The Reboot Joker

[The Guard]

For me, it has to do with the bitterness of life in general.

Batman's interactions with the Joker aren't random. The Joker targets a fully-formed batman priciesely because he's fully formed. Batman's ideals are what the Joker is attacking; therefore, this isn't some random clash that represents the world at large. It's about two people and how their differences are toxic to each other. The Joker works at that stage of batman's existence.

Fair enough. But this aspect wouldn't change much anyway, later in their "careers".

The killing of the Waynes by Chill is entirely different. It's just a horrible random act. It's not a clash of ideals. It's just some thug doing what thugs do. The Waynes didn't do anything specific to attract this (except for maybe being rich, lol). It just happened. It damages Bruce forever and it's tragic because it was so senseless and common. It's a condition of the world at large that Bruce decides to fight.

Right, but whether the man who commits said horrible, random act ends up becoming The Joker and crosses Bruce's path again later on, the initial act would still be, to a young Bruce, a horrible and random act, wouldn't it?

Regardless of the dynamics of their relationship LATER on, how does it actually impact or change Bruce Wayne's mission at its outset if the man who killed his parents later becomes The Joker?

It doesn't.

It would only change their later dynamic.

And it seems that people have been trying to argue that somehow this later "personal" relationship changes EVERYTHING back to the inception of Batman's mission. Can't agree with that. Because it doesn't make logical or psychological sense on pretty much any level.

With the Joker, Batman fights the Joker and what he stands for (chaos, mayhem, etc). The Joker, while an iconic foe, is one of many fights Bruce will have.

With Chill, batman fights the collective condition of crime that has befallen Gotham and the random acts of cruelty criminals like him inflict on others. This isn't one foe in his history; it's his reason for becoming batman in the first place.

By making that random thug into the Joker, you change the dynamics of his fight with Joker later in life. His reason for fighting becomes a distinct person in that case, instead of the faceless, random, bitter world of crime that ruined his family.

Well yes, you change something about the dynamic of his fight with The Joker...the personal element comes into play. But I don't see why the other elements of his classic dynamic with the Joker should change appreciably because of that.

His fight with The Joker has ALWAYS been because The Joker is a particular type of threat, and a particularly dangerous individual/criminal personality.

All making The Joker the murderer of his parents adds is a personal connection. The Joker REMAINS a particular type of threat and a particularly dangerous individual/criminal personality, even then.

I'm not arguing for it...I think it's a bit of a convenient connection (obviously they were going for something a bit more "legendary", I'm just saying that nothing is really "lost" from the mythos as a result of that relationship.

Well, except Joe Chill. But I'm talking about in relation to Batman's character.

And here's the thing.

Whether the reason his crusade begins is the senseless, random killing of his parents, Bruce Wayne doesn't just fight "random, bitter crime".

Bruce Wayne/Batman fights crime, period.

All crime. He doesn't tend to discriminate, in most versions of the character. If there's a crime that is going to harm someone, he will generally fight it.

And he doesn't just fight crime. He fights oppression, inequality, etc.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Jack Napier was as much a psychopath as much as Joker was. Hence repeating the line "Ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?", and the reference to the Waynes' as "prey".

Here's a question then. What makes it better that Joker killed the Waynes'? Also, if it's so good, should it not be emulated for others? Should Lex kill the Kents? Should Doc Ock kill Uncle Ben? Should Sinestro kill Martin Jordan? Should Black Manta kill Aquaman's mother? Should Magneto be the reason for Charles having mutant powers? Should Doom give the Fantastic 4 their powers?

 

[The Guard]

You all understand no one's arguing for The Joker to be the murderer of the Waynes, right?

That's not even what's under discussion at the moment...

 

[The Endless]

Joker killing the Wayne's was used to further explore the parallels between them.

Joker created Batman, Batman created Joker. It's an interesting take that is still true to both characters in a way.

 

[The Guard]

The 89 origin was perfect for that film, which was self contained and neatly structured. It isn't desirable for the broader mythos, however.

I do love the scene itself. The eerie, nightmarish quality it has was brilliant. There is something so very Batman about it, perhaps because it is juxtaposed with Bruce sitting in the security of Wayne Major while mulling on the chaotic and cruel world beyond.

