HBO DC's Joker šŸƒ

I think yā€™all delving too much into how much of the ā€œjokerā€ is in this character when this isnā€™t a joker movie per se

if anything this woulda hit harder if it wasnā€™t called joker and the character names and city were different
 
Bow to Royalty said:
This was supposed to be the origin of the Joker we know. The director said he doesn't even know if Arthur Fleck is the Joker we're familiar with, or someone that came before him. He said he doesn't know who Arthur becomes, so he's writing an origin with no destination in mind, when he should know exactly who he becomes. That's why he messed up the character the way he did. He thought he had more freedom than he did when developing who the Joker is.

You wouldn't write a batman origin movie that just had him killing people on some Punisher shit because that's not who batman is. But apparently if someone did that yall would just say "Well of course the batman down the road wouldn't do that, but this is before that batman. Something in the future probably made him make that drastic change, and it's ok we're never told what that is. Great movie"
Click to expand...

Ok fair, I get what you saying now.
 
People literally are saying, he doesn't have to be joker to be joker...

As long as he eventually become joker,

And those people feel this joker eventually becomes joker....


I don't see that.

I see a dude with his own issues in a good movie that happened to be named joker.

Jeremiah and jerome valeska were both more joker than Arthur fleck
 
Bow to Royalty said:
This was supposed to be the origin of the Joker we know. The director said he doesn't even know if Arthur Fleck is the Joker we're familiar with, or someone that came before him. He said he doesn't know who Arthur becomes, so he's writing an origin with no destination in mind, when he should know exactly who he becomes. That's why he messed up the character the way he did. He thought he had more freedom than he did when developing who the Joker is.

You wouldn't write a batman origin movie that just had him killing people on some Punisher shit because that's not who batman is. But apparently if someone did that yall would just say "Well of course the batman down the road wouldn't do that, but this is before that batman. Something in the future probably made him make that drastic change, and it's ok we're never told what that is. Great movie"
Click to expand...
Not to get back into it too much, but your Batman analogy would work because his intention is to take out criminals, which is central to his character. Just like killing people and causing mayhem is central to Jokers. It would be feasible for Batman to make the turn to no killing later with your proposed origin movie. Just like itā€™s feasible for Joker in the Joker movie.

Now if Batman was killing people indiscriminately like a murderer then itā€™d be real hard to make that leap to non-killing crime fighter.
 
TheNightKing said:
Not to get back into it too much, but your Batman analogy would work because his intention is to take out criminals, which is central to his character. Just like killing people and causing mayhem is central to Jokers. It would be feasible for Batman to make the turn to no killing later with your proposed origin movie. Just like itā€™s feasible for Joker in the Joker movie.

Now if Batman was killing people indiscriminately like a murderer then itā€™d be real hard to make that leap to non-killing crime fighter.
Click to expand...

Then we just differ in expectations there. I'd be okay if they had batman killing people, then addressed what made him stop (and become like the batman we know). But if the last thing I see is him gunning some people down, then they messed up. At that point you can do anything you want in an origin story, and lazily say everything happened and changed later.

Im not saying they need to lead right up to where other movies start off, but they do need to make the path clear.
 
Beta said:
Yeah but the movie was a success so they would t view it as messing up you know?
Click to expand...
The movie was a success and a good movie,

There are just people who didn't feel the character really captures the essence of the Joker or what he was supposed to be.

I liked it, but I'll prolly never watch it again
 
Duwop said:
The movie was a success and a good movie,

There are just people who didn't feel the character really captures the essence of the Joker or what he was supposed to be.

I liked it, but I'll prolly never watch it again
Click to expand...
Me neither which is why I gave the movie a 8
 
Yall really went deep with it

Its still possible that a sequel can be made where his killings become more random and deranged with a story as to how he became more sinister.
 
I can understand these complaints if this was the sequel. But itā€™s his origin story itā€™s showing us how he became the Joker. Maybe he started off only killing people who he felt wronged him, then it evolves from there...
 
There can be no sequel if he wonā€™t ever be tied to Bruce who by the time Bruce becomes Batman he would be geriatric. It ainā€™t happening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top