The Joker Thread - Part 1

[Boom]

I don't normally pay attention to John Campea, but I do agree with his take on this. Reeves should have either put both Joker scenes in, or cut both of them out. On its own, the scene with The Riddler was a bit jarring and it wasn't a particularly well-written scene anyway. Just called attention to itself. Maybe if the Arkham scene was still in the film, that last scene would've worked better, but I 100% agree with Reeves' decision to cut the scene. So here we are.

I know we are all just a bunch of bored fans wanting something to talk about, but Keoghan has literally played the character for 7 minutes' worth of screen-time - 5 minutes of which were cut from the film. Anybody crowning it as the "best Joker ever" or writing it off as a "Ledger imitation" are not giving it a fair and honest shake. There is simply not enough data to go off of yet.

I really like what I've seen and heard thus far, but I'm still firmly in "wait and see" mode.

 

[C Prometheus]

I don't normally pay attention to John Campea, but I do agree with his take on this. Reeves should have either put both Joker scenes in, or cut both of them out. On its own, the scene with The Riddler was a bit jarring and it wasn't a particularly well-written scene anyway. Just didn't fit. Maybe if this profiling scene was still in the film, that last scene would've worked better, but I 100% agree with Reeves' decision to cut the scene. So here we are.

I actually believe there was a fourth option that could have been taken for this conundrum that would have been ideal and optimal.

Both scenes needed to be in this film, but this first scene needed some key rewrites/minor reshoots to show more restraint on Joker's input on the mystery and not just immediately give the game away for the rest of the film as it pertains to Bruce's core arc and Riddler's part in that.

I'm one hundred percent with Matt Reeves in his decision to keep the other scene in the film. But I do agree with the consensus that the scene would have felt more organic and natural a development had this companion scene (with some key adjustments) also been present earlier in the film.

I know we are all just a bunch of bored fans wanting something to talk about, but Keoghan has literally played the character for 7 minutes' worth of screen-time - 5 minutes of which were cut from the film. Anybody crowning it as the "best Joker ever" or writing it off as a "Ledger imitation" are not giving it a fair and honest shake. There is simply not enough data to go off of yet.

I really like what I've seen and heard thus far, but I'm still firmly in "wait and see" mode.

I completely agree.

Like I said, the temptation is there for me. I love what little we've seen so far of Keoghan! But it'd be ridiculous of me to jump to that conclusion already, especially given the other incredible performances that have come before.

We'll see where Keoghan ultimately ends up in the rankings for his Joker eventually.

 

[BatLobster]

I typically really enjoy watching FilmSpeak's video essays and did my best to go in with an open mind on his opinions pertaining to Barry's Joker. His previous essay on The Batman was great, as were his videos on why filmmakers gravitate to Batman and on Batman Returns. And I'll definitely give him credit where it's due in acknowledging other performances like Michael Emerson's in the animated adaptation of TDKR and Jerome and Jeremiah in Gotham!

But I really had to take breaks throughout this twenty minute video, because as it went on, I really think his personal biases on several key parts are drastically coloring his opinion on Barry's Joker and the mere seven or so minutes of screen time he's had in the role so far to the point of reaching a bit beyond the pale. Mind you, his opinions and general stances are absolutely valid and I did my part to keep coming back to the video and listen to his argument through.

But then FilmSpeak opts to wax lyrical about how the prosthetics are causing Barry Keoghan to not emote or express enough on camera. This thought is a mind-boggling conclusion to come to when only going off of a five minute scene, one where the whole point of the camera work and directing is to have Barry emoting more than normal in order to pierce through the proverbial veil of a shallow depth of field to create a distinctive and living silhouette.

"Why aren't Barry and Matt Reeves doing anything new and original with Joker in this scene?" FilmSpeak asks, as if we've seen films do the Clarice-Hannibal type interrogations with Batman and Joker before. And then he goes on to acknowledge and credit how Reeves has the Joker act as the proverbial eyes of clarity in the cacophonous sea of perspectives and wayward vigilantes caught up in their own hype- and the inherent comedy to be found in that distinction... but then FilmSpeak adds on, "But come on, why can't he be a clown or a guy with makeup or just green hair?"

