The Joker Thread - Part 1

[Boom]

 

[Vaibow]

The boy that never grew up, haunted by his scars.... lends itself to both Bruce and Joker.

 

[RokMeAmadeus]

I was gonna say, that's such a perfect parallel to Pattinson's Bruce

 

[Boom]

 

[Vaibow]

So, what was this interpretation of Joker that led to him being locked up?I haven't seen/read anything, do we know? Looking at him, it's a creepy kidnapper/child catcher vibe - hanging around kids as he relates to them, then murdering them. It's personal for Bruce.

I don't see the gangsta/mob vibe, just a psycho clown - I guess that would be different from the rest and very creepy... imagine flash backs to Batman catching him, in a haunted house, creepy circus type lair...

 

[WayneMB]

So, what was this interpretation of Joker that led to him being locked up?I haven't seen/read anything, do we know? Looking at him, it's a creepy kidnapper/child catcher vibe - hanging around kids as he relates to them, then murdering them. It's personal for Bruce.

I don't see the gangsta/mob vibe, just a psycho clown - I guess that would be different from the rest and very creepy... imagine flash backs to Batman catching him, in a haunted house, creepy circus type lair...

oh man... that sounds unsettling but in a good way. would like to see that inerpretation.

 

[Marvel united]

See, I actually find this quite fascinating. It's a bold, disturbing direction to take the character, and it makes the casting, and general vibe make so much sense.

It's just a shame that the actual writing doesn't reflect this, as I could see something closer to Telltale's Joker working quite well with Reeves' claimed thesis for his take As it stands now, the characterization presented in that scene doesn't match what Reeves says about this interpretation.

You'd assume that the elements of sadness, tragedy and rejection (central elements of the Elephant Man story) would be present in our introduction to this character, given Reeves CLAIMS as the defining elements of this "proto" Joker. But as it stands now, there's nothing "proto" about it. He already has a philosophy, he's already a serial killer, he already has a deep relationship with Batman, complete with an angle to psychoanalyze him.

It feels like lip service on Reeves' part, something he came up with on the spot to justify doing Joker again, never having any intention to actually commit to these ideas.

I could absolutely buy Barry Keoghan as a Joker reminisce of his character (Martin) in 'The Killing of a Sacred Dear', an almost innocent, child-like character, prone to violence, but extremely malleable and sympathetic to audiences due to a lifetime of mockery via his deformities. It would be amazing, and tragic and sad to see this character TRANSFORM into the Joker.

But if we don't see this origin, we don't see the "before" picture, we don't SEE these elements Reeves is referring to, how the hell are we supposed to appreciate the finished effect?

 

[CaptainWagner]

So, what was this interpretation of Joker that led to him being locked up?I haven't seen/read anything, do we know? Looking at him, it's a creepy kidnapper/child catcher vibe - hanging around kids as he relates to them, then murdering them. It's personal for Bruce.

I don't see the gangsta/mob vibe, just a psycho clown - I guess that would be different from the rest and very creepy... imagine flash backs to Batman catching him, in a haunted house, creepy circus type lair...

I mean, they're clearly going for the mastermind route, based on his scene in Arkham. Whatever it was that got him locked up, he definitely has bigger plans in this universe than being a powerless Pennywise. The 'rise of the freaks" in Reeves' Gotham is just beginning. So while this Joker definitely wasn't a crime boss before, I definitely think it's an option in the future. Similar to how we watched them take over in the original Long Halloween/Dark Victory story.

So - kid who got caught up with the wrong crowd, permanently scarred and stunted by an accident during a robbery, now wants to come back out and run the gangs with his own anarchic, hedonist style. "Because it's fun, and nothing really matters anyway."

 

[J.Drangal]

Looks great, I like how you can still see a bit of Keoghan and his childlike charisma.
The more I think about it, the more I think I could even accept that Joker having no hair. Again, on paper, I'd say that's too much of a deviation from the source, but picturing it now... Anyway.

On the statement above the pic though, before we start discussing how this direction was visible in the deleted scene or not, I just want to ask: what is the source? This doesn't sound like it's coming from Reeves himself and more from the person who tweeted this. Am I wrong ?

 

[Vaibow]

See, I actually find this quite fascinating. It's a bold, disturbing direction to take the character, and it makes the casting, and general vibe make so much sense.

It's just a shame that the actual writing doesn't reflect this, as I could see something closer to Telltale's Joker working quite well with Reeves' claimed thesis for his take As it stands now, the characterization presented in that scene doesn't match what Reeves says about this interpretation.

