The Dark Knight Well....this is intresting? (Joker news)

[Boom]

You know what, I'd rather have a movie that had no Joker than one that had over 60% of him.

And when has anyone said they wanted 60%?

 

[Ming]

Yep.

 

[Boom]

This is bull crap.The Joker cannot have a small role in this movie.He's either a central villain,or just leave him out of it altogether.

And this feeling his presence despite his small role nonsense I've seen some people say is not applicable here.Anyone who reads the Batman comics knows the Joker doesn't do small roles like this.He cannot play second fiddle to any other villain in a Batman movie.

I sincerely hope this is not true.Otherwise my faith in Nolan has just plummeted.

Well spoken.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Thanks.

Look, I agree with everybody here. Batman should be the main focus of this movie, as he was in Batman Begins. I don't want the Joker taking over the show. But I don't want him short-changed either. I want memorable scenes, scenes that will become classics. I don't want to spend a good portion of the movie thinking, "LOOK! ANOTHER DEAD BODY! WE'RE ONE STEP CLOSER TO SEEING A COOL JOKER SCENE!!"

Seriously.

Exactly,We know Bruce's backstory now so whilst Batman should remain the viewpoint we see the movie from it should be as a detective which will incorporate the villains more
Joker and Batman must share onscreen dialogues otherwise joker is just a random killer who batman is chasing
Joker is obsessed with Batman and vice versa,without interaction that obsession can't be triggered and built

 

[The Fallen]

Look. Here is my definitive opinion.

I like The Joker. He's my fav rougue.

I just want the character protrayed RIGHT, not like in '89.

This CAN be done with a small amount or large amount of screen time.

As long was we get A DEFINITAVE CHARACERISATION of The Joker in this movie and possibally the third, I'll be happy with that.

That's the thing with comic book characters, everyone has a different interpretation of the characters, and there is SO MUCH material to source from (comics, cartoons, movies) but the essence of the character remains in all these different interpretations.

.... INWT

 

[Mr. Socko]

Name a Batman comic where Joker is the main villian and he wasn't focused on or shown as much as Batman...

Anyone, come on, I dare ya!

Oh and Ming, 50% Joker would be perfect

 

[Babs Gordon]

i just worry about pre-e-joker-lation or whatever that dude called it a few pages back.

it's like giving the kids dessert before dinner. they won't want dinner after dessert's been have. do i make ANY sense? lol

 

[Ming]

And when has anyone said they wanted 60%?

I'd prefer less then that. 30%, maybe 25%....

 

[Boom]

I'd prefer less then that. 30%, maybe 25%....

Alright, fair enough.

But how much of that is dedicated to this "behind-the-scenes" idea?

 

[Mr. Socko]

I'd prefer less then that. 30%, maybe 25%....

Then go watch some s****ty fan film

 

[Babs Gordon]

i really agree with you fallen. i really do.

 

[Babs Gordon]

haha we fan folks whine worse than little babies sometimes.

 

[trustyside-kick]

i actually like limiting the joker like that. maybe by do that they can they could focus more on the Batman/Gordon/Dent crime team. plus it could reduces the chance of him killing Rachel (good).

im still hoping for Bettany to get the part though. right now hes the only one i can see playing the part.

At first I was hoping for Joker to have more screen time but after reading that I think it is ok.

I especially liked the whole Batman/Gordon/Dent team thing you mentioned too; reminds me of TLH; good idea bro.

Also, with making Joker not have a butt-load of screen time means that he will not be main villain for this movie which is fine and makes a bigger chance of him being a main villain in the 3rd perhaps.

And about the killing Rachel part...I can care less.

And appearently Bettany won't get the part...Hulme, Law, and Weaving (w/e his name is) I heard are the candidates now? Out of the three I say Hulme then.

 

[The Fallen]

Yeah, Ducard being Ra's Al Ghul was ripped right from the comics...

Those fanboys you speak of amaze me

I liked that twist, cos it was different. I see where you are coming from. It's just that IMO, Joker killing Wayne's was wrong cos it strayed from the mythos.

While Ra's being Ducard is acceptable as Ra's is a shadowy type figure. If I was the head of a massive 'organisation' like Ra's, I'd have a bodyguard or two...

 

[zer00]

Yeah, Ducard being Ra's Al Ghul was ripped right from the comics...

Those fanboys you speak of amaze me

It's funny that they complain about stuff like that in B89 etc.

Yet Joker appearing in shadow and etc until the very end is revolutionary and kickass.

 

[Babs Gordon]

there are lots of ways to work this. batman is still just setting up shop. joker is still just getting started. like i've said in this thread before, it's plausible that the joker develops criminally as well. because this is part of an origin trilogy exploring the earliest work of batman, this gives us an opportunity to explore the joker's development as a maniacal criminal as well.

i just want a story told well and i want audiences dying to come back for the third. a satisfying story involving the joker, leading toward a bang-up climax in the 3rd won't disappoint audiences so long as they've got an interesting support story. did people come out to see begins because it had the joker? no! i mean seriously... they're going to come anyway, and any joker involvement will keep them interested, especially if its moving toward something awesomer. anyway... i'm just rambling now.

 

[Ming]

Name a Batman comic where Joker is the main villian and he wasn't focused on or shown as much as Batman...

Anyone, come on, I dare ya!

