Joker (origin film)

[Mr Webber]

No gadgets, no super human feats and seemingly no large set pieces. I cant wait. At first I wanted to get straight to the dessert and see more of full blown Joker but now I want to savor the main course that is Arthur Fleck. The entrees of that brilliant 30 second tease and the two trailers are the best I`ve seen in many, many years.

 

[Apollo]

Do or do not, there is no try

I'm going to try to get my butt to the theater to see it!

 

[Psab keel]

Mom! These rocks are too heavyy!!!

 

[vader45]

While the trailer really got me interested in the film, that was a really good trailer, I just don't understand the direction it's taking.

Do we need another Joker who intentionally puts on the make up and persona like Ledgers Joker did?

What happened to the real original origin of the acid stained face from an accident from a confrontation with Batman? As far as I know only one live action source that stayed true was Burton's Batman.

I'm not a fan of the crazy driven personality that creates the Joker persona. But the persona created as a result of an incident that leaves him looking like a clown forever and gets revenge against Batman for it, Al la Tim Burton's Batman.

 

[Psab keel]

As far as I understand there are a number of origin stories for the Joker in the 80 year history of the character in the comics.

As much as I enjoy the Tim Burton take I do enjoy the wealth of interpretations for the character which at least in spirit honors his enduring legacy by having different variations. Not all of them were good (Suicide Squad much???) but it's unlike something like Star Wars which I don't feel needs each generation's stamp on the characters.

Comics are a naturally evolving art form that easily lends itself to different writers exploring the same concept in new ways where something like Star Wars (at least the saga films) are more rigid in their structure and to stray too far outside of that it falls apart.

I'm very much looking forward to this new Joker movie as it feels like a natural exploration of the character and when you consider the discussions surrounding mental illness, it feels relevant to the era in which we live.

Again I must reiterate that as long as the filmmakers and actors themselves don't engage too much into the political aspects of the questions this movie might raise then I am all for it. I say that cautiously though because if they do then it goes from elevating film as an art into debasing it into propaganda disguised as art.

 

[Strikerkc]

What happened to the real original origin of the acid stained face from an accident from a confrontation with Batman? As far as I know only one live action source that stayed true was Burton's Batman.

As was just mentioned, there's no truly Canon creation story behind the joker. Each television series, comic series, and film series, gets to take crack at it however they want, if they even want to.

Joker in the Tim Burton movies has a certain origin. That origin is different from the joker in red Hood. And seems like it would need to be different from the Heath ledger joker. And appears to be different from the Phoenix Joker. The red Hood joker, despite being animated, clearly seems to have a different origin from the Mark Hamill joker, from an earlier animated series.

Honestly that's one of the things that I enjoy most about comic series. The ability to use the same characters to tell different stories. You can make tweaks to how characters met, or how they came to be, or how they were raised. But then you can drop them in the same suit and persona that we've seen before, and we get a new feeling a new flavor for how they got there, and potentially what they'll do now.

 

[vader45]

As was just mentioned, there's no truly Canon creation story behind the joker. Each television series, comic series, and film series, gets to take crack at it however they want, if they even want to.

Joker in the Tim Burton movies has a certain origin. That origin is different from the joker in red Hood. And seems like it would need to be different from the Heath ledger joker. And appears to be different from the Phoenix Joker. The red Hood joker, despite being animated, clearly seems to have a different origin from the Mark Hamill joker, from an earlier animated series.

Honestly that's one of the things that I enjoy most about comic series. The ability to use the same characters to tell different stories. You can make tweaks to how characters met, or how they came to be, or how they were raised. But then you can drop them in the same suit and persona that we've seen before, and we get a new feeling a new flavor for how they got there, and potentially what they'll do now.

I understand what you are saying. His origin changes a bit so why don't they change it again for this movie? It appears they are just following Nolan's approache with the character, a deranged maniac using the joker persona. It would be a nice change of they implemented the stained face version of the origin because it was the most widely used origin in the comics from the original Detective Comics Issue to The Killing Joke. It doesn't have to be exact just another spin on the origin that's closer to the source material because Ledger and Leto were not even close. It would be nice to acknowledge the comics a bit more.

 

[Strikerkc]

 

[vader45]

View attachment 1055111

Is that towards my reply? I hope not!

 

[Seabass]

The multiple Joker origins has actually has worked out pretty well, if you look at The Killing Joke

 

[Psab keel]

Instinctively the voice I heard when I read that panel was Mark Hamill's!

 

[CT1138]

The multiple Joker origins has actually has worked out pretty well, if you look at The Killing Joke


View attachment 1055221

Beat me to the post!

 

[Ron]

Two questions I've been thinking about:

1. Will we see a young or even old Bruce Wayne?
2. Do we even want to see Bruce Wayne at all?

I kind of feel like it would be better to just leave him out of it than trying to shoehorn him in.

 

[JoeG]

1. Yes. If you saw the teaser trailer that was released back in April, you've already seen him.

2. Based on the most recent trailer and who the main antagonist might be, it seems kind of inevitable.

 

[Ron]

I didn't watch the second trailer, I'm trying to avoid ANYTHING that could spoil something. But in the first trailer is it the little boy that he puts a smile on? I wondered if that might be him. Which would mean that the interview the Joker is watching about "someone who hides behind a mask" is probably related to the Wayne family murders?

I just watched it again and I noticed the boy is holding flowers. And the gate he's standing behind looks like it could be Wayne Manor. So the Joker visits Bruce to cheer him up or a scene along those lines? That could actually be really cool! Way better than a fan service cameo.

Ugh I really want to watch that second trailer now...but I'm not lol.

 

[JLeezy23]

I read somewhere that the laugh was inspired by watching mental patients on videos, Arthur laughs when he's nervous or scared.

My theory about Joker putting a smile on Young Bruce is that he consoles Bruce and he tells him how easy it is for 1 single person can change the world. Telling him all it takes is 1 person to flip the city upside down... And this speech gives Bruce the idea to become a hero, to become the 1 person who will turn Gotham around.

I also think Arthur was always messed up, and he finally lets lose because madness is the emergency exit. His therapist sees there is nothing to do to fix him. In a world gone mad, why be normal? I dont see him as a victim of society, but him blending in to fit the surroundings he lives in.

Each iteration of Gotham City has always been political, its a crime paradise filled with poverty, while the rich sit back and count their money. I think Bruce became Batman because he knows the rich do not care for the poor. Thomas wanted to help the entire city, and was murdered before he can see it go into fruition. So a little bit of political agenda is a given for any story taking place in Gotham, no acception for this film

 

[Ron]

I also think Arthur was always messed up, and he finally lets lose because madness is the emergency exit. His therapist sees there is nothing to do to fix him. In a world gone mad, why be normal? I dont see him as a victim of society, but him blending in to fit the surroundings he lives in.

I'm thinking the same. And for the sake of avoiding clichés, I don't think you necessarily need a tragic event to spur the transformation of Arthur into the Joker. He could just have a simple epiphany that he's just a madman living in a mad world and why fight it anymore?

I'm telling you guys there's something about this movie. We might be giving it unrealistic expectations but damn it looks so good.

 

[PantheraGem]

I think his mother is what motivates him to try to keep a grip on his sanity. That's what I've inferred so far.

 

[Gimpdiggity]

1. Yes. If you saw the teaser trailer that was released back in April, you've already seen him.

2. Based on the most recent trailer and who the main antagonist might be, it seems kind of inevitable.

Joe who do you think the main antagonist is going to be?

 

[joberg]

Oscar for Phoenix on that one!! As for the girl, she'll leave him seeing that he cannot get a handle on his psychosis...