The Joker Thread - Part 1

[Gamma Goliath]

If they bring Phoenix back as joker in a sequel I hope the series is an anthology play on the "if I had a past I prefer it be multiple choice" line and continue with the unreliable narrator.

 

[emielaen]

If they bring Phoenix back as joker in a sequel I hope the series is an anthology play on the "if I had a past I prefer it be multiple choice" line and continue with the unreliable narrator.

Bingo.

 

[shauner111]

It’ll never happen. Reeves wrote his script long before anyone even knew Phoenix’s Joker would be a hit. If it’s Joaquin we may as well applaud the Snyderverse/Anti WB crowd because this would make them right, in that the studio will always get their way in shoehorning whatever they want into a director’s vision. Matt lost the battle if Joaquin is in this movie. That’s nothing to be excited about. The long term effects would be awful, all for a short term thrill from casuals who we don’t really care about in the first place..

I get the excitement at first because of the fresh take on Phillips’ Joker. But 2 years later, it’s time to think logically and to support Reeves’ original vision instead of creaming our jeans on some business model. Of COURSE it would turn the heads of casuals. It would be a great business decision. But I prefer thinking about what’s best for story instead. And this ain’t it. I respect Reeves to not fold here.

Bending a timeline and aesthetic and age just to make the meet-up work is the very definition of shoehorn.

 

[Boom]

I've already exhausted my opinion on this matter months ago.

Let's just say, I don't envision any scenario where Phoenix plays The Joker in this franchise. And I wouldn't particularly want his version of The Joker populating this world anyway. Life loser Arthur Fleck can stay in his own little bubble world, thank you very much.

"But Phoenix could play a totally different version of the character for Reeves," you'll cry. Sure, he could... in the sense that anything is possible. Won't happen though.

 

[emielaen]

Eh, sure, but you may just be overreacting and misinterpreting some things here, at least from my take. I’m not suggesting they compromise Reeves’ work to utilize Phoenix as a continuation of Philips’ take. I’m saying they use him as an actor for an entirely different Reeves iteration solely because he’s beyond talented.

The built in hype would just sell it even more so. That’s not a bad thing. It being a win for anti-WB crowd seems like a wild exaggeration.

But I’m not holding out hope for it. Lol I’m for whatever Reeves goes with. It’d just be dope as **** because Phoenix is one of the best actors of his generation, not because of Philips’ take.

 

[Jekecy]

Bending a timeline and aesthetic and age just to make the meet-up work is the very definition of shoehorn.

Joker's canon is already bent. Because it's been established his POV is unreliable, even to himself. The film explicitly shows this, multiple times. Reeves doesn't have to adhere to anything other than the non-bleached skin (for obvious reasons). And I certainly wouldn't start expecting Joaquin to do an encore of the first film. He's never been that type of performer.

When we're involving arguably the greatest actor of his generation, who's coming off an Oscar win and is clearly invested in the character's future, I'm hard-pressed to believe Reeves would have been forced or coerced into working with him. There's no universe that I buy that.

If it doesn't happen, so be it. But if somehow these two worlds collide -- sorry, the sheer amount of talent in that little group is too huge to ignore and shun away.

 

[Eddie Dean]

Reeves has be shown to be very adept at studio politics and if somehow, the great tragedy of having to use Joaquin, such a heavy burden that no director would want, was something the studio would want, I'm pretty sure he could make it work.

 

[AndyTrevino]

There's no denying it would be awesome if done right. But I want someone else.

 

[shauner111]

Screw “making it work” though. That’s still a compromise. I want no compromise. Everyone would want to work with Joaquin. But you don’t bend a character for your actor. You bend your actor for the character. If Joker is in this movie I can guarantee you that a specific Reeves version was written into the script in 2018, 2019. Way before anyone got the results/earnings for “Joker”. Remember, that movie was seen as a one off experiment set during the 80’s. By the time WB talks to Matt, the new Joker has already been cast and the costume designer is already doing her work.

