HBO DC's Joker

[Bow to Royalty]

According to this video Joker did not kill his neighbor

Figured this,because like he said, he only killed people that wronged him.

Dude took it a step further and said he had a code he lives by. That statement makes it even more obvious that he DGAF about who Joker is, and makes it even harder to believe this guy turns into the Joker.

 

[Duwop]

Figured this,because like he said, he only killed people that wronged him.

Dude took it a step further and said he had a code he lives by. That statement makes it even more obvious that he DGAF about who Joker is, and makes it even harder to believe this guy turns into the Joker.

Right, he had a whole motive, lane, personality, plight that was unique to him....

And it was at no point going to the direction of classic joker

 

[g-dog-ona-flytip]

I would expect a different joker though for the sequel. He’s evolved

There no sequel this is a one shot else worlds take on the character.

 

[Victory_Kid]

"I know it seems strange, I don't mean to make you uncomfortable, I don't know why everyone is so rude, I don't know why you are; I don't want anything from you. Maybe a little warmth, maybe a hug dad, maybe a bit of common decency!"

That's him asking for warmth, love, and decency from who he thought was his dad.

"Have you seen what it's like out there, Murray? Do you ever actually leave the studio? Everybody just yells and screams at each other. Nobody's civil anymore. Nobody thinks what it's like to be the other guy."

That's part of his final speech before killing the show host. He's crying out for society to be kinder, and more compassionate.

So naw, it's not easy for me to see that this man became a chaos loving maniac from what's been shown. The writer's dropped the ball.

Yeah, but after killing the host and being captured by the cops, he was smiling and happy at the movement he created. It was chaos and he felt alive more than ever. There's a reason for everything. How lame would it have been if they just told a story of a man who just loves chaos and killing people with no explanation to as how he got there?

I think yall just need to wait on the future installments and see where the writer(s) and the director take it to.

 

[Bow to Royalty]

Yeah, but after killing the host and being captured by the cops, he was smiling and happy at the movement he created. It was chaos and he felt alive more than ever. There's a reason for everything. How lame would it have been if they just told a story of a man who just loves chaos and killing people with no explanation to as how he got there?

I think yall just need to wait on the future installments and see where the writer(s) and the director take it to.

There's no intention of future installments. I said I'd look at it differently if there were. If there do end up being some, then they lucked into an opportunity to fix their mistakes, because this was supposed to be the only movie.

We view that scene differently. That movement, like his killings, had a reason. It was a class war. I think he was just happy he got more people to take action.

"How lame would it have been if they just told a story of a man who just loves chaos and killing people with no explanation to as how he got there?"

You jumped in late, and missed stuff. The entire issue is we don't feel like we got an explanation of how he got there. Some of us don't think they showed how Arthur Fleck is/becomes the Joker we know (as far as his characteristics). The stuff you quoted was stuff Arthur said that's nothing close to what Joker would say.

 

[Victory_Kid]

There's no intention of future installments. I said I'd look at it differently if there were. If there do end up being some, then they lucked into an opportunity to fix their mistakes, because this was supposed to be the only movie.

We view that scene differently. That movement, like his killings, had a reason. It was a class war. I think he was just happy he got more people to take action.

"How lame would it have been if they just told a story of a man who just loves chaos and killing people with no explanation to as how he got there?"

You jumped in late, and missed stuff. The entire issue is we don't feel like we got an explanation of how he got there. Some of us don't think they showed how Arthur Fleck is/becomes the Joker we know (as far as his characteristics). The stuff you quoted was stuff Arthur said that's nothing close to what Joker would say.

Yeah, the joker we all know wouldn't care to say that... down the road.

This movie is supposed to be the introduction of the joker.

 

[Bow to Royalty]

Yeah, the joker we all know wouldn't care to say that... down the road.

This movie is supposed to be the introduction of the joker.

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"

 

[Sony Montana]

I think y’all delving too much into how much of the “joker” is in this character when this isn’t a joker movie per se

if anything this woulda hit harder if it wasn’t called joker and the character names and city were different

 

[Bow to Royalty]

I think y’all delving too much into how much of the “joker” is in this character when this isn’t a joker movie per se

Bruh. The movie is titled Joker.

I said earlier I think it's a good movie minus trying to make him Joker.

 

[Sony Montana]

Bruh. The movie is titled Joker.

I said earlier I think it's a good movie minus trying to make him Joker.

A movie that’s called joker that’s loosely based on the joker though

 

[Victory_Kid]

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"

Ok fair, I get what you saying now.

 

[Duwop]

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

 

[Duwop]

A movie that’s called joker that’s loosely based on the joker though

Too loose

 

[TheNightKing]

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"

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 it’s feasible for Joker in the Joker movie.

Now if Batman was killing people indiscriminately like a murderer then it’d be real hard to make that leap to non-killing crime fighter.

 

[Bow to Royalty]

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 it’s feasible for Joker in the Joker movie.

Now if Batman was killing people indiscriminately like a murderer then it’d be real hard to make that leap to non-killing crime fighter.

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.

 

[Bow to Royalty]

A movie that’s called joker that’s loosely based on the joker though

You're right, and that's why they messed it up. Origin stories shouldn't just be loosely based on whose origin you're showing.

 

[Sony Montana]

You're right, and that's why they messed it up. Origin stories shouldn't just be loosely based on whose origin you're showing.

Yeah but the movie was a success so they would t view it as messing up you know?

 

[Duwop]

Yeah but the movie was a success so they would t view it as messing up you know?

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

 

[Sony Montana]

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

Me neither which is why I gave the movie a 8

 

[Sony Montana]