JOKER - Teaser Trailer

ShadowKingpin

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,337
Please.

THis has never happened ever, every time you give a backstory to a well known charterer that character is ruined. It's not evil anymore, it's just another victim.

Rubbish
Not at all. Backstories are usually a great way to understanding a character’s motives or why they are the way that they are. Some movies here and there aren’t needed, but a stand-alone artistic, dark thriller about the Joker starring one of the finest methodical actors ever? Count me in! Besides, the Joker didn’t just magically appear as an evil adult. He became that way through a shitty life. People want to see that and I can tell you it sure as hell doesn’t ruin the character to see him from a different perspective.
 

Assenzio

Alt account
Banned
Mar 18, 2019
775
Not at all. Backstories are usually a great way to understanding a character’s motives or why they are the way that they are. Some movies here and there aren’t needed, but a stand-alone artistic, dark thriller about the Joker starring one of the finest methodical actors ever? Count me in! Besides, the Joker didn’t just magically appear as an evil adult. He became that way through a shitty life. People want to see that and I can tell you it sure as hell doesn’t ruin the character to see him from a different perspective.
Backstories there from the start. Backstories made for carachters that did not have a defined one are rubbish.

And we have many many example.

Tho whole point of the Joker is exactly that or at least was. There is no reason, he is pure evil.

In the world there are people like this, not every bad perpetrator has a sad backstory. Some are just born like that and make those choices driven by themselves only. This is the Joker.

The "Dark Knight" sentence " some men just want to see the world burn" was not there randomly. That's the joker.

An evil so evil you cannot have empathy , structure or reason
 
Oct 25, 2017
526
I hate that they're giving him an origin here instead of just copying what they did in Dark Knight. There's only ever been one interpretation of the Joker through all of the comics and they need to stick with that. It's the reason that Alan Moore's The Killing Joke is widely considered trash by comic book fans. Don't even get me started on the '89 Batman film. When I went to go see it as a kid with my dad, as soon as I realized they were giving Joker a backstory I demanded that my father and I leave the theatre and ask for a refund.
 

ShadowKingpin

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,337
I hate that they're giving him an origin here instead of just copying what they did in Dark Knight. There's only ever been one interpretation of the Joker through all of the comics and they need to stick with that. It's the reason that Alan Moore's The Killing Joke is widely considered trash by comic book fans. Don't even get me started on the '89 Batman film. When I went to go see it as a kid with my dad, as soon as I realized they were giving Joker a backstory I demanded that my father and I leave the theatre and ask for a refund.
Considered trash? I have only ever heard nothing but fantastic things about it (I quite enjoy it myself) from others and just now looking at all of the graphic novel reviews all over different websites, it’s at a 4.5/5 from thousands of reviews. That doesn’t scream “trash” to me.
 

OtherWorldly

Member
Dec 3, 2018
1,867
The Russo's career pre-MCU was far more impressive than Todd Phillips'. Yes, the Russo's didn't have the most impressive movie track record, but their tv stuff was very well received. I mean, they were one of the parties behind the start of what is considered by many to be one of the best comedy shows of all time (Arrested Development). And of course they were one of the main creative forces behind Community, a show that is also loved by many and a critical darling.

Todd Phillips' most notable career achievement is co-writing Borat and, uhm, giving the world The Hangover, I guess.

There's also the fact that this seems to be DC doing a Logan-esque film (where the director basically has full say over what kind of movie he wants to make), which is vastly different than the MCU Russo films, which have been mostly devoid of a personal touch. It's very obviously trying to evoke classic Scorsese films, which is a type of film Todd Phillips has never, ever made before, so of course people are a bit wary considering (almost) all Todd Phillips has done so far are middle-of-the-road comedies and not strong character drama.

Now I'm also looking forward to Joker, the trailer looks interesting and the concept sounds good, but comparing Phillips with the Russo's is weird. This movie seems to be something totally different than what the MCU is going for.
I’m only referring to movies
 

BlackFyre

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,491
I hate that they're giving him an origin here instead of just copying what they did in Dark Knight. There's only ever been one interpretation of the Joker through all of the comics and they need to stick with that. It's the reason that Alan Moore's The Killing Joke is widely considered trash by comic book fans. Don't even get me started on the '89 Batman film. When I went to go see it as a kid with my dad, as soon as I realized they were giving Joker a backstory I demanded that my father and I leave the theatre and ask for a refund.
Damn. People like you should stay away from movies then.
 