You'd assume that the elements of sadness, tragedy and rejection (central elements of the Elephant Man story) would be present in our introduction to this character, given Reeves CLAIMS as the defining elements of this "proto" Joker. But as it stands now, there's nothing "proto" about it. He already has a philosophy, he's already a serial killer, he already has a deep relationship with Batman, complete with an angle to psychoanalyze him.

It feels like lip service on Reeves' part, something he came up with on the spot to justify doing Joker again, never having any intention to actually commit to these ideas.

I could absolutely buy Barry Keoghan as a Joker reminisce of his character (Martin) in 'The Killing of a Sacred Dear', an almost innocent, child-like character, prone to violence, but extremely malleable and sympathetic to audiences due to a lifetime of mockery via his deformities. It would be amazing, and tragic and sad to see this character TRANSFORM into the Joker.

But if we don't see this origin, we don't see the "before" picture, we don't SEE these elements Reeves is referring to, how the hell are we supposed to appreciate the finished effect?

that's why that scene was deleted and we only had a vague scene in the movie... opens it up more...

 

[Vaibow]

I mean, they're clearly going for the mastermind route, based on his scene in Arkham. Whatever it was that got him locked up, he definitely has bigger plans in this universe than being a powerless Pennywise. The 'rise of the freaks" in Reeves' Gotham is just beginning. So while this Joker definitely wasn't a crime boss before, I definitely think it's an option in the future. Similar to how we watched them take over in the original Long Halloween/Dark Victory story.

So - kid who got caught up with the wrong crowd, permanently scarred and stunted by an accident during a robbery, now wants to come back out and run the gangs with his own anarchic, hedonist style. "Because it's fun, and nothing really matters anyway."

yeah, I don't buy that, you look at real gangs in cities, there's no way a bloke locked up In a mental asylum runs the gangs, let's be real - esp one with no connection to most gangs.

But then again we are basing this on a deleted scene.

All we did see was an inmate try and egg on another inmate and even that is open to interpretation. He manipulates - that's what we saw. Lends itself to the kidnapper angle, honing in on vunerable people.

If anything, they can work together to reach out to copy cat killers etc to mess with Batman - riddler already as pretty good at that, draw him back into Arkham for a riot like moment.

I just can't see this joker controlling gangs per se and he doesn't need too, I don't want this bond spectre like plot.

Joker can be locked up the whole time and still mess with bruce's mind, ptsd etc as a sub plot whilst we see many more villains.

 

[Marvel united]

Looks great, I like how you can still see a bit of Keoghan and his childlike charisma.
The more I think about it, the more I think I could even accept that Joker having no hair. Again, on paper, I'd say that's too much of a deviation from the source, but picturing it now... Anyway.

On the statement above the pic though, before we start discussing how this direction was visible in the deleted scene or not, I just want to ask: what is the source? This doesn't sound like it's coming from Reeves himself and more from the person who tweeted this. Am I wrong ?

I'm talking about Reeves' comments about Joker being a victim of society ala Elephant Man, and his origin as a "pre"-Joker. These statements do not match what is portrayed in that scene

that's why that scene was deleted and we only had a vague scene in the movie... opens it up more...

Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea of taking inspiration from the Elephant Man, because there's an insane amount of potential here.

To have Batman and Joker be mirrors of each other, one scarred physically, the other scarred mentally, both manifesting their trauma in opposite contrasts on a collision course with one another

 

[Batgirl0202]

Portraying Joker as a tragicomic figure would definitely mesh with the Phillips/Phoenix version of the character from the 2019 film.

However I think I prefer the Nolan/Ledger version. Joker as an agent of pure chaos. Shrouded in mystery, no past to examine for clues. Nothing to contextualize or rationalize. To me that's much scarier than that hoary old notion of how 'society creates its own monsters'...

Regardless of which direction they choose, I still think Barry Keoghan is an inspired choice for the character. He portrayed a young budding psychopath beautifully in The Killing of a Sacred Deer. He was charismatic, enigmatic, and projected a certain darkness that should lend well to Joker. Just don't forget about Joker's theatricality and impish humor, which are both cornerstones for the character.

 

[AndyTrevino]

Portraying Joker as a tragicomic figure would definitely mesh with the Phillips/Phoenix version of the character from the 2019 film.

However I think I prefer the Nolan/Ledger version. Joker as an agent of pure chaos. Shrouded in mystery, no past to examine for clues. Nothing to contextualize or rationalize. To me that's much scarier than that hoary old notion of how 'society creates its own monsters'...

Regardless of which direction they choose, I still think Barry Keoghan is an inspired choice for the character. He portrayed a young budding psychopath beautifully in The Killing of a Sacred Deer. He was charismatic, enigmatic, and projected a certain darkness that should lend well to Joker. Just don't forget about Joker's theatricality and impish humor, which are both cornerstones for the character.

