#1 Posted by GroovyAsh (162 posts) - - Show Bio

If you ask me, putting realism in comic book movies is one of the stupidest things imaginable and making Joker 'realistic' was dumb. I wanted to see crow bars, chattering teeth bombs and various other clown themed weapons.

Hell, even his appearance isn't very good to me. I would love to see The Joker from the Arkham games portrayed in films. To me, he is the perfect Joker.

This rant also goes to Bane and Scarecrow in Batman Begins/Dark Knight Rises, but I'm mainly focusing on Joker because he has been praised so much and people are always saying he's THE Joker now, which insanely annoys me.

Anyway, what do you think?

#2 Posted by sagejonathan (1990 posts) - - Show Bio

I understand what your saying, but I still really liked Nolan's Joker. It had a very sick, dark, and unique vibe. If he was done the way you said, it wouldn't appeal to the common audience.

#3 Edited by GroovyAsh (162 posts) - - Show Bio

@sagejonathan: Since when does a comic book movie have to appeal to a common audience? You who a comic book themed movie has to appeal to? Comic book readers!

#4 Posted by SheenLantern (6790 posts) - - Show Bio

@groovyash said:

@sagejonathan: Since when does a comic book movie have to appeal to a common audience? You who a comic book themed movie has to appeal to? Comic book readers!

I agree with you, but that movie would bomb.

Still, the Dark Knight was ridiculously overrated and so was Heath Ledger's Joker.

#5 Posted by SoA (4919 posts) - - Show Bio

scarecrow was great , ra's was meh, joker was good , and bane sucked. i liked the realism look . if they try to be too comic-booky you get batman forever/batman and robin . if you prefer those kind of films, more power to you

#6 Posted by TheManInTheShoe (3878 posts) - - Show Bio

I liked the TDK Joker, but yeah, the Arkham one is the most perfect. The next Batman movie they make (he should not be in MOS2) should include Joker-fish

#7 Edited by GroovyAsh (162 posts) - - Show Bio

@soa: Scarecrow was great?! He never once wore the proper suit, just a sack with a couple of holes and then he gets beaten by a woman with a taser!
Ra's was forgettable.
Joker was good, but not Joker.
Bane sucked.

Yes, weirdly enough, I enjoyed Batman Forever/Batman and Robin...

#8 Edited by Wolverine08 (43579 posts) - - Show Bio

A Comic book movie has to appeal to the common audience or else it will fail miserably at the box office. Us geeks make up a miniscule part of the box ofifice, and movie studios will not let their CBMs fail just to go out their way to please us. Anyways, Heath Ledger's Joker was awesome. Best CBM villain ever.

Online
#9 Posted by RulerOfThisUniverse (6358 posts) - - Show Bio

NO. JUST NO. YOUR OPINION IS WRONG.

#10 Posted by Bobsjonjon (231 posts) - - Show Bio

Ledger's performance was the best thing about the Nolan Batman films. Bane was a total joke and the Screaming Whisperer Bale was just awful!!!

#11 Posted by cattlebattle (12975 posts) - - Show Bio

The Nolan Batman films were a different take on the mythos. Batman wasn't even like Batman from the comics in those movies so naturally the villains were different.

I liked the Joker in that movie and I would say it was one of the best modern cinematic villain performances, but, I wouldn't say he is the Joker now, or thats how the Joker should be. I would also like to see a more comic book related Joker on screen.

#12 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6417 posts) - - Show Bio

I didn't really like it either. I don't get all the hype.

Online
#13 Posted by GroovyAsh (162 posts) - - Show Bio

Jack Nicholson was a better Joker.

#14 Edited by Wolverine08 (43579 posts) - - Show Bio

Online
#15 Posted by ImagineMan16 (466 posts) - - Show Bio

@sagejonathan: Since when does a comic book movie have to appeal to a common audience? You who a comic book themed movie has to appeal to? Comic book readers!

I'm sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong. Comic book movies aren't made for comic book fans. They haven't been for a long, long time. Do you think it was a relatively small niche group that made the Avengers such a massive worldwide success? Or the Dark Knight Trilogy? Or Man of Steel? Or the Iron Man trilogy? Or hell, even the Spider-Man films? Comic book movies are engineered for mass appeal. The comic-reading audience is a lot smaller than the non-comic reading one, so they would sooner alienate us, it would be a smaller loss. Movie studios are fueled by dollar signs, end of story.

