Suicide Squad
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
binkleywalker
Sr Member
..........
Athanasius
Active Member
No one's saying that this would be the actual joker's new origin story, they're saying that Jared Leto isn't playing the actual joker. This would be Jason Todd surviving the joker's attack and then being tortured and tattooed by the real joker until he goes insane and copies the joker.
I love the theory because it means that they can explain this version of the joker without the crappy tattoos and grill being the actual joker.
Also, seeing as how Leto's joker looks nothing like the Comic book version and is clearly not influenced by the Killing Joke, I'd say the chances of the Killing Joke origin being faithfully retold are absolutely zero.
I agree with you about killing joke being perfect for his backstory, but even if the Jason Todd theory isn't correct, they've already changed his design too much to be able to use that backstory.
I honestly hope this theory turns out to be true because it's the only way to even vaguely justify the design choices they went with.
Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk
harrisonp
Sr Member
I'm 100% on board with Leto Joker. I think he will do a great job and I like the look. Joker is multifaceted and appears with many personalities throughout the decades that he's been written, so this current iteration has just as much merit as any in the past. I absolutely believe that Joker is eccentric enough to sit and get tattoos, be it while holding the artist at gunpoint or while sitting around telling jokes. I think the reactions to the look are extreme, and that at the very least we need to give the movie a chance to come out and see how everyone feels once the credits roll. If that day comes and Leto ACTS the Joker terribly then I will be more than happy to eat crow and admit that people were right all along.
I absolutely hate the "Joker is Jason" theory because the Robins are some people's favorite characters (mine), and it is a complete disservice to those fans to make one of them into Joker just so they pull a switch and cast a more "real" Joker. Sure there has been a little bit of precedence with the Batman Beyond movie that made Tim have Joker's consciousness, but I still don't think it is a direction that they should go.
I stand by my claim that if Leto hits a complete home-run with his performance, but the look is still bothering people, DC could just handwave/retcon the tattoos and remove them from his design for future appearances. Joker has come back from having his entire face cut off, they can backpedal on some tattoos and dentistry.
I absolutely hate the "Joker is Jason" theory because the Robins are some people's favorite characters (mine), and it is a complete disservice to those fans to make one of them into Joker just so they pull a switch and cast a more "real" Joker. Sure there has been a little bit of precedence with the Batman Beyond movie that made Tim have Joker's consciousness, but I still don't think it is a direction that they should go.
I stand by my claim that if Leto hits a complete home-run with his performance, but the look is still bothering people, DC could just handwave/retcon the tattoos and remove them from his design for future appearances. Joker has come back from having his entire face cut off, they can backpedal on some tattoos and dentistry.
crabra comander
Master Member
If they retcon those tattoos i will lose my faith in Hollyw...wait i already have, see FF film thread for that example.
And are the rest of the Batman films gonna be prequels? Cuz, then the Jason Todd deal could work i suppose, since Jason Todd wpuld never be as good as the original Joker
harrisonp
Sr Member
Would a design change like that really be a deal breaker if everything else was good? Is it any worse than recasting a role? I'm assuming that the Batman movies will be sequels, and I'm hoping one of them will do the Under the Hood storyline,part of the reason I would hate for Joker to be Jason.
crabra comander
Master Member
Not if the story is amazing, but it will still leave me with the knowledge that the producers have no idea what to do with the character. Fantastic Four is a good example, taking so many liberties with the source and perhaps the story is good nut it's so far removed from the source that it's a mess. That's another thing Spider-man is doing, recasting, and they've left a bad impression on me.
thequackdealer
Active Member
Just looks like a bad ledger impression to me. Not impressed with what I have seen. Will have to wait for final judgment, but I'm still not excited.
Fawbish
Sr Member
*holds bridge of nose in tired frustration*
Seriously? Anyone can see that this joker is nothing like the predecessor. and if there are similarities? IT MIGHT BE BECAUSE THEY ARE SAME CHARACTER.
Literally 20 seconds of footage. I am so tired of seeing Ledgers name pop up. You can already see its going to be a different interpretation. Easily. And if it tanks/isnt good in its own right? Then fair play. But I still whole heartedly disagree (and think its pretty obvious) that whether he is as good as Heath is a totally seperate arguement than whether he is trying to emulate him. He isnt. The creative decisions alone behind this kind of movie would absolutely prevent that. Why do you think he looks so different!?!
Solo4114
Master Member
Recasting doesn't bother me. Actors age out or decide not to return to a role. It happens. No biggie.