This is entirely coincidental most likely, as the script for this was being written before Joker 2019 was even announced.

And I'd say they've already got the impish humor down, and Keoghan naturally has that kind of quality to him naturally so that's great

 

[CaptainWagner]

yeah, I don't buy that, you look at real gangs in cities, there's no way a bloke locked up In a mental asylum runs the gangs, let's be real - esp one with no connection to most gangs.

No one suggested he is CURRENTLY running the gangs. It's made very clear from the movie that Falcone had secured control over the Gotham gangs. Now, there's going to be a violent power struggle (this is literally spelled out in the movie) and that's the perfect chaotic vacuum for an escaped Joker to make a move in.

But then again we are basing this on a deleted scene.

All we did see was an inmate try and egg on another inmate and even that is open to interpretation. He manipulates - that's what we saw. Lends itself to the kidnapper angle, honing in on vunerable people.

If anything, they can work together to reach out to copy cat killers etc to mess with Batman - riddler already as pretty good at that, draw him back into Arkham for a riot like moment.

I just can't see this joker controlling gangs per se and he doesn't need too, I don't want this bond spectre like plot.

Joker can be locked up the whole time and still mess with bruce's mind, ptsd etc as a sub plot whilst we see many more villains.

No, I'm basing this on the scene that actually made the final cut. Personally, I found it very clear that he was being set-up as a mastermind in that scene. We have a power struggle among the Gotham gangs. We have a Joker intro. We know that we're getting more content on Penguin and Arkham before the next movie. It definitely makes narrative sense for Joker to be taking over the gangs.

 

[Marvel united]

Portraying Joker as a tragicomic figure would definitely mesh with the Phillips/Phoenix version of the character from the 2019 film.

However I think I prefer the Nolan/Ledger version. Joker as an agent of pure chaos. Shrouded in mystery, no past to examine for clues. Nothing to contextualize or rationalize. To me that's much scarier than that hoary old notion of how 'society creates its own monsters'...

Regardless of which direction they choose, I still think Barry Keoghan is an inspired choice for the character. He portrayed a young budding psychopath beautifully in The Killing of a Sacred Deer. He was charismatic, enigmatic, and projected a certain darkness that should lend well to Joker. Just don't forget about Joker's theatricality and impish humor, which are both cornerstones for the character.

In any other instance, I'd agree with you. In fact, I would've preferred Reeves lean even FURTHER into that direction by making the Joker a borderline supernatural, Michael Myers-lite figure. The "Pale Man" of Gotham; An urban legend, a scary story that Gothamites tell their children at night, the personification of pure evil:


I would've love to have seen a Joker that is so terrifying, and so devoid of humanity, that he makes even Bruce question his existence. It would serve as a parallel to how criminals saw Batman when he started.

But that's NOT the direction Reeves chose to go. Reeves chose to humanize the Joker, remove the mystique, and give a reason, a rhyme for his madness. So, given that this the direction Reeves chose, I expect him to commit to it, explore it, and not just have this "backstory" be something that exists in the foreground of interviews with the producers-- lip service that doesn't mean anything, inform the character in any way at all.

Reeves is contradicting his own writing

 

[Vaibow]

No one suggested he is CURRENTLY running the gangs. It's made very clear from the movie that Falcone had secured control over the Gotham gangs. Now, there's going to be a violent power struggle (this is literally spelled out in the movie) and that's the perfect chaotic vacuum for an escaped Joker to make a move in.


No, I'm basing this on the scene that actually made the final cut. Personally, I found it very clear that he was being set-up as a mastermind in that scene. We have a power struggle among the Gotham gangs. We have a Joker intro. We know that we're getting more content on Penguin and Arkham before the next movie. It definitely makes narrative sense for Joker to be taking over the gangs.

I didn't say he's currently running gangs..

I said that I don't buy he will end up running gangs, which you suggested... as that's totally unbelievable.

However, I can see him manipulating criminals into buying into his agenda...

 

[Batgirl0202]

In any other instance, I'd agree with you. In fact, I would've preferred Reeves lean even FURTHER into that direction by making the Joker a borderline supernatural, Michael Myers-lite figure. The "Pale Man" of Gotham; An urban legend, a scary story that Gothamites tell their children at night, the personification of pure evil:
View attachment 54757

I would've love to have seen a Joker that is so terrifying, and so devoid of humanity, that he makes even Bruce question his existence. It would serve as a parallel to how criminals saw Batman when he started.