Long story short, FilmSpeak's primary problem seems to really just be the design. And again, it's perfectly fine to dislike the design! It's an acquired taste for sure. But the arguments he brings here feel disconnected and self-contradicting with this detail in perspective. Because while the writing of the scene is too on the nose with giving away the mystery overarching the film and Bruce's character arc, as a conversation between Batman and Joker goes, we haven't seen anything on film quite like it before. And it's a strong take on the dynamic between the two characters beyond just "Oh hey, look at this one guy, he's so crazy!"

Part of the scene's brilliance to me is how quiet and reserved Pattinson plays Batman throughout the scene. There's an unusual gentleness present with Batman here, even as the conversation flips against him and Joker starts prodding at him instead of analyzing Riddler. Compare that with how immediately tense and on edge Bale plays the whole of the Interrogation Scene in TDK.

This Joker is terrifying because as FilmSpeak rightly notes (but doesn't seem to fully process to himself), he's actually not just "crazy." He's brilliantly perceptive and manipulative. There's a subtlety present in the writing and performance from Barry that really speaks to me- but even I know that I can't just go around crowning Barry as the all-time great Joker or even remotely a serious contender for the crown off merely one five minute scene. But for all of the hooplah about how he's just ripping off Heath Ledger, I find it odd how the things that are sticking with me so much are what make this Barry stand out apart from the previous actors so far.

I enjoy FilmSpeak too, though I do agree he was definitely biased here and I could sense that, even if I'm overall somewhat mixed on the whole Joker reveal. It felt more like him just ranting his frustration than a serious analysis of the scene.

I understand the sense of frustration though. I think for some there is just an overall feeling that we didn't need this, and it whatever positives are there, it wasn't worth the compromising of what felt like such a self-contained movie movie to jam in this rather huge piece of world-building. It feels a bit self-indulgent, overall to me. It just feels weird to kind of drop Joker on us with no build-up. Even if this scene had been in the film, I just feel like....I dunno, it may have been jarring to just suddenly cut to Arkham Asylum and drop us into a full-on scene with The Joker out of nowhere. Which is still kind of how it felt in the scene at the end, but in that case it feels more like a typical MCU-style post credits tease.

Overall though, I agree with @Boom, there's simply not enough data yet to have an idea of what this interpretation of The Joker will ultimately be and how it compares to others.

 

[WayneMB]

I recommend everyone give this a watch, even if you like what you've seen

 

[C Prometheus]

I enjoy FilmSpeak too, though I do agree he was definitely biased here and I could sense that, even if I'm overall somewhat mixed on the whole Joker reveal. It felt more like him just ranting his frustration than a serious analysis of the scene.

I understand the sense of frustration though. I think for some there is just an overall feeling that we didn't need this, and it whatever positives are there, it wasn't worth the compromising of what felt like such a self-contained movie movie to jam in this rather huge piece of world-building. It feels a bit self-indulgent, overall to me. It just feels weird to kind of drop Joker on us with no build-up. Even if this scene had been in the film, I just feel like....I dunno, it may have been jarring to just suddenly cut to Arkham Asylum and dropping us into a full-on scene with The Joker out of nowhere. Which is still kind of how it felt in the scene at the end, but in that case it feels more like a typical MCU-style post credits tease.

Overall though, I agree with @Boom, there's simply not enough data yet to have an idea of what this interpretation of The Joker will ultimately be and how it compares to others.

And I think that's a perfectly fine position to have, even if I don't quite agree with you on the matter. Regardless of whatever I think, you have a totally valid position on the matter!

I just have a hard time accepting FilmSpeak's arguments here because the arguments themselves, as presented by FilmSpeak in that video, feel uncharacteristically awkward in how he puts them together and often have some rather hefty holes and contradictions that indicate more that FilmSpeak is just generally frustrated by a) the appearance of yet another Joker and b) that he really isn't a fan of his new design. Both of which, again, are totally acceptable positions to have! But they're not what he's trying to actually argue here.