If the Joker is only showing up in the sequel then I can totally get behind what you guys are saying. Because then there’s that possibility that Matt hasn’t even thought of the Joker until now right? But judging by the Drops all over the set, Blu Ray Angel’s comments...it’s fairly obvious to me that Matt has put the time into thinking up a version of Joker that works alongside Pattinson (as far back as the Affleck JL fallout). Todd Phillips’ Joker moved along real quick in production. Matt could have written a Joker and rogues gallery scenarios way before he was even aware of a solo Joker movie existing.

 

[Eddie Dean]

That’s a whole lot of speculation that frankly makes little sense. Sorry my boy!

 

[shauner111]

All we do here is speculate.

 

[Eddie Dean]

Please speculate responsibly!

 

[CondimentKing]

Making blockbusters is inherently full of compromises, that's just how big movies are made. For example, Reeves wanted Mahershala Ali for Gordon over Wright as his first pick but Ali didn't want to get typecast or be a secondary character, so he turned to his next options. That is technically a compromise, etc. Compromises end up actually usually making these movies more interesting imo. Using Joaquin as just an actor would be one of the greatest compromises of all time lol. I agree it *probably* won't happen but if it does it would be a great thing imo

 

[shauner111]

It’s not as easy as just plopping Joaquin into any Joker and making it work. That’s not realistic. Joaquin won’t fit every version of Joker. Just because he’s a great actor it doesn’t mean he fits what Reeves is doing. Tarantino makes this point all the time that he’d love to work with many actors and may be able to get them too but his character on the page takes priority over them no matter how skilled they are. If a lesser name fits better, then that’s the choice.

Don’t underestimate Reeves’ control just because it’s a Batman movie. And you can’t compare asking Ali and getting rejected to tailoring his Joker to fit Mr Mumblecore himself Joaquin Phoenix. You have no choice but to look for another actor if they say no. A completely different scenario.

 

[JubJub86]

Reeves has be shown to be very adept at studio politics and if somehow, the great tragedy of having to use Joaquin, such a heavy burden that no director would want, was something the studio would want, I'm pretty sure he could make it work.

This is a guy who's already (politely) told them to go shove it and taken himself out of consideration for helming this movie when they started asking him to color within the lines they've drawn.

Matt's made it clear it's his way or the highway, he just wasn't a d*ck about letting that be known, he did it diplomatically and professionally. They wanted him to direct it badly enough that they kissed the ring and let him dance his dance.

I don't see any scenario where Matt's bowing to studio pressure over something like that. If he wants Joaquin for it, it may happen. It won't be due to pressure from the suits and Joker 2 making eleventy-three-zillion dollars, though.

It may be a smart move financially, tapping into the public's big response to the Phillips movie. That's about it though, can't see any actual creative reason that it's a good idea. Reeves clearly has a pretty-specific vision for his Gotham, for his tone, and it's sure not what we've already seen from Phillip's movie. They're both "dark" and that's about it for similarity.

Just let Matt do his thing. Whether it's this rat-faced cop guy turns out to be Joker, or he introduces Joker in a sequel, or if he leaves it for further down the road, whatever, doesn't matter. But they've gotta get out of the kitchen and let the chef do the cookin'.

 

[Razor Crest]

Disregard the tattoos, Driver’s a good looking Joker.

 

[PurpleStar]

It’ll never happen. Reeves wrote his script long before anyone even knew Phoenix’s Joker would be a hit. If it’s Joaquin we may as well applaud the Snyderverse/Anti WB crowd because this would make them right, in that the studio will always get their way in shoehorning whatever they want into a director’s vision. Matt lost the battle if Joaquin is in this movie. That’s nothing to be excited about. The long term effects would be awful, all for a short term thrill from casuals who we don’t really care about in the first place..

I get the excitement at first because of the fresh take on Phillips’ Joker. But 2 years later, it’s time to think logically and to support Reeves’ original vision instead of creaming our jeans on some business model. Of COURSE it would turn the heads of casuals. It would be a great business decision. But I prefer thinking about what’s best for story instead. And this ain’t it. I respect Reeves to not fold here.

