Joker - Warner Bros. movie

[Sure-Oz]

New teaser....I'm intrigued


https://youtu.be/t433PEQGErc

[ThaVirus]

I finally saw this. I thought it was pretty good- a fresh take on the Joker. Loved the delusion, hallucinations, and complete nosedive into madness.

Spoiler!

When he shot De Niro I was like "holy ****ing shit!"

And I was a bit tired, but was it implied that he killed the psychiatrist at the end as well? I thought I saw bloody footprints and orderlies chasing after him down the hall.

[-King-]

I hope there isn't a sequel to this. I don't even know how a non-origin story would work with joker.

[Mahomie]

Underrated flick. Here's hoping JP wins best actor.

[Deberg_1990]

Watched it over the weekend. Found it quite disturbing in parts.

Very well made though.

[bowener]

Originally Posted by -King-

I hope there isn't a sequel to this. I don't even know how a non-origin story would work with joker.

Joker seems so far to take place in a realistic universe. If they were to move forward with a sequel I'm not sure the current version of Joker would be THE Joker. Something tells me this would morph into a sort of mantel that a 'worthy' villain would wear as the head of a small but deadly anarchist group.

Perhaps JP would still be THE Joker, just old and frail and operating from a secret location dictating operations. Bruce Wayne was very young in the film, so let's say its 20 years minimum until he is The Batman. That would put JP near 60 or more in that universe, and he didn't exactly seem healthy.

[DeepPurple]

If there is a sequel, I would like to see it tied into the Joker by Heath Ledger. Possibly a 20 year descent into crime related madness and the conclusion would be the bank heist that was the opening to Dark Knight.

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by DeepPurple

If there is a sequel, I would like to see it tied into the Joker by Heath Ledger. Possibly a 20 year descent into crime related madness and the conclusion would be the bank heist that was the opening to Dark Knight.

That wouldnt work. Because Joaquin Phoenix's joker is mid 40s. So Ledgers Joker would be in his mid 60s???

[Sassy Squatch]

So how would he go on a 20 year crime spree and yet he's still a relative unknown in both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

[DeepPurple]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

That wouldnt work. Because Joaquin Phoenix's joker is mid 40s. So Ledgers Joker would be in his mid 60s???

Originally Posted by Superturtle

So how would he go on a 20 year crime spree and yet he's still a relative unknown in both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

Problems, Problems, Problems. That's what a screenwriter's job is, to solve continuity. Heath Ledger wore heavy makeup and was never seen without it, age is not something viewers would be hung up on. As long as he is nimble, quick and mean, it will work. I could write super hero flicks.



Twenty year crime spree doesn't mean he pulling bank heists every week, it could be penny-ante non-sense, he's going mad, what does the level of the crime matter. Eventually he regains his senses and forms a gang, then comes the banks and the mob hits. Of course, he has no loyalty to his gang because he hires all losers. Anyone that gets in his way, hence the bank heist at the opening of Dark Knight and the killing of his gang members.

[The Franchise]

That shit wouldn’t work. Now if you want to have it so that Heath Ledger’s Joker idolizes Phoenix’s Joker....then it might work. Your idea won’t work.

[DeepPurple]

Originally Posted by The Franchise

That shit wouldn’t work. Now if you want to have it so that Heath Ledger’s Joker idolizes Phoenix’s Joker....then it might work. Your idea won’t work.

I bet if they made it, you would be first in line to see it and say how great it was. You know the saying, build it and they will come. It's a super hero movie, it's not real life, you can make any shit work in movies.

[listopencil]

Here's an old article, more like a blog, that I dug up while thinking about the timeline of the Dark Knight trilogy. I'll put the entire thing here in a spoiler tag so it won't be a giant wall of text in the thread:

Spoiler!

Hello ComicBookMovie community! It's been a long time since my last editorial on this website. Well this editorial is about the timeline of Christopher Nolan's Batman films. Many have speculated what the timeline of these films are, and how long Christian Bale's Batman was actually Batman. First I will start with the claim, then I'll tell you why I believe this. So, in the words of Bane, "let the games begin".



Claim: Batman Begins was released in 2005 and has many people believing that is the same year the film is set in, but I don't believe that. Batman Begins, not including flashbacks, takes place somewhere between 2002 to 2005. Bruce returns to Gotham in late 2002/early 2003, takes a couple of months getting his "mission" ready, and begins his caped crusade in late 2003 taking down mob boss Carmine Falcone. By early to mid 2004 Batman is investigating the drugs that eventually lead to Scarecrow, and by late 2004/early 2005 Ra's Al Ghul has come to Gotham to finish his mission. Batman Begins ends in 2005 on the night of Bruce Wayne's birthday.

Why: Bruce Wayne was Batman for 5 years before he got the new batsuit in The Dark Knight. How do I know this? In the the book The Dark Knight Manual it says that Bruce Wayne has been Batman for 5 years and that he needed a new suit. Of course I'm paraphrasing, but it does say he has been Batman for 5 years as clear as day.