I will say, much like with my previous suggestion to @Boom about making some slight adjustments to the dialogue for the Deleted Arkham Scene itself, I do think you could have made some slight adjustments to the dialogue in other scenes before and after in Acts 1 and 2 between Bats and Gordon that would fill audiences in a bit more on the history and build up to Joker's established presence in this Gotham City prior to the events of the film.

 

[BatLobster]

And I think that's a perfectly fine position to have, even if I don't quite agree with you on the matter. Regardless of whatever I think, you have a totally valid position on the matter!

I just have a hard time accepting FilmSpeak's arguments here because the arguments themselves, as presented by FilmSpeak in that video, feel uncharacteristically awkward in how he puts them together and often have some rather hefty holes and contradictions that indicate more that FilmSpeak is just generally frustrated by a) the appearance of yet another Joker and b) that he really isn't a fan of his new design. Both of which, again, are totally acceptable positions to have! But they're not what he's trying to actually argue here.

Yeah, I don't think he made a particularly strong point here.

We will just have to see how it pans out. The overall feeling for me with this Joker reveal has been one of "ripping off the band-aid". And going with that analogy, I guess it's inevitable that it's not going to be comfortable for some.

 

[RokMeAmadeus]

I recommend everyone give this a watch, even if you like what you've seen

Im gonna just guess... Something something, Joker fatigue, right?

 

[WayneMB]

i'm still trying to process where does Barry channel Heath. I dont's see nor hear that at all.
And it's a clearly new way to present The Joker. We haven't had a locked up manipulator joker yet.

And in my view, Matt made a great decision to cut the scene. It does not work in the film, but as a scene that happened "in universe" off screen,it works really well. It establishes Batman and Joker relationship, puts it on the timeline and tells us everything we need to know about Joker's character, how he shifts the conversation from the Riddler to startling Batman's mental.

 

[Boom]

i'm still trying to process where does Barry channel Heath. I dont's see nor hear that at all.
And it's a clearly new way to present The Joker. We haven't had a locked up manipulator joker yet.

And in my view, Matt made a great decision to cut the scene. It does not work in the film, but as a scene that happened "in universe" off screen,it works really well. It establishes Batman and Joker relationship, puts it on the timeline and tells us everything we need to know about Joker's character, how he shifts the conversation from the Riddler to startling Batman's mental.

The obscurity of the glass causes some of Keoghan's features to dissolve into impressions that are evocative of the Ledger aesthetic (i.e. the "panda eyes," the large red smile from cheek to cheek). The illusion completely dissipates ones you actually see him up close in full detail.

Ledger put on a high-pitched voice for his Joker, and Keoghan just naturally has a high-pitched voice, so there's some similarity in how they sound. I've been told that Keoghan is putting on certain inflections that evoke Ledger's, but honestly he just sounds like himself to me. And of course, there are certain key words in the Joker's dialogue that immediately call back to Ledger ("Commissioner," "Ahead of the curve").

I think those factors are subconsciously influencing people's perception a bit.

 

[C Prometheus]

The obscurity of the glass causes some of Keoghan's features to dissolve into impressions that are evocative of the Ledger aesthetic (i.e. the "panda eyes," the large red smile from cheek to cheek). The illusion completely dissipates ones you actually see him up close in full detail.

Ledger put on a high-pitched voice for his Joker, and Keoghan just naturally has a high-pitched voice, so there's some similarity in how they sound. I've been told that Keoghan is putting on certain inflections that evoke Ledger's, but honestly he just sounds like himself to me. And of course, there are certain key words in the Joker's dialogue that immediately call back to Ledger ("Commissioner," "Ahead of the curve").

I think those factors are subconsciously influencing people's perception a bit.

Yeah, I'll be more than happy to acknowledge and agree that there's influences of Ledger's Joker present here.

Or at least, it wouldn't shock me at all if we found out that the teams behind both iterations were fans of Lee Bermejo's Joker and had that as some level of inspiration while coming up with their designs. That said, I do think the silhouette of Keoghan's Joker through most of the scene actually reminds me most of Dave McKean's Joker in ASHOSE.