It sucks that the people adapting the material that we love aren't doing it with our interests at heart, but if we hurry up and accept it, we can at least put aside our prejudices and enjoy these movies for what they are. And frankly, you have the wrong attitude anyway. If you love the source material, why would you want to drive others away from it? I welcome the common audience. Sure, it might not be in perfect form, and the audience might not be aware of that, but at least for once, everyone else is enjoying the same things that we are. At least we can finally talk about superheroes in public without being looked at like mentally deficient man-children.

The Dark Knight trilogy was NEVER intended to be an accurate portrayal of comic Batman. It was the directors vision of Batman, it was the telling of a new story through a different perspective on the character on the character and his world. Same with every other superhero movie ever made. In fact, the directors who change less are probably just the ones with less creative vision. These movies were never intended to be just for us, and that's fine.

#16 Posted by GroovyAsh (162 posts) - - Show Bio
#17 Posted by sagejonathan (1990 posts) - - Show Bio

@groovyash: I probably would have enjoyed the movie more if they made the Joker just like in the comics but the movie would not get enough money because many non-comic book readers wouldn't go watch it. They don't get money and we stop getting super hero movies.

#18 Edited by Wolverine08 (43579 posts) - - Show Bio

Online
#19 Posted by cattlebattle (12975 posts) - - Show Bio

@groovyash said:

Jack Nicholson was a better Joker.

How so?? Jack Nicholsons Joker was more or less Jack Nicholson with make up on. He was also represented as a mobster who just wanted to be more popular than Batman, he was kind of a media whore, there wasn't really much more to him than that. At least Ledgers Joker was just insane, it also touched upon his desire to not kill Batman, but, always have him there to try and stop him and why he poses such a great threat to him.

#20 Posted by GroovyAsh (162 posts) - - Show Bio
#21 Edited by Wolverine08 (43579 posts) - - Show Bio

Oh jeez, we got a purist who wants EVERY detail from the comics in CBMs.

Online
#22 Edited by Wolverine08 (43579 posts) - - Show Bio

Online
#23 Posted by Dernman (15228 posts) - - Show Bio

Nolan's Joker was an awesome take on the character. Joker has had multiple versions and this is just another one.

Online
#24 Edited by Wolverine08 (43579 posts) - - Show Bio

Online
#25 Edited by Jonny_Anonymous (33885 posts) - - Show Bio

Nolan is a crime director, what where you expecting?

#26 Posted by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

TDK was a great movie. It took the key elements of the Batman character, and took them into a more grounded setting. The villains are a reflection of that, and Heath Ledger made nothing short of a stunning and memorable performance as the Joker. The Joker here was turned from a clown-themed sociopath into a deranged anarchist.

Was it entirely comics-accurate? No. Was it an entertaining, well-portrayed, and ultimately-true-to-the-source-material depiction of the Joker in a more real-world universe? Yes. You might not enjoy the more practical take that Nolan's movies have, but there's no denying that it's a critically good one. Taste is subjective, merit isn't.

We're all comic fans here, and of course I wouldn't want a 'super-realistic Batman universe' every time I watch a comic-book movie. But that was Nolan's rendition, and it stayed faithful to the original Joker by giving him a new spin for a modern audience.

#27 Posted by GroovyAsh (162 posts) - - Show Bio

You really don't need to keep posting video links to The Joker. I've seen the movie and I didn't really like it.

#28 Posted by FadeToBlackBolt (23334 posts) - - Show Bio

It's never a good idea to open a thread with "I think/I like" etc... because it enables the immediate response of;

no one cares.

#29 Edited by Dernman (15228 posts) - - Show Bio

The only complaint I have about Ledger's joker is it makes him seem like he has dry lips. Every time he talked I felt like wetting my own. Still wouldn't change a thing though.

Online
#30 Posted by GroovyAsh (162 posts) - - Show Bio
#31 Posted by Wolverine08 (43579 posts) - - Show Bio

@groovyash:

I'm not posting the videos for you. I'm posting the videos so everyone can remember Ledger's awesome Joker performance.

Online
#32 Posted by DeathpooltheT1000 (11414 posts) - - Show Bio

@groovyash: Is not Nolan, is Jerry Robinson version, the original Joker.