Oh and Ming, 50% Joker would be perfect

Actually, I believe in Batman No.1, counting panel for panel, no counting the ones where they were together, the joker had less panels then Batman. Unlike Batman 89', it was about how Batman stopped the Joker, not a Joke-orgy with the occasional cameo by Batman.

 

[trustyside-kick]

there are lots of ways to work this. batman is still just setting up shop. joker is still just getting started. like i've said in this thread before, it's plausible that the joker develops criminally as well. because this is part of an origin trilogy exploring the earliest work of batman, this gives us an opportunity to explore the joker's development as a maniacal criminal as well.

i just want a story told well and i want audiences dying to come back for the third. a satisfying story involving the joker, leading toward a bang-up climax in the 3rd won't disappoint audiences so long as they've got an interesting support story. did people come out to see begins because it had the joker? no! i mean seriously... they're going to come anyway, and any joker involvement will keep them interested, especially if its moving toward something awesomer. anyway... i'm just rambling now.

Yea....don't know what else to add to that....except for the Batman/Gordon/Dent crime team thing my bro mentioned.

 

[Mr. Socko]

It's funny that they complain about stuff like that in B89 etc.

Yet Joker appearing in shadow and etc until the very end is revolutionary and kickass.

Like you said, denial. They won't accept that Nolan is taking the wrong approach.

there are lots of ways to work this. batman is still just setting up shop. joker is still just getting started. like i've said in this thread before, it's plausible that the joker develops criminally as well. because this is part of an origin trilogy exploring the earliest work of batman, this gives us an opportunity to explore the joker's development as a maniacal criminal as well.

i just want a story told well and i want audiences dying to come back for the third. a satisfying story involving the joker, leading toward a bang-up climax in the 3rd won't disappoint audiences so long as they've got an interesting support story. did people come out to see begins because it had the joker? no! i mean seriously... they're going to come anyway, and any joker involvement will keep them interested, especially if its moving toward something awesomer. anyway... i'm just rambling now.

Did people come to see Batman & Robin because it featured Bat-nipples? Those people you speak of will watch anything. Doesn't matter how bad it is, it'll still do atleast decent in the BO. Batman & Robin did pretty good in the BO itself.

Actually, I believe in Batman No.1, counting panel for panel, no counting the ones where they were together, the joker had less panels then Batman. Unlike Batman 89', it was about how Batman stopped the Joker, not a Joke-orgy with the occasional cameo by Batman.

MY GAWD NO!!!! One comic where Joker actually had one less panel then Batman.

Yep, this is why the movie should only have the Joker in it for the last 10 minutes

 

[trustyside-kick]

Nah, not the last 10 minutes. He should get more screen time then that. And if anything have them at spread out parts of the film.

 

[zer00]

there are lots of ways to work this. batman is still just setting up shop. joker is still just getting started. like i've said in this thread before, it's plausible that the joker develops criminally as well. because this is part of an origin trilogy exploring the earliest work of batman, this gives us an opportunity to explore the joker's development as a maniacal criminal as well.

i just want a story told well and i want audiences dying to come back for the third. a satisfying story involving the joker, leading toward a bang-up climax in the 3rd won't disappoint audiences so long as they've got an interesting support story. did people come out to see begins because it had the joker? no! i mean seriously... they're going to come anyway, and any joker involvement will keep them interested, especially if its moving toward something awesomer. anyway... i'm just rambling now.

Well of course they went to see BATMAN kickass. And be...Batmanish.

But they know The Joker is coming. I mean when that Joker card was shown..before it was even flipped. People went nuts. And this is maryland. That doesn't happen often It's hard to get a clap out of people.

People want to see what can be the ultimate showdown between the best Batman yet and The Joker.

Not exploring that would be wrong and unfair not just to comic fans but to people who's never really seen it outside of TAS which was still a cartoon.

You don't need to see Joker byhimself or with goons. You can show him with Dent or Gordon or Batman or killing people etc. And still have him be Batman. That's how I'm doing it(uh oh self plug) my script I'm...been working on for 10 months...I got busy okay. I had Joker tormenting Dent and even stabbing Gordon. Only really one scene with him and his guys alone. And in that he kills one of them.

He didn't overtake Batman or hell even Dent for that matter. But he still got enough play to make it a good Batman vs Joker story. Now I'm not expecting it to be done the same way. Cause...I'm not a proffesional But side lining Joker...there's no excuse you could give to make up for such a thing. And it's very easy to tie in Bruce's psychological torment with Joker's for some great stuff...that doesn't even have Joker mentioned let alone around for.

 

[Mr. Socko]

My point is, when the Joker is the main villian 99% of the time, he has just as much screen time/comic panels as Batman does.

 

[trustyside-kick]

Mr. Socko do you mean that you want him to be the main villain in the sequel?

 

[zer00]

My point is, when the Joker is the main villian 99% of the time, he has just as much screen time/comic panels as Batman does.

yes. But that doesn't mean Joker should have even equal screentime to still have a good amount of the J-man.

Think of Batman and Joker's screen time side by side

Batman: 100%

Joker: 80%

Even Dent and Gordon would probobly have more than that. But...Joker wouldn't have a small part. But still be done justice. And not even come close to overshadowing Batman.

 

[zer00]

Mr. Socko do you mean that you want him to be the main villain in the sequel?

The Joker?

the main villian in a Batman movie?

Are you out of your ****ing mind?