Solid SOAP

Member
Nov 27, 2017
576
A movie can stand on its own, but this much build up of an iconic character just to kill him off is something I personally don’t want to get attached to.
Well, I believe that's precisely the idea. I mean, we don't know if he dies or not, frankly at this point it doesn't matter, but a good film will want you to get attached to a character you love so their death is all the more tragic. I believe the director stated that this is a tragedy, and Joaquin has stated multiple times he doesn't want any franchise deals, so I don't reckon we're getting this Joker again.

What I don't understand though is the need to be attached to a character for several films. LIke, I get it. The "canon" DCEU Joker sucks, as does a lot of that canon, but so what? I'd rather DC make one-off character study movies like this and TDK than haplessly connect their inane movies to each other. We don't need epic sagas, Marvel has that covered, DC should focus on making singular films like this that are strong on their own.

If this is a great performance I’m not going back to watching Leto Joker movies.
Whether this performance is great or not I don't think anyone wants any more Leto as the Joker LOL
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,473
Well, I believe that's precisely the idea. I mean, we don't know if he dies or not, frankly at this point it doesn't matter, but a good film will want you to get attached to a character you love so their death is all the more tragic. I believe the director stated that this is a tragedy, and Joaquin has stated multiple times he doesn't want any franchise deals, so I don't reckon we're getting this Joker again.

What I don't understand though is the need to be attached to a character for several films. LIke, I get it. The "canon" DCEU Joker sucks, as does a lot of that canon, but so what? I'd rather DC make one-off character study movies like this and TDK than haplessly connect their inane movies to each other. We don't need epic sagas, Marvel has that covered, DC should focus on making singular films like this that are strong on their own.


Whether this performance is great or not I don't think anyone wants any more Leto as the Joker LOL
I just don’t like the idea of constantly switching actors for the same role. But it’s really just a personal preference of mine.
 
Last edited:

Disco

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,099
I hate that they're giving him an origin here instead of just copying what they did in Dark Knight. There's only ever been one interpretation of the Joker through all of the comics and they need to stick with that. It's the reason that Alan Moore's The Killing Joke is widely considered trash by comic book fans. Don't even get me started on the '89 Batman film. When I went to go see it as a kid with my dad, as soon as I realized they were giving Joker a backstory I demanded that my father and I leave the theatre and ask for a refund.
Lol
 

Calamari41

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,524
A movie can stand on its own, but this much build up of an iconic character just to kill him off is something I personally don’t want to get attached to.
I just don’t like the idea of constantly switching actors for the same role. But it’s really just a personal preference of mine.
I mean, does it really matter? Would The Dark Knight have been worse if it was a standalone release, the only Nolan Batman film? Is it worse than it would have been if Heath Ledger had shown up in Rises? We never see that Joker again either, he might as well have died at the end of TDK.

The fact that Joaquin won't be facing off against the assembled Justice League in five years after being featured in four more DC movies shouldn't matter, as long as this movie itself is good.
 

Solid SOAP

Member
Nov 27, 2017
576
I just don’t like the idea of constantly switching actors for the same role. But it’s really just a personal preference of mine.
I get that, but would understand it more if this movie was intended to take place in the same universe as the DCEU. It's its own thing, though. Batman's actor is always changing when a new story is told, and this is by and large a new story about a new Joker that likely will never be replicated.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,473
I mean, does it really matter? Would The Dark Knight have been worse if it was a standalone release, the only Nolan Batman film? Is it worse than it would have been if Heath Ledger had shown up in Rises? We never see that Joker again either, he might as well have died at the end of TDK.

The fact that Joaquin won't be facing off against the assembled Justice League in five years after being featured in four more DC movies shouldn't matter, as long as this movie itself is good.
We don’t see him again because Ledger passed away. Joker was supposed to be in Rises but out of respect for Ledger they refused to recast Joker with a different actor, and I honestly feel they made the correct choice.
 