The credit for creation of the Joker is disputed. Kane responded in a 1994 interview to claims that Jerry Robinson created the concept of the character:

Bill Finger and I created the Joker. Bill was the writer. Jerry Robinson came to me with a playing card of the Joker. That's the way I sum it up. [The Joker] looks like Conrad Veidt — you know, the actor in The Man Who Laughs, [the 1928 movie based on the novel] by Victor Hugo. [...] Bill Finger had a book with a photograph of Conrad Veidt and showed it to me and said, 'Here's the Joker'. Jerry Robinson had absolutely nothing to do with it, but he'll always say he created it till he dies. He brought in a playing card, which we used for a couple of issues for him [the Joker] to use as his playing card.[9]

Robinson has countered that he created the Joker to be Batman's larger-than-life nemesis when extra stories needed to be written quickly for Batman #1, and that he received credit for the story in a college course.[10] Regarding the character's similarity with Conrad Veidt, Robinson said:

In that first meeting when I showed them that sketch of the Joker, Bill said it reminded him of Conrad Veidt in The Man Who Laughs. That was the first mention of it...He can be credited and Bob himself, we all played a role in it. The concept was mine. Bill finished that first script from my outline of the persona and what should happen in the first story. He wrote the script of that, so he really was co-creator, and Bob and I did the visuals, so Bob was also.[11]

Does people even remember the original Joker back in the past, long before Mark Hamill, long before Jack Nicholson, long Before of Cesar Romero.

Joker in Batman #1 is using Make Up, using a cop costume and explains he has no origin, no other reason to do thing more that he pretty much enjoy this.

Take the fact he is also using the media to tell people what he is doing and why its doing it.

TDK is pretty much Batman #1 without Robin.

Nolan got back at The Original Concept of The Joker and build something new.

Nolan got help of Jerry Robinson the person that created the Joker and Heath had help of Grant Morrison.

Arkham Joker is again Hamill Joker again, the version people belive its the Joker and ignores the previous Jokers and other Jokers.

Nolan reallism was actually going back at original concept of Batman.

By 1942, the writers and artists behind the Batman comics had established most of the basic elements of the Batman mythos.[31] In the years following World War II, DC Comics "adopted a postwar editorial direction that increasingly de-emphasized social commentary in favor of lighthearted juvenile fantasy."

Online
#33 Edited by Black_Arrow (3410 posts) - - Show Bio

His joker was very similar to his first appearance announcing who will die, having make up, he dressed like a cop, the only thing missing was the joker gas but that was replaced with the knife. But he was based in that one

#34 Edited by batmannflash (6224 posts) - - Show Bio

A Comic book movie has to appeal to the common audience or else it will fail miserably at the box office. Us geeks make up a miniscule part of the box ofifice, and movie studios will not let their CBMs fail just to go out their way to please us. Anyways, Heath Ledger's Joker was awesome. Best CBM villain ever.

#35 Posted by kasino (1785 posts) - - Show Bio

love Heaths Joker, perfect to what the joker would really be. only way i could see any other joker surviving is being the joker from "Under the Red Hood" or Nolans.

Always make keeping him alive the best option because of the bomb he's holding, or in the cartoons case, lighter over fueled dunk hostages

#36 Posted by Mutant X (1543 posts) - - Show Bio

Thank God you're not in charge of these movies... lol.

#37 Edited by RustyRoy (13184 posts) - - Show Bio

Ledgers performance was LEGENDARY!

#38 Posted by RustyRoy (13184 posts) - - Show Bio

@wolverine08 said:

A Comic book movie has to appeal to the common audience or else it will fail miserably at the box office. Us geeks make up a miniscule part of the box ofifice, and movie studios will not let their CBMs fail just to go out their way to please us. Anyways, Heath Ledger's Joker was awesome. Best CBM villain ever.

#39 Posted by Xwraith (19295 posts) - - Show Bio

I still think TDK wouldn't have been nearly as successful if Heath Ledger were still alive.

#40 Posted by lilben42 (2556 posts) - - Show Bio

@wolverine08: I don't understand why fans can't just enjoy the movie for what it is. There will be different takes on the character but it shouldn't take away from the entertainment.

#41 Edited by Guardiandevil83 (5778 posts) - - Show Bio

I look at the movies as just another universe. This is what Owlman talked about in Crisis. Some worlds are similar some drastically different.