Bending a timeline and aesthetic and age just to make the meet-up work is the very definition of shoehorn.

Mostly agree with this tbh. As much as I enjoyed Pheonix's performance the more I think about the more it would be better to leave it as a one off. The character in Joker is not really The Joker as such, except maybe at the very end. But I just can't see Arthur Fleck believably turning into The Joker, the Clown Prince of Crime as I like the character to be. I know as it's an origin that's the point and many like the tragic origin (as they do the one in The Killing Joke). Plus, as he's an unreliable narrator the story could be a fabrication anyway. This makes people want to see more of Pheonix as a fully formed Joker, but to me the only way forward with that would be to leave the story of Joker (2019) alone. So, have play The Joker with no reference to the origin. But, what's the point in doing that really? Even using Pheonix as Joker again will leave most people with the understanding that his backstory is in Joker (2019), as despite the unreliable narrator angle, most casual audiences will take it at face value anyway for the most part. Overall, they need to be careful not to over use Pheonix's Joker because too much of a good thing is bad and in the long run it's best to leave you wanting more.

And I want a different type of Joker, getting away from the face paint Jokers of Ledger and Pheonix, back to something more comicbook accurate. I think some of the gothic elements of golden age Joker would work well in Reeves aesthetic. For example, in the early 40s stories his first hideout is under a cemetery and then in an abandoned haunted mansion. Steve Englehart and Marshall Rogers work in The Laughing Fish, Sign of the Joker and Dark Detective had call backs to these, which I love. Then, there's the trope of disappearing to an apparent death, but somehow reappearing again later. This lends something of the supernatural to the character, and that could work with the urban legend idea mentioned earlier in the thread, although I'd prefer it to remain mysterious rather than outright stated to be supernatural.

 

[JubJub86]

Yeah, I'll actually be pretty disappointed if he doesn't go and mine all the really old classic stuff for his take on the character here. Pretty sure he will though, something about the Adam West hat-tips kind of seals that for me, seems like the approach Matt'd take.

I can take or leave the Ace Chemicals/bleaching shiz, the Red Hood shenanigans, hardly a necessity - you can riff on all that, make it drug-related rather than a chemical bath. But overall, big-picture, let's look back and do a Reeves-twist on the classic.

Romero & Nicholson in a blender visually, gothed/noired-up 10-15%, with the viciousness & depravity dialed up to, oh, a billion. Making Reeves-Riddler seem like Regis Philbin hugging puppydogs.

 

[PurpleStar]

Yeah, I'll actually be pretty disappointed if he doesn't go and mine all the really old classic stuff for his take on the character here. Pretty sure he will though, something about the Adam West hat-tips kind of seals that for me, seems like the approach Matt'd take.

I can take or leave the Ace Chemicals/bleaching shiz, the Red Hood shenanigans, hardly a necessity - you can riff on all that, make it drug-related rather than a chemical bath. But overall, big-picture, let's look back and do a Reeves-twist on the classic.

Romero & Nicholson in a blender visually, gothed/noired-up 10-15%, with the viciousness & depravity dialed up to, oh, a billion. Making Reeves-Riddler seem like Regis Philbin hugging puppydogs.

Yes to this. I think the early 40s Joker has a bit of that creepy gothic horror vibe (of course because the look is based on Conrad Veidt in The Man Who Laughs). So, some expressionist visuals mixed with gothic and film noir would work wonders. And I don't think there is a live action Joker that truly captures that aspect tbh.

Similarly, I don't think there's a need to use the ace chemicals/red hood stuff. After all, Joker was a character for a decade before that origin was added. And even then, it doesn't seem to have been heavily referenced until after it was reworked in The Killing Joke. I notice after reading The Bronze Age Joker Omnibus that no stories in there reference any origin at all. So, Joker works just fine as a creepy mysterious character with a vaguely former criminal past (that is hinted in Batman #1) but who appears out of nowhere.