This.

There was no guarantee there would ever even be another Batman movie in 1989. It was something of a risk cinematically.

 

[MrsKent26]

Fair enough. But this aspect wouldn't change much anyway, later in their "careers".



Right, but whether the man who commits said horrible, random act ends up becoming The Joker and crosses Bruce's path again later on, the initial act would still be, to a young Bruce, a horrible and random act, wouldn't it?

Regardless of the dynamics of their relationship LATER on, how does it actually impact or change Bruce Wayne's mission at its outset if the man who killed his parents later becomes The Joker?

It doesn't.

It would only change their later dynamic.

And it seems that people have been trying to argue that somehow this later "personal" relationship changes EVERYTHING back to the inception of Batman's mission. Can't agree with that. Because it doesn't make logical or psychological sense on pretty much any level.



Well yes, you change something about the dynamic of his fight with The Joker...the personal element comes into play. But I don't see why the other elements of his classic dynamic with the Joker should change appreciably because of that.

His fight with The Joker has ALWAYS been because The Joker is a particular type of threat, and a particularly dangerous individual/criminal personality.

All making The Joker the murderer of his parents adds is a personal connection. The Joker REMAINS a particular type of threat and a particularly dangerous individual/criminal personality, even then.

I'm not arguing for it...I think it's a bit of a convenient connection (obviously they were going for something a bit more "legendary", I'm just saying that nothing is really "lost" from the mythos as a result of that relationship.

Well, except Joe Chill. But I'm talking about in relation to Batman's character.

And here's the thing.

Whether the reason his crusade begins is the senseless, random killing of his parents, Bruce Wayne doesn't just fight "random, bitter crime".

Bruce Wayne/Batman fights crime, period.

All crime. He doesn't tend to discriminate, in most versions of the character. If there's a crime that is going to harm someone, he will generally fight it.

And he doesn't just fight crime. He fights oppression, inequality, etc.

It does change his relationship to the Joker though.

I never said he discriminates. Random crime is what set him off. That's how batman was born. The killing of his parents made him realize what is happening in this world and he became something to combat it. After that, he takes on whatever is there. At this stage, it doesn't matter who the random killer of his parents is. But later on, it does matter.

My point was the the Joker is not something random that just happened to the world. He targets batman because of his ideals. Their clash is about ideals, NOT just about what happened to the Waynes. By making Joker into the killer of the Waynes, the clash becomes about that. But that's not why or how it started. Yes, the Joker is a criminal and because of that batman must combat him, but...I like it when the Joker targets batman. He seeks him out because of what batman believes in. The Joker aims to destroy this. The Joker is an entity that stands out from the random thugs encountered on a daily basis. Those thugs are against the world and batman aims to stand between them and the innocents. The Joker is against batman himself. The merging of the Joe Chill character and the Joker combines two separate and symbolically different events in batman's life. One event started his life as Batman. The other challenges the way The Batman conducts himself. They are best as separate pillars because Bruce Wayne is two very different people when he encounters each challenge.

Also, I think the best are stories are those (like in BB) where Bruce never gets revenge directly on Joe Chill. He sees Chill everywhere, in all the crime he combats, but he never gets the satisfaction of punishing him. If Joker is made into the Waynes' killer and batman meets him later in life (and has the opportunity to conquer him), it removes that cruel irony. Batman punishes so many thugs in his time, but never gets his day with the one that matters the most.

 

[Mr. Finger]

It does change his relationship to the Joker though.

I never said he discriminates. Random crime is what set him off. That's how batman was born. The killing of his parents made him realize what is happening in this world and he became something to combat it. After that, he takes on whatever is there. At this stage, it doesn't matter who the random killer of his parents is. But later on, it does matter.

My point was the the Joker is not something random that just happened to the world. He targets batman because of his ideals. Their clash is about ideals, NOT just about what happened to the Waynes. By making Joker into the killer of the Waynes, the clash becomes about that. But that's not why or how it started. Yes, the Joker is a criminal and because of that batman must combat him, but...I like it when the Joker targets batman. He seeks him out because of what batman believes in. The Joker aims to destroy this. The Joker is an entity that stands out from the random thugs encountered on a daily basis. Those thugs are against the world and batman aims to stand between them and the innocents. The Joker is against batman himself. The merging of the Joe Chill character and the Joker combines two separate and symbolically different events in batman's life. One event started his life as Batman. The other challenges the way The Batman conducts himself. They are best as separate pillars because Bruce Wayne is two very different people when he encounters each challenge.

