The Joker Thread - Part 1

[AndyTrevino]

It's been a longtime since I last read TDKR, so forgive me for asking, but what exactly do some people here find to be so homophobic about the Joker's depiction in it? Is it just the context of Miller explicitly depicting this vile murderer as being homosexual in a generally more homophobic era? I'm not looking to ruffle anyone's feathers up by asking, I'd just like to understand.

I don't see it as homophobic necessarily. I think it's just Miller's attempt to make Joker scary for that particular time period, when artists like Prince, Bowie, Culture Club, etc really "popularized" effeminate behavior.

Homophobes obviously saw this as a sacrilegious outrage, so it's not surprising that The Joker took on what was considered controversial at the time.

 

[AndyTrevino]

It’s tricky because in a lot of ways Joker is coded as “other” or “camp”, which comes from a long (and problematic) line of queer coding villains, which is still a controversial topic in queer communities. The way (especially) Miller and Morrison use Joker’s “queerness” verges a little to deeply into homophobic territory for me, where as Caeser Romero’s (a very important queer icon) seems more like a celebration of those aspects of the character.

I just interpreted it as Joker defying expectations to really screw with people (in-universe mainly). It's all just a game to him.

But I definitely agree that taking that aspect too far could be seen as offensive, which is why I kind of just want it to be relegated to a colorful wardrobe and some mannerisms here and there.

 

[Eddie Dean]

It's been a longtime since I last read TDKR, so forgive me for asking, but what exactly do some people here find to be so homophobic about the Joker's depiction in it? Is it just the context of Miller explicitly depicting this vile murderer as being homosexual in a generally more homophobic era? I'm not looking to ruffle anyone's feathers up by asking, I'd just like to understand.

My reading of Miller’s treatment of The Joker is that we’re supposed to be repulsed by the more femme aspects of the character. I’m thinking about how the simple act of him putting on lipstick is supposed a big moment of villainy and disgust for the audience. It’s similar to people’s problems with Buffalo Bill.

 

[Captain Tired]

With regards to the Joker having any sort of sexuality, count me as one who'd prefer that he simply not have one. However, having said that, I'm also partial to the idea of him having a sole interest in Batman and no one else.

Al Jean and Mike Reiss, two of the showrunners from the early days of The Simpsons, always used to say that Smithers wasn't homosexual as much as he was simply Burns-sexual. And that if Burns were a woman, Smithers would still be totally enraptured.

I think that's how I look at the Joker and his fixation on Batman whenever it's hinted at. He ain't necessarily gay, he just has the hots for Batman.

 

[AndyTrevino]

My reading of Miller’s treatment of The Joker is that we’re supposed to be repulsed by the more femme aspects of the character. I’m thinking about how the simple act of him putting on lipstick is supposed a big moment of villainy and disgust for the audience. It’s similar to people’s problems with Buffalo Bill.

I just see it as "He doesn't care what anyone thinks". He thrives on toying with people, and it might cause them to either let their guard down as to just seeing him as some random loon or become suspicious because he just wants to get a reaction out of them.

 

[Captain Tired]

My reading of Miller’s treatment of The Joker is that we’re supposed to be repulsed by the more femme aspects of the character. I’m thinking about how the simple act of him putting on lipstick is supposed a big moment of villainy and disgust for the audience. It’s similar to people’s problems with Buffalo Bill.

That's an interesting perspective and one I'd never thought about with regards to the Joker's depiction in TDKR and ASHOSE. Personally, I really quite enjoy it when the writers lean into the Joker's more overtly feminine traits. But I guess I can understand how some would be offended by it. Especially during the time it was written in.

 

[AndyTrevino]

That's an interesting perspective and one I'd never thought about with regards to the Joker's depiction in TDKR and ASHOSE. Personally, I really quite enjoy it when the writers lean into the Joker's more overtly feminine traits. But I guess I can understand how some would be offended by it. Especially during the time it was written in.

Yeah. I think it's really interesting whenever they emphasize those aspects like him wearing actual lipstick, eyeliner, etc but it can only be taken so far before it seems offensive.

That, and sometimes way too much glam makes him look less creepy, and I personally think that he should look at least a little ugly.

 

[Eddie Dean]

It’s all in all you handle it. The Joker can still have those aspects, but his villainy should come from his madness and sadism, not simply from the fact that he displays feminine traits.

 

[shauner111]

I think it’s simple. Women shouldn’t be playing men and men shouldn’t be playing women. Unless it’s literally a dude crossdressing in that particular story. But you’re aware that it’s still a man. Having Colette play a man and we’re just supposed to buy that it’s a man? That’s a straight up dumb gimmick. If he’s a male character, he should be played by one. Just like hypothetically you shouldn’t cast Timothée Chalamet as Selina Kyle just because he’s a good actor and might be able to pull it off.

Joker, the way I see him in the comics, has a flamboyant, AT TIMES feminine side. But you never know if he’s bisexual, gay, straight, whatever...because he’s constantly screwing around with people. Is he acting like that because it’s natural? Or just to make someone uncomfortable? Once you draw too much attention to his sexuality by confirming whether he’s gay or not, it ruins the whole point of that character. His backstory should be a mystery for the most part. His sexuality? A mystery. Nothing he does or says is easy to figure out. You can’t put Joker in a box.