Most notably for his performance, to me, Keoghan seems to have implemented Heath's "lip smacking" tic that he did as Joker. I don't hear much similarity vocally personally. Barry and Heath pronounce and enunciate their words rather differently IMO.

 

[BatLobster]

I still think the "huh?" after "You think they deserved it.." screams Heath to me. He added a lot of those "huh"s and "hmms" into his lines. It's not just the high pitched voiced either, there's a specific back of the throat type of delivery that gives him a kind of snake-like quality that I also hear Barry tapping into here.

I would never call it a direct ripoff or anything, but as someone eloquently put it-- the lineage is there.

 

[DeadlyWest]

I still think the "huh?" after "You think they deserved it.." screams Heath to me. He added a lot of those "huh"s and "hmms" into his lines. It's not just the high pitched voiced either, there's a specific back of the throat type of delivery that gives him a kind of snake-like quality that I also hear Barry tapping into here.

I would never call it a direct ripoff or anything, but as someone eloquently put it-- the lineage is there.

I don't really recall Heath ever explicitly saying "huh" in TDK, for some reason. He tended to draw out the end of his sentences too much to do that, as far as I can remember. Been a while since I watched TDK admittedly though.

 

[RokMeAmadeus]

It was moreso "hmm" than "huh" for Heath. It's weird to even be saying that though, huh? A bit funny, hmm?

 

[chintai80]

there's some ledger dna in keoghan's performance as the joker, just like there's still some keaton + bale dna in rob's batman performance.

but keoghan's joker's characterization feels very different from ledger's.
he gets under people's skin psychologically more than ledger's did.
whereas ledger's was more about proving an ideological point.

 

[BatLobster]

I don't really recall Heath ever explicitly saying "huh" in TDK, for some reason. He tended to draw out the end of his sentences too much to do that, as far as I can remember. Been a while since I watched TDK admittedly though.

Haha ok so I just scrubbed through a few Heath scenes on Youtube and here were the "huhs" and "hmms" I found:

"I mean what happened...your b*lls drop off, hmm?"

"I just wanna see her smile again...hmm?"

"You truly are incorruptible, aren't you....huh?"

"Until they get a good look at the real Harvey Dent....huh?...and all the heroic things he's done."

I think the "huhs" are pretty much just in his final scene. I think the "hmms" along with a lot of the "uhs" he drops into his speech with the mob all kind of blended together for me into one tick. Point being, when I heard Barry do that it just instantly recalled Heath for me. TDK is just too burned into my brain not to notice.

 

[Art Vandelay]

If I have a problem with this Joker scene, it's that it goes against what Reeves himself has told us about who this character is supposed to be, and how he's not yet "the Joker". To me, that doesn't really play with what we've seen so far. This is maybe a more grotesque Joker that we've seen, but it still very much is the Joker, from the green hair, to the white skin, to his personality. When Batman comes in for his insight, Joker correctly reads the situation immediately. The scene plays out as if the two have had a long history. So, with that said, where else do they go from here?

You can show him in his element, the purple suit, the laughing gas, the whole nine yards, but from a character stand point, this very much looks like the Joker we all know. So when Reeves says this is a version of the character who is not yet the Joker, I have to think "Are ya sure about that, Matt?".

 

[chintai80]

that 5 minutes there was more comic book joker than jared leto and joaquin phoenix jokers combined.

 

[The Shape]

 

[BMW 224]

Do you guys think this Joker will have henchmen or followers ?

A mob presence ?

Or will be alone save for the other members of the rogue's gallery like Riddler.

 

[Luke995]

One of Ledger's primary inspirations was Alex and his Droogs.

Well, mainly from the visual pov.
There are many angles of Alex to explore for a new Joker.

 

[Razor Crest]

Made some Prisma art from the scene. I still love the look.

 

[Drop Head]

I can totally see this joker cutting his face off.

 

[AndyTrevino]

I can totally see this joker cutting his face off.

No thanks. He's more than messed up already; I feel like anything else would push this into edgelord territory

 

[Boom]

 

[AndyTrevino]

That Art Of book can't get here soon enough. I need to see more of him