The Joker Thread - Part 1

[Chip Chipperson]

and a better dentist

 

[DeadStroke]

and a better dentist

Teeth are a nice addition. It just effects the way he talks.

Just have him do what Hardy did for TDKR.

Simple fix

 

[shauner111]

He doesn't have a mask covering his face.

 

[Wildcard]

Taking the tattoo's off his face, is what needs to happen.

Good poster though.

Eh, they still affect nothing. Not for me, anyway.

 

[OutOfBoose]

I don't see how that little punk b**** is a threat to Affleck.

 

[DeadStroke]

 

[Wildcard]

Spot on.

 

[BH/HHH]

 

[The Joker]

Having seen The Lego Batman movie, I can safely say hand on heart that the Lego Joker is a more entertaining and effectual Joker than Leto was.

Taking the tattoo's off his face, is what needs to happen.

Off his body, too, if they keep planning to do shirtless scenes with him. Or having his shirt wide open exposing his chest.

I don't see how that little punk b**** is a threat to Affleck.

What's funny is so far Harley has made more of an attempt on his life than Letoker has. But then she's crazier and more dangerous than him

 

[DeadStroke]

Or they decided to save a Batman/Joker confrontation for it to be in an actual Batman and Joker movie.

Or keep it comics where in the new 52 the Joker was in Suicide Squad comics primarily as a source for Harley's origin or only to have time with her. No real interactions with Batman.

Crazy I know?

 

[The Joker]

Or they decided to save a Batman/Joker confrontation for it to be in an actual Batman and Joker movie.

Why would they do that? They deemed it an appropriate choice to introduce the Joker as unimportant enough to make his debut into this cinematic universe as a throwaway sub plot. A sub plot that made no difference to the overall story if you removed it. They deemed it necessary to have Batman chase down Joker and Harley in this movie, when they could have just shown Batman capture Harley on her own, since this is supposedly following the comics when Harley has often been caught without Joker there. So if Batman and Joker were put in the same scene, why shouldn't we see them have a confrontation? We saw Batman face off with Deadshot and Harley. Joker is more prominent than either of them, and he's reduced to being a skirt chaser.

As awful as BvS' Lex Luthor was at least they didn't reduce him to a unimportant brief sub plot for his grand debut to the DCEU. He was the main villain of the movie, as it should have been for an A-list villain like him.

Or keep it comics where in the new 52 the Joker was in Suicide Squad comics primarily as a source for Harley's origin or only to have time with her. No real interactions with Batman.

New 52 SS comics were not Joker's intro into that universe.

Crazy I know?

Boring, lazy and a waste.

 

[OutOfBoose]

What's funny is so far Harley has made more of an attempt on his life than Letoker has. But then she's crazier and more dangerous than him

And Robin is more fearsome than Batman...

 

[Boom]

Waller: "She's crazier than him, and more fearless."

[Seconds later]

Harley: *Screaming in fear* "Puddin, I can't swim!!!"

 

[thebatfan5194]

Waller: "She's crazier than him, and more fearless."

[Seconds later]

Harley: *Screaming in fear* "Puddin, I can't swim!!!"

I took that as Waller trying to sell the idea of the team to the government folks she was talking to.

 

[The Joker]

And Robin is more fearsome than Batman...

Where was that said?

I took that as Waller trying to sell the idea of the team to the government folks she was talking to.

That doesn't make sense to me though. She didn't have to BS about any of the other Squad members when she was selling them to the Government. If she didn't really believe in Harley's capability for this team that she had to make up BS about her to sound more suitable, why would she want her on it in the first place?

Those narrative flashbacks for each of the Squad members by Waller were exposition pieces to the audience about all these new characters. The audience was being told Harley is more crazy and fearless.

 

[DeadStroke]

Why would they do that? They deemed it an appropriate choice to introduce the Joker as unimportant enough to make his debut into this cinematic universe as a throwaway sub plot. A sub plot that made no difference to the overall story if you removed it. They deemed it necessary to have Batman chase down Joker and Harley in this movie, when they could have just shown Batman capture Harley on her own, since this is supposedly following the comics when Harley has often been caught without Joker there. So if Batman and Joker were put in the same scene, why shouldn't we see them have a confrontation? We saw Batman face off with Deadshot and Harley. Joker is more prominent than either of them, and he's reduced to being a skirt chaser.

As awful as BvS' Lex Luthor was at least they didn't reduce him to a unimportant brief sub plot for his grand debut to the DCEU. He was the main villain of the movie, as it should have been for an A-list villain like him.



New 52 SS comics were not Joker's intro into that universe.



Boring, lazy and a waste.

. Deadshot and Harley having a confrontation with the Batman works well because it is indeed a Suicide Squad movie.

New 52 comics Harley and Suicide Squad were primary influences on the film. So they were actually comic book accurate in the fact that Joker would show up and deal with Harley and there would be no direct influence of Batman.

Joker leaving Harley allowed for a nice moment of Joker bailing on her. Harley having her moment with Batman.

Its clear that the true confrontation/conversation was going to be saved for another movie/another director. It was just a nice nod to have them there. The magic of world building eh?

Would it have worked better if Joker was the main villain vs. Suicide Squad? Sure.

However, Ayer was going for comic book accuracy. Where the Suicide Squad, new 52 inspired, were not just taking on the Joker.

