't need to see his entire backstory to get who he is.
 
This idea just seems bad.

I like the multiple choice thing but Joker's mystery is no one knows exactly who or what he is. . . . Batman is clear cut. Joker isn't and pushes those limits.
 
An intriguing part is the setting. The intention is to make a gritty and grounded hard-boiled crime film set in early-’80s Gotham City that isn’t meant to feel like a DC movie as much as one of Scorsese’s films from that era, like Taxi Driver, Raging Bull or The King Of Comedy.

In other words it won't look or feel like a comic book.

Because everyone knows that would be too stupid.
 
Would this film be the equivalent of an "elseworld" story?

I mean it seems like this "origin story" won't actually be tied into Leto Joker's official origin.
 
In other words it won't look or feel like a comic book.

Because everyone knows that would be too stupid.

It seems they are getting a lot of inspiration from "The Joker" graphic novel which did take place in a more "grounded" real-crime world than anything super comic-booky.

The Joker in that book actually made Ledger's seem like he'd fit more in the The Animated series universe.
 
The "ALL" in that statement was referring only to Joker; as in all the origin stories which have involved him. If fans can concede they've liked a story or two, then surely they'd have to concede the concept has merit and can already work.

I don't disagree with that, but one can enjoy those stories for what they are while at the same time feeling that knowing more about the character and where he comes from lessens their enjoyment of him overall.

There are also people who are just generally disinterested in the concept, despite conceding that those stories you mentioned were well told.

But positing that doesn't even inform much. An origin movie is supposed to unveil and explore the events which formed the iconic character we know today. Okay. But the important pieces of that component can literally be anything.

Does that even matter? It's an origin movie. There are people here who, for whatever reason, aren't interested in knowing the character's origin. It's a story that can be told any number of ways, but that seems irrelevant when you object to it being told in the first place.

As this is a new iteration, all avenues are open. The origin story could start with him as a kid, as a teen, or an adult. And even if you had that information, you don't know what parts of his life will be covered. There's too many unknown factors here to consider before coming up with a judgment.

I see your point, but you could say that about almost anything that's discussed on this forum. I'd wager more than half the conversations here are speculative.

It very much did, but let me ask you this: what if that's the goal of this film? An unreliable narrator and central figure is an oft used trope of mysteries and thrillers. And in fact is what was used for The Killing Joke. There's nothing to stop it from being used again to great dramatic effect.

That it would keep the mystery of The Joker alive, which would make it almost the opposite of an origin story.

And if not, I still see a story potential. Look at TDK's intro prologue; it technically portrays a Year Zero Joker. No purple tux, no Batman, no past. A origin film could conceivably cover the period between when he's first chemically bathed and end right before he's clashed with Batman. That's a part of history not really covered on any medium and still fits in line with the mystique of Joker.

I would consider that an origin in the loosest possible terms, frankly.
 
As much as I feel meh about this, if they want to cast a younger Joker, they should go with Will Poulter. Sometimes I wonder how he would have done Pennywise, even though Bill Skarsgård looks amazing!
 
Last edited:
As much as I feel meh about this, if they wanted to cast a younger Joker, they should go with Will Poulter. Sometimes I wonder how he would have done Pennywise, even though Bill Skarsgård looks amazing!
I thought Cary Fukunaga was absolutely nuts for wanting him in that part, but 'DETROIT' changed my mind completely.

He's still a bit young, but damn if Will ain't an effective menace on-screen. I wouldn't be mad at that casting.
 
I thought Cary Fukunaga was absolutely nuts for wanting him in that part, but 'DETROIT' changed my mind completely.

He's still a bit young, but damn if Will ain't an effective menace on-screen. I wouldn't be mad at that casting.

I've heard he's pretty great in Detroit. Probably going to go see it soon!
 
Everyone keeps calling this a Joker movie but is it really a Joker movie if it's about his life before he became Joker? Using the Joker name is just a marketing trick.
 
Everyone keeps calling this a Joker movie but is it really a Joker movie if it's about his life before he became Joker? Using the Joker name is just a marketing trick.

We don't know if that's what it's about.
 
I would imagine they'd want as much "Joker" as possible. Probably a Rise of The Joker type thing.
 
I mean, I kind of understand the worry that this could reveal too much about the Joker. We get the rise of the Joker in Batman 1989, but with the benefit of Vicki Vale and Batman/Bruce Wayne to cut back to. We don't actually see his RISE, we see the results of incremental steps in his rise.

Who do we cut back to in this movie? Someone the Joker used to know who is now disillusioned and trying to stop him? It's a hard script to crack.
 
remember Bob Dylan movie I'm not There where six different actors play a different aspect of his life?
maybe they can do something like that, multiple actors embodies all kinds of Joker origins.
 
Unless there do some story where Joker existed before Batman, it's not a Joker movie. It's a Joker origin story but if this actually happens, the only shot of him as "Joker" will be at the very end.
 
remember Bob Dylan movie I'm not There where six different actors play a different aspect of his life?
maybe they can do something like that, multiple actors embodies all kinds of Joker origins.

That would be a way to actually make this interesting.
 
I don't know if that would work. All of the actors would basically be competing to be the best Joker. What if you want to move on with the character? Who do you pick out of the 2, 3, 4 Jokers? Do you get a new actor again?
 
I don't know if that would work. All of the actors would basically be competing to be the best Joker. What if you want to move on with the character? Who do you pick out of the 2, 3, 4 Jokers? Do you get a new actor again?

Yes.
 
remember Bob Dylan movie I'm not There where six different actors play a different aspect of his life?
maybe they can do something like that, multiple actors embodies all kinds of Joker origins.

I actually like that idea, and it's all the more fitting that Ledger and Bale were in that movie as well.
 
Because those are all characters who have known origins as part of their concepts. A major part of the Joker's appeal is that we don't need to know his backstory. That's why the "Wanna know how I got these scars?" running gag is so effective.

Even the 89 version doesn't go too in depth. We know he's a power hungry gangster named Jack Napier but we didn't need to see his entire backstory to get who he is.

I never got the idea the appeal of the Joker was that he had a mysterious origin. For me what makes the Joker is all the crazy things he does. I don't see how knowing how he got started diminishes his appeal.
We all know how Harley Quinn got started, but that doesn't diminish the enjoyment of her zany antics.

Besides you don't even know if the Joker in the movie is the same Joker as the one in the DCEU. It could be one of those stand alone movie that aren't a part of the DCEU which Warner Bros. is planning on making.
So just because this Joker has an origin in this movie doesn't mean that the Joker in the DCEU has the same origin. Maybe it's like the concept they explored on Gotham. The Joker isn't one specific person,
Joker is more an idea, and so Joker can have multiple origins. Hence why the Joker seems immortal. One dies, another Joker takes his place.
 
I'd argue that knowing where Harley comes from is exactly what makes her so interesting. The fact that she was once a relatively sane psychiatrist who was corrupted by The Joker adds a very interesting layer to her character that would t necessarily be here if she were just another loony sidekick.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"