 

[Captain Tired]

I think Nicholson but with a pinch of Phoenix would be a better mix. Playful and silly, but with flashes of unbridled rage that peek through the surface every so often.



A mix of Romero and Nicholson would just be 100% campiness. The creepier aspects of Nicholson would be totally drowned out in a deluge of pink and blonde lol.

 

[Boom]

Disregard the tattoos, Driver’s a good looking Joker.

View attachment 49665

I'm struggling to understand why the artist would go through all the effort of giving him that classic Joker look, only to add the Leto tattoos in there.

 

[Captain Tired]

Even disregarding the tatts, I think Driver looks terrible as the Joker in that manip.

He looks like Paul Stanley from KISS.

 

[Boom]

If Driver were cast, I'd want Reeves to make him more monstrous in appearance. I think an Adam Driver Joker inspired by ASHOSE would be ace.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

It’s not as easy as just plopping Joaquin into any Joker and making it work. That’s not realistic. Joaquin won’t fit every version of Joker. Just because he’s a great actor it doesn’t mean he fits what Reeves is doing. Tarantino makes this point all the time that he’d love to work with many actors and may be able to get them too but his character on the page takes priority over them no matter how skilled they are. If a lesser name fits better, then that’s the choice.

Don’t underestimate Reeves’ control just because it’s a Batman movie. And you can’t compare asking Ali and getting rejected to tailoring his Joker to fit Mr Mumblecore himself Joaquin Phoenix. You have no choice but to look for another actor if they say no. A completely different scenario.

I too have a strong preference against reusing Phoenix but I'm having trouble picturing a version of Joker that Joaquin wouldn't be able to fit. Apart from Letoker he could easily have pulled off every screen version of Joker so far in his own way. Would his Fleck performance fit all of them? No, but his Fleck performance is already far enough removed from Joker that I find him barely recognizable as the character outside of a few scenes.

I also frankly don't see anything wrong with Reeves tailoring the character specifically to an actor. Nothing wrong with tailoring a character to suit the specific strengths of an actor, Tarantino's perspective on that is super valid but it isn't the only way of doing it. Characters get rewritten for actors all the time, this is baseless speculation but I would bet you anything there were tweaks to Penguin after a middle-aged guy like Colin was cast if the role was written for a guy Jonah Hill's age.

Regardless, Joker sequel being in development and Phoenix clearly having a strong enough level of disinterest in Batman stuff that unless he really wants to buy his own country it's hard to imagine this is in the cards or that Joaquin would even do it.

 

[JubJub86]

I think Nicholson but with a pinch of Phoenix would be a better mix. Playful and silly, but with flashes of unbridled rage that peek through the surface every so often.



A mix of Romero and Nicholson would just be 100% campiness. The creepier aspects of Nicholson would be totally drowned out in a deluge of pink and blonde lol.

Pretty much just meant looks-wise for the Romero bit, tall lanky dude with a hard-on for bright-colored dandy clothes. (Though hey, a mustache here wouldn't go astray! ) Not the personality, yeah. Though maybe some of the vibe of the laugh could be fun to incorporate, a different feel to it than Jack's gleefulness or Heath's shrieking chimpanzee or Joaquin's involuntary tick. And do a really grim twist on his goofy pranks/messing with people, all Joker's crazy funhouse wackiness but through the lens of a sadistic bloodlusty wackadoodle.

The anger side I'm a little torn on for Joker. I'd sort of keep that rare, and maybe save it for Bats alone, like he's the only guy that can really get under Joker's skin and spoil his mayhem party. Not sure I'd really want Joker losing his temper with regular victims or goons working for him or whatever. Yeah, he's going to kill those types of people, but he's just plain bat**** enough that he's either laughing while doing it or simply emotionless like he doesn't give a crap. His henchmen failed him, and they've gotta die, but he's not going to let them spoil the fun.