The primary issue is that a movie should have come out featuring Batman and the Joker before Suicide Squad. However, it is what it is.

Your issue should be that they should have just cut the Joker out of the movie altogether than giving him a Spiderman/Wonder Woman side intro.

They tried to have their cake and eat it too. It didn't work for you. Thats fine.

 

[FunkMiller]

Having seen The Lego Batman movie, I can safely say hand on heart that the Lego Joker is a more entertaining and effectual Joker than Leto was.
o

Hate to say it, but so is Jerome on Gotham

 

[The Joker]

Deadshot and Harley having a confrontation with the Batman works well because it is indeed a Suicide Squad movie.

What does it being a SS movie have to do with it? If the Joker can be the primary antagonist in a SS movie e.g. Assault on Arkham where he has confrontations with half the Squad, and Batman, then why wouldn't it be acceptable here?

New 52 comics Harley and Suicide Squad were primary influences on the film. So they were actually comic book accurate in the fact that Joker would show up and deal with Harley and there would be no direct influence of Batman.

That's the director's fault for limiting himself to two titles. If he broadened his horizons when using such a HUGE wealth of DC characters, he would have had a better movie.

If you narrow your vision you narrow your creativity.

Joker leaving Harley allowed for a nice moment of Joker bailing on her. Harley having her moment with Batman.

Didn't need the Joker for Harley to have a moment with Batman by herself. If you've read the SS comics and New 52 comics which this movie is supposedly based on, that would be very evident. That's not including the non SS and New 52 comics, too, where Batman and Harley have had tons of private confrontations. BTAS as well.

Its clear that the true confrontation/conversation was going to be saved for another movie/another director. It was just a nice nod to have them there.

In what way is it clear? Can you provide some proof of where this is made clear?

One of the predominant complaints against this movie is the Joker was pointless. He didn't need to be here. There was nothing 'nice' about wasting him like they did.

Would it have worked better if Joker was the main villain vs. Suicide Squad? Sure.

However, Ayer was going for comic book accuracy. Where the Suicide Squad, new 52 inspired, were not just taking on the Joker.

The last thing Ayer was going for in this movie was comic book accuracy. It would not have been inaccurate to the comics to have Joker as the main villain. At all.

The primary issue is that a movie should have come out featuring Batman and the Joker before Suicide Squad. However, it is what it is.

Right, and what it is is bad. They wasted the Joker, and reduced his big debut as an irrelevant sub plot.

Your issue should be that they should have just cut the Joker out of the movie altogether than giving him a Spiderman/Wonder Woman side intro.

I know what my issues "should" be thanks. If I had my way they would have cut him out altogether, or even better rewritten it so he was the main antagonist.

It's very telling when a direct to DVD animated movie does a SS better movie than a multi million dollar live action one.

Hate to say it, but so is Jerome on Gotham

From the clips I've seen I agree.

 

[NotNickFury]

Let's be real here, Leto's interpretation in Suicide Squad, and Ayer's material for him, didn't exactly set a new threshold for the Joker the way that Nolan did for Ledger.

 

[FunkMiller]

From the clips I've seen I agree.

Started watching Gotham again from start of season 2. It's still pretty bad, but Jerome is definitely a highlight. Once you can just go with the idea that it's a bat**** weird alternate universe where all canon is pretty much discarded, it's actually quite an entertaining watch.

 

[Wildcard]

Waller: "She's crazier than him, and more fearless."

[Seconds later]

Harley: *Screaming in fear* "Puddin, I can't swim!!!"

And yet this continues to be ignored when this scene is brought up.

 

[The Joker]

It's not ignored. It's just inconsequential. Being more fearless than him means she fears less things than he does. It doesn't mean she is not afraid of everything. Not being able to swim is just not one of the things she is not fearless about. And even then she played possum and pretended to be unconscious under water so she could attack Batman. Not bad for someone who can't swim.

Let's be real here, Leto's interpretation in Suicide Squad, and Ayer's material for him, didn't exactly set a new threshold for the Joker the way that Nolan did for Ledger.

To say the least.

Started watching Gotham again from start of season 2. It's still pretty bad, but Jerome is definitely a highlight. Once you can just go with the idea that it's a bat**** weird alternate universe where all canon is pretty much discarded, it's actually quite an entertaining watch.

I would, but the acting and characterizations are predominately bad for most characters, so a couple of diamonds in the rough like Jerome and Penguin isn't enough to keep me as a regular viewer unfortunately.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Where was that said?

Nowhere. And that's the point. "Crazier than him and more fearless" doesn't make much sense.

 

[Wildcard]

It's not ignored. It's just inconsequential. Being more fearless than him means she fears less things than he does. It doesn't mean she is not afraid of everything. Not being able to swim is just not one of the things she is not fearless about. And even then she played possum and pretended to be unconscious under water so she could attack Batman. Not bad for someone who can't swim.

Regardless, it doesn't negate the fact that the statement is completely contradicted by the action that follows it. Waller makes a statement that is proven to be untrue only seconds later. And that facet cannot be denied.

 

[King23DC]

What's funny is so far Harley has made more of an attempt on his life than Letoker has. But then she's crazier and more dangerous than him

Exactly.

Her saying she can't swim doesn't negate that sentiment. Joker is a love sick, emo, cuckold boyfriend in SS.