Solid SOAP

Member
Nov 27, 2017
576
I mean, does it really matter? Would The Dark Knight have been worse if it was a standalone release, the only Nolan Batman film?
I like that you brought up this point. The Nolan trilogy as a whole is quite good; Begins is great, TDK is unprecedented and TDKR is... alright. However, TDK is always the go-to for a rewatch because it's a damn good movie. It doesn't need to be connected to Begins or Rises to be good, and in fact would've suffered if they decided to shove weird cameos into it in order to foster a shared "universe."

The industry needs movies like Logan, Joker, and Spider-Verse. CBMs that are films first and adaptations second. I don't care much for super heroes these days, so I'm likely only going to see one-off movies as it is.
 

rashbeep

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,048
I hate that they're giving him an origin here instead of just copying what they did in Dark Knight. There's only ever been one interpretation of the Joker through all of the comics and they need to stick with that. It's the reason that Alan Moore's The Killing Joke is widely considered trash by comic book fans. Don't even get me started on the '89 Batman film. When I went to go see it as a kid with my dad, as soon as I realized they were giving Joker a backstory I demanded that my father and I leave the theatre and ask for a refund.
this is great
 

carlosrox

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,028
Vancouver BC
Rewatched it and I'm feeling the vibe a bit more.

This goes well past the realism Nolan began with...Begins.

Is this the first time something like this has been attempted with a property like this, that isn't fan made?

Didn't know Scorsese was attached to it, that's pretty crazy. If this does well which I assume it will, I could see this uber gritty and realistic take becoming a trend, for better or worse.
 

Starshine

Member
Oct 25, 2017
79
That was a damn fine trailer, and has me interested in the film less in a comic book way but more of a character study. For me, seeing Joaquin do his thing is worth the price of admission based on this trailer alone.
 

Solid SOAP

Member
Nov 27, 2017
576
Didn't know Scorsese was attached to it, that's pretty crazy. If this does well which I assume it will, I could see this uber gritty and realistic take becoming a trend, for better or worse.
I don't think it'll become a trend in the sense of there beings tons of movies replicating it, like DC are trying to do with Marvel, but I think that Logan and Deadpool proved that adults are willing to pay for R-rated comic book movies, so there simply will be more CBMs geared towards that audience. Joker, if anything, is following that trend.
 

Braag

Member
Nov 7, 2017
648
Well damn, I haven't been interested in any DC or Marvel movies for a while now, but this looks great.
 

carlosrox

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,028
Vancouver BC
I don't think it'll become a trend in the sense of there beings tons of movies replicating it, like DC are trying to do with Marvel, but I think that Logan and Deadpool proved that adults are willing to pay for R-rated comic book movies, so there simply will be more CBMs geared towards that audience. Joker, if anything, is following that trend.
I forgot about Logan, but this still takes it a step further than that.

Logan wasn't as grounded as this appears to be.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,239
I went and found the source for IMDB's listing since IMDB is about as reliable as 4chan for unreleased content.
https://comicbook.com/dc/2018/10/23/joker-bruce-wayne-cast-dante-pereira-olson/

Well that's interesting. So the guy playing Joker is 44 and Bruce is 10/11.
Bruce generally becomes Batman on average around 25ish, so if this Bruce followed the trend then Joker would be 58 when they finally clashed.

It's different but I could still imagine it in this universe. I never really liked the interpretations of the Joker that ended up getting too physical with Batman. I always viewed him more as a manipulator than a fighter, and he doesn't need to match Batman physically to do that. And Batman still won't kill him. Same stalemate as usual.
 

Solid SOAP

Member
Nov 27, 2017
576
I forgot about Logan, but this still takes it a step further than that.

Logan wasn't as grounded as this appears to be.
For sure. Batman as a series though always has been able to be more grounded than practically every other super hero franchise though considering how many characters in it are simply just human beings.

I don't think we'll see a "grounded" Wolverine or Spider-Man. They're just too, erm, "super" to do it right. Joker is a crazy clown in make-up... but that story can be told in so many different ways that it's possible to make it suitable for kids and adult, or make it as grounded or silly as they want.
 