Beautifully put good sir! I would just add, don't forget the theatricality. Joker may be a psychopath but at his core, he's also a huge dork who loves putting on a good homicidal show. Anything to attract Batman's attention

And you've touched on a serious pet peeve of mine. Genre films (particularly horror) rarely have subtext anymore. Hollywood now requires everything to have predictable narrative arcs...

I was watching the Black Christmas remake (2006 version) last December. Whose bright idea was it to give Billy a backstory? How much more terrifying was the 1974 original where there was no explanation for any of the bat**** craziness that went on in that film?

Anyway just a mini rant for a Sunday morning lol. And I would love if they went in the direction you described for Joker. But I do agree, if Reeves has a particular vision for the character, he should definitely have the stones to follow it through...

 

[AndyTrevino]

I'm sure they'll follow through with it somehow. Just because it wasn't laid out entirely in these two fairly short scenes doesn't mean they're doing away with this pitch completely.

 

[Vaibow]

In any other instance, I'd agree with you. In fact, I would've preferred Reeves lean even FURTHER into that direction by making the Joker a borderline supernatural, Michael Myers-lite figure. The "Pale Man" of Gotham; An urban legend, a scary story that Gothamites tell their children at night, the personification of pure evil:
View attachment 54757

I would've love to have seen a Joker that is so terrifying, and so devoid of humanity, that he makes even Bruce question his existence. It would serve as a parallel to how criminals saw Batman when he started.

But that's NOT the direction Reeves chose to go. Reeves chose to humanize the Joker, remove the mystique, and give a reason, a rhyme for his madness. So, given that this the direction Reeves chose, I expect him to commit to it, explore it, and not just have this "backstory" be something that exists in the foreground of interviews with the producers-- lip service that doesn't mean anything, inform the character in any way at all.

Reeves is contradicting his own writing

I love the idea of this, just make the joker this insane, evil villain... a monster of society - he is what he is and the imagination of why does all the hard work. He's Gotham's bogeyman.

Bruce saw the terror in Gotham's eyes, the fear and he knew he had to do something.

The joker plays up on it, clown prince of darkness... I like the idea, it's different too.

Beautifully put good sir! I would just add, don't forget the theatricality. Joker may be a psychopath but at his core, he's also a huge dork who loves putting on a good homicidal show. Anything to attract Batman's attention

And you've touched on a serious pet peeve of mine. Genre films (particularly horror) rarely have subtext anymore. Hollywood now requires everything to have predictable narrative arcs...

I was watching the Black Christmas remake (2006 version) last December. Whose bright idea was it to give Billy a backstory? How much more terrifying was the 1974 original where there was no explanation for any of the bat**** craziness that went on in that film?

Anyway just a mini rant for a Sunday morning lol. And I would love if they went in the direction you described for Joker. But I do agree, if Reeves has a particular vision for the character, he should definitely have the stones to follow it through...

Nice post!!!!

 

[Gamma Goliath]

I finally got around to watching the Green Knight while on a flight today, and Barry is in it briefly. I'd love if he brought that kind of cheeky, exaggerated energy to Joker. He had a lot of charisma in the little bit of time he was on screen.

 

[CaptainWagner]

I didn't say he's currently running gangs..

I said that I don't buy he will end up running gangs, which you suggested... as that's totally unbelievable.

However, I can see him manipulating criminals into buying into his agenda...

Okay, I thought you were arguing it was unbelievable for him to run the gangs from prison? How is it unbelievable for him to take them over once he gets out?

 

[antsman41]

...Barry's Joker is going to be a level-up than any Joker we have seen in live-action.

**** gangs and basic crime, he's going to control the Freaks. Riddler is his first recruit (aka puppet). I'm so excited for the future of this franchise.

 

[Vaibow]

Okay, I thought you were arguing it was unbelievable for him to run the gangs from prison? How is it unbelievable for him to take them over once he gets out?

Take a look at a real life gang, the organized crime, the levels you need to achieve, the network, the actual brains behind it all, the initiation to get into a gang... the power hungry members waiting to get to the top....

Only to let someone from Arkham control it?

Now, if we are talking about the Joker influencing people, riddler and his anons, having a freak army of sorts - to cause mayhem, to get that up and running... ok, but it's still huge ask - riddler is locked up - even for that... I assumed that's where Pheonix's joker was headed, copycat killers etc

I can see Joker like Hannibal Lecter - taunting him from behind the glass and I would assume that's what Reeves had in mind as that scene was very, very similar.

I guess we just have to wait and see.

 

[AndyTrevino]

Ok, I got it. If I’m wrong I will post a short video of me in full Joker makeup saying that I was wrong and BigBatTheory was right.

You can choose what happens if I’m right.

Welp.....