Joker Teaser Trailer

[doctorbadwolf]

I wonder if this movie will finally allow me to understand what the actual frack anyone finds interesting about the joker...

 

[Morrus]

I wonder if this movie will finally allow me to understand what the actual frack anyone finds interesting about the joker...

If you don't know yet, this movie isn't going to help you. I imagine if decades of comics and movies haven't had the desired effect, one more ain't gonna make any difference.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

If you don't know yet, this movie isn't going to help you. I imagine if decades of comics and movies haven't had the desired effect, one more ain't gonna make any difference.

You never know. All it takes is one good story.

edit: Inversion of famous character lines aside, I do like the Joker as part of the reason why Batman is needed. I despise the notion that Batman is the reason that his own rogue's gallery exists, so I like it when there is a joker that's been around since before Bruce lost his parents.

I just don't understand what could possibly be compelling about him as an actual character. There's literally nothing there. He..isn't actually a character. He's a talking plot device.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Also, this movie's treatment of Thomas Wayne seems incredibly weird, from what we've seen. Just seems like a change that has absolutely no need that it's fulfilling.

Edit: assuming that what little has been reported is even true, of course. Could be he is entirely in line with past portrayals of the sort of person he is, but the early reporting on the character notes basically describes the opposite sort of rich guy from any portrayal I think we've ever seen of the character.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Morrus]

Yeah. Joker and Vader. The two great iconic pop culture villains. Nobody comes close to those two. Even Hannibal Lecter, Thanos, Voldemort, and the Master are second league to those two.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Well, as Morrus already said ... if eighty (80!!!!) years of comics, TV shows, and movies haven't done it for you ... this probably won't, either.

Part of the issue is that there are more than one Joker- from the criminal mastermind, to the psychopath, to the campy goofy prankster. Just like there have been multiple Batmans.

But I think the essence of the Joker (for many fans) has always been in the way that he plays in relation to Batman; the yin to the yang, the amorality to the morality, the laugh to the dour, the chaos to the logic, the (yes) killing to the not killing.

It's really about about opposites, about thesis and antithesis, and (for the Joker) synthesis.

But YMMV- and not every story is like that. Personally, I find him to be one of the most interesting of the villains, but not everyone does.

Fair enough. I think the Joker is only interesting as an opposite to Batman, which, to me at least, means he is not at all interesting as an actual character, but I suppose not everyone is interested in him as an actual character? IDK.

He seems more like a shorthand, to me, than anything else. A quick way to pit Batman against the things that all his enemies represent in their own varied ways, without any of the background or buildup. He's a crime boss like Penguin, a laughing lunatic like Riddler, a violent unpredictable psychopath like Two-Face, etc, but you don't ever need to know or understand anything at all about him in order to understand the story, because there simply isn't ever anything about him to know or understand. He's a physically embodied archetype.

I guess I can vaguely see, through the foliage as it were, that others find that itself interesting? Still seems to me like even that, if I'm even right that people are engaged by that dynamic, isn't a case of finding him interesting as a character.


OTOH, Vader doesn't need any other character to be interesting. Or iconic. The Joker isn't iconic without Batman. Full stop.

 

[Imaculata]

Yeah. Joker and Vader. The two great iconic pop culture villains. Nobody comes close to those two. Even Hannibal Lecter, Thanos, Voldemort, and the Master are second league to those two.

But... but... his hands are so posable! And he has fruitpunch mouth!

 

[Zardnaar]

Of he does a good job he will join Ledger and Nicholson as one of the best.

The young guy from Shameless (Dominic Monaghan?) in Gotham he looked interesting in photos. Had stopped watching by that point.

Superhero movies not really my thing but liked the 1989 one and the Dark Knight trilogy. The 1989 one confused me a bit as I didn't see the bat in the logo but the golden tonsils. I was 11 and unfamiliar with Batman except the camp 60s tv show.

 

[Morrus]

Fair enough. I think the Joker is only interesting as an opposite to Batman, which, to me at least, means he is not at all interesting as an actual character, but I suppose not everyone is interested in him as an actual character? IDK.

He seems more like a shorthand, to me, than anything else. A quick way to pit Batman against the things that all his enemies represent in their own varied ways, without any of the background or buildup. He's a crime boss like Penguin, a laughing lunatic like Riddler, a violent unpredictable psychopath like Two-Face, etc, but you don't ever need to know or understand anything at all about him in order to understand the story, because there simply isn't ever anything about him to know or understand. He's a physically embodied archetype.

I guess I can vaguely see, through the foliage as it were, that others find that itself interesting? Still seems to me like even that, if I'm even right that people are engaged by that dynamic, isn't a case of finding him interesting as a character.


OTOH, Vader doesn't need any other character to be interesting. Or iconic. The Joker isn't iconic without Batman. Full stop.

You’re doing a lot of begging the question there. Your initial premise isn’t one others agree with, and therefore your conclusions as to why it is true lack foundation.