TheBaldwin

Member
Feb 25, 2018
3,339
I usually really dislike the joker, but this actually has me interested. Seeing gotham (?) slowly break him down and have him go insane slowly seems like an interesting character film.

Plus im always in for zazie
 

Calamari41

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,524
Yikes... talk about verbal gymnastics.

That has absolutely nothing to do with what we were discussing.
You said that you don't prefer to get invested in a portrayal of a character if they're just going to switch out the actor the next time, or if they're not going to appear in a sequel (i.e., if they're killed). Heath Ledger appeared one time as the Joker, and his specific version of the Joker didn't appear again, and I was just trying to point out that the fact that he didn't re-appear later did not lessen the quality or impact or enjoyability of his one performance.

I'm certainly not trying to use any verbal gymnastics, I've been trying to explain the same thing in the same way in each post I've made.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,473
You said that you don't prefer to get invested in a portrayal of a character if they're just going to switch out the actor the next time, or if they're not going to appear in a sequel (i.e., if they're killed). Heath Ledger appeared one time as the Joker, and his specific version of the Joker didn't appear again, and I was just trying to point out that the fact that he didn't re-appear later did not lessen the quality or impact or enjoyability of his one performance.

I'm certainly not trying to use any verbal gymnastics, I've been trying to explain the same thing in the same way in each post I've made.
“I understand that, but does that make The Dark Knight worth less?”

That is a direct quote from you talking about the actual movie, not a specific performance.

You didn’t like my answer so now you’re framing the discussion differently just to get me to say the answer you want to hear.
 

Calamari41

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,524
“I understand that, but does that make The Dark Knight worth less?”

That is a direct quote from you talking about the actual movie, not a specific performance.
I was speaking initially on the assumption that his performance was an integral part in making that movie as good as it was. At that point, I didn't know that you didn't care for the movie beyond Ledger's performance. So I slightly adjusted the focus of my question from the movie itself to the performance itself, since that is what you liked about it.

The point remains the same. The movie overall, the performance itself, or whatever, was not lessened by the fact that Heath Ledger did not appear in subsequent movies as The Joker.

You didn’t like my answer so now you’re framing the discussion differently just to get me to say the answer you want to hear.
I'm not trying to get any kind of answer in particular, I'm trying to discuss your mindset. I didn't realize that you didn't like TDK, so I refined my point in order to focus the question on the thing you did like. The question remains the same exact question, just with a different specific subject.

You seem to be approaching this as if we're in some kind of anger-fueled raging debate or something, and at least from my end, that's not the case at all. I'm just trying to figure out where you're coming from. If you said "right, I didn't like The Dark Knight partly because Ledger's Joker was a one-off," I would happily accept that. It would actually be consistent with what you initially said.
 
Last edited:

Arkanius

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,567
This trailer was fucking fantastic from start to end
I can't believe this might actually be good
 

funky

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,268
So will this be connected to any wider Batman stuff or is it just some character piece on the joker?


I dont mean is it part of a cinematic universe, but just is this in a universe where Batman and stuff exists / will exist.
 

Blablurn

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,168
Germany
Okay, I wanted to wait a little before commenting. I watched this trailer now like 20 times to see what people were raving about it. But come on. This is like one of the most pretentious stories ever. I mean, come the fuck on. Ooooh, poor dude is a clown who has it rough in life. Ooooh, then he snaps because his mom, and life is hard. Boohooo, what a surprise in this day and age. But yeah, lets make it a lil darker so it doesnt look as ridiculous as it actually is. And peeeeopl buy it. They buy it. And I think its shocking. And then they dare to shit on Jared Leto who presented a Joker that just didnt copy the old ones like Phoenix does. No, Leto went a new way, a damaged way. A way that was destroyed by producers and the former DC team. But if you listen to the stories people told, and the secret scripts, you will find out that there was soooo much more to Jareds Joker. A performance for ages. From an actor who went the extra mile. I dont wanna shit on Phoenix, but who has the Oscar? Who made the Oscar worthy performance so far? Its Jared Leto. A person who should have gotten a second chance besides giving us this lukewarm new storyline. now, im sorry, but i dont see it lads. this is not the what i wanted. i feel sorry.