I'd say the dramatic shift from the source material is the real problem. With the upcoming FF film, for example, it actually looks reasonably entertaining as a generic superhero film. However, it's not what I consider an actual Fantastic Four film. You can give people the same or very similar powers. You can give them the same names, even. And you know what? If you change pretty much everything else, though, are you really doing a [source material] film? Particularly with something like an origin story, at a certain point, all you're doing is stealing the most superficial aspects of the brand to apply to your own otherwise original material. If your original material is that good, let it stand on its own. If it isn't, maybe it doesn't deserve to see the light of day in any form, regardless of what brands are slapped on it.
Fawbish
Sr Member
Genuine interest (dont take anything badly) - would you apply the same logic to a multi-verse comic/film/alternate future/alternate character scenario?
The new FF film is simply another story using the basic premise? If we applied your logic, every story told between now and when Superman was first conceived arent really Superman stories, they are original stories with superficial superman details.
I agree completely about original works - but when you write a new story with an existing brand, isnt the whole point supposed to be that its new, yet it retains the familiar details?
Solo4114
Master Member
No offense taken. I think you're misinterpreting what I'm saying, or at least applying it way more broadly than I would.
The "capitalize on new brand" thing is exactly done for the reason you describe. I just find it's almost never really done well.
As for Superman, most of the film adaptations have retained plenty of the material that makes Superman Superman. (Although, even then, that doesn't guarantee a quality film -- I was seriously underwhelmed by Man of Steel.)
By contrast, the superficial details from FF that I see are the character names and powers....and that's about it. Although that doesn't even really apply with Doom himself. Otherwise, it's got next to nothing to do with FF source material.
Consider what differs:
- The racial makeup of the team (not a problem, mind you, but it is undeniably different from the source).
- The means by which they obtain their powers (interdimensional travel rather than mutated by space gamma rays).
- The nature of their foe (Doom is a hacker with biomechanical origins, rather than a dictator and genius who wears armor to conceal his mutilated face and amplify his power).
- The threat they face (interdimensional...uh...stuff... vs. cosmic threats).
Granted, the original FF has dealt with the Negative Zone, and there are threats emanating from there (e.g. Annihilus), but for the most part, this sounds like it has next to nothing to do with anything established in the FF comics, and basically just does its own thing, with only the names and powers of the main four characters translating over.
thequackdealer
Active Member
Whoah..... I just think the voice is clearly 90% ledger. It doesn't sound original, and I don't like the look. If he's great than that's fantastic, but right now I'm not excited. And your tired of seeing ledgers name pop up? Well when only one guy has done this character justice the new actor is going to be judged by that standard. Don't like the stupid tattoos, don't like the hipster hair and purple leather jacket, and I don't think he's being very original. Yes he looks different, but based on the line we've heard that sounds like it's pulled straight from ledger. I'm not gonna kill you, I'm just gonna hurt you. Really... Really... BAD. Most of you, myself included just read that in ledgers joker voice. I rest my case, still not excited and don't care that fanboys say I should be.
JD
Master Member
I tend to agree with you. I don't think it will be a 'bad' Ledger impersonation - but, based on what I've seen they seem to be borrowing heavily from the Ledger Joker... the way he talks especially seems derivative. We've seen so many versions of this character, it seems odd that they're using so much Ledger when you'd think they want to distance themselves from that rather recent, Oscar winning performance.
Obviously, they're trying to change the overall look of the Joker... but, a lot of those are so radical, that's it's become a distraction.
thequackdealer
Active Member
Father
Sr Member
Not impressed.
It looks like it humanizes at least a few of the bad guys, which is fine in terms of giving them depth. I guess it's interesting in that you see they do bad things for good reasons which creates somewhat of a dichotomy in that Batman (the good guy) also does bad things (beating the crap out of people and operating outside the law) for good reasons.
It might make for interesting future movies where the JL battles these "villains" since it'll make you question everyone's motives.
Or not... maybe I'm reading into it all way too much.
HQ looks cool but not consistently.
Joker... not impressed at all.
Everyone else... meh.
Like everything else, it doesn't mean I won't see it but I'll be going in expecting the worse.
It looks like it humanizes at least a few of the bad guys, which is fine in terms of giving them depth. I guess it's interesting in that you see they do bad things for good reasons which creates somewhat of a dichotomy in that Batman (the good guy) also does bad things (beating the crap out of people and operating outside the law) for good reasons.
It might make for interesting future movies where the JL battles these "villains" since it'll make you question everyone's motives.
Or not... maybe I'm reading into it all way too much.
HQ looks cool but not consistently.
Joker... not impressed at all.
Everyone else... meh.
Like everything else, it doesn't mean I won't see it but I'll be going in expecting the worse.
Mr Mold Maker
Master Member
And Heath was just doing a bad Tom Waits impersonation. Certainly didn't take a thing away from the performance.
I don't hear Ledger's joker at all in Leto's.. what is it... 13 words of dialogue in this trailer?
Solo4114
Master Member
And Tom Waits was just doing a bad Sinatra impression!
A really, really bad one.
Similar threads