Claim: The Dark Knight was released in 2008, and the film is indeed set in 2008. Mid 2008, with it ending in late 2008 to be exact.

Why: As said previously, Bruce Wayne had been Batman for 5 years until he needed the new batsuit. If my last claim is correct Batman's crusade began in 2003, add 5 years to that and it's 2008. Also the photo of the Joker that Jim Gordon holds up to Batman after the bank hiest has the date marked July 2008, the exact date was hard to tell but looked like it was 17. That's not all either. In Batman Begins we get a glimps of Jim Gordon's son. It's the scene where Gordon speaks to Batman before Batman interrogates Flass. We see Jim's wife, Barbara, feeding a child that looks 3 or 4 through the window and in The Dark Knight Gordon's son looks 8 or 9.



Claim: My claim here will be different. The Dark Knight Rises was released in 2012. The film itself is set 8 years after The Dark Knight. It is late 2016, same night of the last confirmed Batman sighting, with the film ending somwhere in early 2017 since Bruce Wanye was in the pit for 6 months and it was winter by the end of the film. Here's my claim: The Batman was still, in some way, active between The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises.

Why: Well for starters they tell us it's been 8 years since the last confirmed sighting of the Batman, keyword: "confirmed". You might be thinking that I'm grasping at straws, but keep reading. Gordon knew the truth, and with the Dent Act there must have been somekind of "war" between Gotham police and orginized crime. If Batman did help, he must've done it from the shadows. Gathering information, interrogating criminals, and giving it to Gordon. Also when Bruce goes down to the batcave, after Selina Kyle steals the pearls, Alfred says that Bruce hadn't been down there in a long time. If Bruce quit being Batman immediately after The Dark Knight, then I believe Alfred would have said something along the lines of: "So you've decided to finally use you batcave".



So in conclusion, the timeline of Christopher Nolan's Batman films start at 2002 and end at 2017. Bruce has been Batman far longer than people actually believe. 5 years between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, as opposed to the generally believed 1 year. Also since the last "confirmed" sighting of the batman was 8 years before The Dark Knight Rises, Bruce could have still been active as Batman for, at least, another 5 years. This gives Nolan's Batman 10 years of crime fighting. This also explains why his body by The Dark Knight Rises is a total mess.

So what do you guys and gals think? Do you agree with me or do you believe I'm wrong? Let me know in the comments below! Until next time ComicBookMovie!

What do you think? Is this guy right? Can this be used to consider how Pheonix's Joker fits in, or if it does fit in? Doing a similar search I read that Joker is set in 1981. That would make the introduction of the character into the Dark Knight universe happen 27 years after the Pheonix Joker. So, suppose that Pheonix Joker goes on a domestic terrorism spree in the sequel during the 80's. Lots of material to work with there. He could take on the persona of a terrorist/serial killer/chaos engine and Ledger's Joker could be using that as an inspiration just as the Dark Knight uses fear to fight criminals.

[Prison Bitch]

Yes, I said 1982 because they said “30 years ago she was in Arkham” and the clip board was dated 1952. So that’s the answer.


Not a comic book fan but this movie was excellent. It’s got heavy political overtones obv (with both alt-right and Bernie Bros claiming it as their anthem), and mental illness stigma.


The scene where he aces Deniro was gripping: “YOU GET WHAT YOU FING DESERVE!!!” But I don’t quite understand why he killed his mom. Because he believed she lied to him about Wayne?

[Deberg_1990]

Theres a scene with a theater marquee that says 'Blow Out' and "Zorro the Gay Blade'

Both released in summer of 1981

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Superturtle

So how would he go on a 20 year crime spree and yet he's still a relative unknown in both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

In the style of Charles Manson he becomes a sort of insane violent guru. He moves from group to group inciting chaos and inspiring others to do the dirty work. The state and then federal authorities get involved but they can never quite pin him down, as he becomes well known among international terrorist organizations and organized crime families. Those groups use him to further their agendas and he goes along with it because he's just in it for the ride and doesn't really care what happens.

One of the threads in the sequel could be conspiracy theory talk show hosts bringing guests on who claim to know of the existence of 'The Joker' only to be laughed at and dismissed by the vast majority. Leading to a scene where Pheonix shows up as a guest and purposefully kills any serious consideration of his existence by pretending to be caught out as a fraud.


At some point the authorities get too close and he instructs those closest to him to go on divergent sets of missions to muddy the waters. He tells them that as long as they remain active then 'The Joker' will never die. Meanwhile he goes an an extremely violent suicide mission that he frames on a lead investigator leaving the authorities to wonder if 'The Joker' was one of their own or if he ever really existed at all.




Ledger's Joker is a member of one of those cells started by Pheonix's closest followers.