WE know who is playing the villain, so it becomes a gimmick rather quickly once an actress has been cast. There are enough female characters in the Batman and DC universe to play. They don’t need to take a massive male role that a rising actor could be playing. And there are plenty of male roles in the DC/Batman world so they can stay in their lane too and not hogue the rest.

Miller’s Joker was a product of the 80’s. If ppl are offended I suggest they stop being babies. But today that wouldn’t work, especially set in modern decade.

 

[Captain Tired]

I was personally horrified by the Joker shooting countless innocents in the tunnel of love, more than his applying lipstick.

 

[Eddie Dean]

I was personally horrified by the Joker shooting countless innocents in the tunnel of love, more than his applying lipstick.

I mean, there is a certain aspect in DKR that Joker is the worst of the worst because on top of the killing, he’s also... “icky”.

 

[Mindreaper21]

Just keep him sexually ambiguous. Have him give the “sexy eye” to men, women, dead fish, rusty cars, broken dishes and whatever else. One thing I love about the Joker is just how differently he sees the world. Whats absolutely bizarre to us, makes perfect sense to him.

 

[AndyTrevino]

Just keep him sexually ambiguous. Have him give the “sexy eye” to men, women, dead fish, rusty cars, broken dishes and whatever else. One thing I love about the Joker is just how differently he sees the world. Whats absolutely bizarre to us, makes perfect sense to him.

^This.

 

[Brother Jack]

With regards to the Joker having any sort of sexuality, count me as one who'd prefer that he simply not have one. However, having said that, I'm also partial to the idea of him having a sole interest in Batman and no one else.

Al Jean and Mike Reiss, two of the showrunners from the early days of The Simpsons, always used to say that Smithers wasn't homosexual as much as he was simply Burns-sexual. And that if Burns were a woman, Smithers would still be totally enraptured.

I think that's how I look at the Joker and his fixation on Batman whenever it's hinted at. He ain't necessarily gay, he just has the hots for Batman.

I agree with this. And I think that hermeneutic could be applied to his relationship with Harley, in that it's not technically a heterosexual relationship as much as a very abusive master/slave dynamic, wherein any affection he would be capable of feeling for her is only in how she glorifies him. It's pure ego.

 

[Astro13Zombie]

I agree with this. And I think that hermeneutic could be applied to his relationship with Harley, in that it's not technically a heterosexual relationship as much as a very abusive master/slave dynamic, wherein any affection he would be capable of feeling for her is only in how she glorifies him. It's pure ego.

Wrong

She was his queen, and God help anyone who dared to disrespect his queen.

 

[Rorschach2012]

Wrong

She was his queen, and God help anyone who dared to disrespect his queen.

That was complete garbage. But I’m open to an Ayer cut... it sounds way better but who knows

 

[shauner111]

She’s crazier than him too.

I’m sure all of that is still in the Ayer Cut. And even more purring noises from that Roxbury antagonist.

 

[Captain Tired]

Yeah, stuff like the Joker genuinely seeming to love Harley makes me wonder if Ayer does actually have a good understanding of this universe tbh.

When all the leaks started coming out about how the Joker keeps showing up to rescue Harley, I was like... that... doesn't sound too much like the Joker.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

That was complete garbage. But I’m open to an Ayer cut... it sounds way better but who knows

I thought so too until I watched Bright and Sabotage. If Ayer's cut is anything like the rest of his recent output it's merely accidentally hilarious trash instead of semi-intentionally hilarious trash.

 

[AndyTrevino]

Yeah, stuff like the Joker genuinely seeming to love Harley makes me wonder if Ayer does actually have a good understanding of this universe tbh.

When all the leaks started coming out about how the Joker keeps showing up to rescue Harley, I was like... that... doesn't sound too much like the Joker.

But bro that's good because otherwise he's just a super evil psychopathic monster bro this gives him humanity and joker always does everything to prove a point and does everything 4 a reason bro

 

[shauner111]

You’re all just jealous.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

"More Leto Joker in the Ayer cut" feels more like a threat than anything else, tbh.

I'm kinda curious what kind of chemistry he and Affleck would've had. I feel like they'd have been a... Weird combo.

 

[AndyTrevino]

"More Leto Joker in the Ayer cut" feels more like a threat than anything else, tbh.

I'm kinda curious what kind of chemistry he and Affleck would've had. I feel like they'd have been a... Weird combo.

I still kiiinda think he has potential but....meh. I was probably the biggest DCEU apologist in 2016 and a little bit of 2017, but now I'm kinda over it. I still want a cinematic universe but WB tainted the one we already had and are still desperately trying to connect all their movies to Justice League.

It's kind of depressing for me, really, because I can't really bring myself to watch Birds of Prey and certain scenes in Shazam just made me cringe in a sad way because that universe is barely holding itself up. It's like those underwhelming sequels where it has all the cool ingredients that you love, but everything just seems so bland and you can't really drum up a ton of excitement for it anymore (looking at YOU, It: Chapter Two).

 

[Captain Tired]

Between Affleck's voice modulator and Leto's grills, somehow I don't think there would have been much chemistry on display. Still, it is a pity we didn't see them interact.

Also I liked Shazam a lot. It was a nice change of pace for DC.

 

[Rorschach2012]

Bright was ****ing awesome. One of my favorite movies of that year TBH.