Also, I think the best are stories are those (like in BB) where Bruce never gets revenge directly on Joe Chill. He sees Chill everywhere, in all the crime he combats, but he never gets the satisfaction of punishing him. If Joker is made into the Waynes' killer and batman meets him later in life (and has the opportunity to conquer him), it removes that cruel irony. Batman punishes so many thugs in his time, but never gets his day with the one that matters the most.

Well put.. And I am one that really disliked the idea of the killer of the Wayne's, and the Joker being the same person.. I get why they did it, it is just contrary to the view I have of Batman.. Or his motivations.. I like the way that you put it..

 

[The Shape]

Jack Napier was as much a psychopath as much as Joker was. Hence repeating the line "Ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?", and the reference to the Waynes' as "prey".

Here's a question then. What makes it better that Joker killed the Waynes'? Also, if it's so good, should it not be emulated for others? Should Lex kill the Kents? Should Doc Ock kill Uncle Ben? Should Sinestro kill Martin Jordan? Should Black Manta kill Aquaman's mother? Should Magneto be the reason for Charles having mutant powers? Should Doom give the Fantastic 4 their powers?

 

[BRGomes]

Vincent Cassel IS the Joker!

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

I don't even think WB would approach Dafoe about playing the joker, honestly. They'd probably aim to go with a younger guy.

And Brody would fit that mold, only 41, around the same age as Affleck. Plus he's a fantastic actor, I think he could pull it off.

why would they go with a younger guy? he's in facepaint for god sake. his age wouldn't be an issue. dafoe needs to be the joker and ddl needs to be mr.freeze. it's what the world needs.

 

[Guts]

If not Dafoe or Brody, then I think that Sharlto copley could do a good job as the joker.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

If not Dafoe or Brody, then I think that Sharlto copley could do a good job as the joker.

I've wanted copley as thawne for a long time.

 

[Verick808]

I'd like a break from Joker. He's everywhere. I would not be surprised if the Arkham Knight from the new batman game turns out to be Joker.,Seriously, I wouldn't. The new universe isn't grounded in reality so use some of his mother enemies like Clayface, Manbat, Solomon Grundy. Even Killer Croc could be awesome on screen. Not as the main villian and they would have to get rid of his jobber aura but it would be a great change of pace.

I've wanted copley as thawne for a long time.

He did make a pretty great messed up psychopath in Elysium so I could see it.

 

[Bathead]

So in many sites said that Adrien Brody (who was up for The Joker in TDK) told to Metro that he's interested in playing the Joker in some DC movies, what do you think?

Sure, why not? A long as this time they don't go the makeup and scars route.

 

[John-An]

Which do you suggest?

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

We always fan cast super intense actors for Joker. I get it but... How come we never actually think about an actor known for comedy in the part?

 

[John-An]

He looks the part... he's a good actor. but the only thing is that if he can pull-off the character. initiative is a thing he has.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Again... Why not an actual comedian as The Joker?

 

[John-An]

Do you have someone in mind besides the ones mentioned?

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

The thought just occurred to me so... No. But more importantly I just wonder why we never bring up comedians or actors known for comedy?

 

[Guts]

Hopefully not adam sandler

 

[John-An]

Well actually that idea hasn't crossed to my mind to be honest. I prefer to have another genre movie type of actor. But if the actor is good I wouldn't complain.

 

[Brian Braddock]

I actually suggested the comedian Lee Evans years ago on here, around 2004/5 I think. He'd just done a film called 'Freeze Frame' that showed quite a different (dark) side to him, as did it demonstrate that he actually had a fair bit of acting talent. This, coupled with his height, build and manic comedy standup routine, made me think he had what it took for a really good 'traditional' Joker.

But for what it is worth - I happen to think that Brody would make an excellent Joker (certainly in terms of visuals).

 

[Wheels]

Jim Carrey could have done it had he not been Riddler.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I don't think Carey would have made a good Joker.