Do you like the Joker as a sympathetic character?

Do you like the Joker as a sympathetic character?

Attached: cover1.jpg (1848x1040, 118.54K)

Oh yes, I love him

Was this movie called something else originally?

no

Not the way this film did it. Arthur Joker is shit because he's already nutty, and his entire life was shit.

Attached: Joker Sad.png (450x600, 619.79K)

No.
I prefer not knowing anything about his past, and just having him by a psycho.

It was a Joker movie project 2 years prior development so no.

I liked the movie, I believe most alternative takes on a character have a potential to be cool and interesting, but they also should be contained in one-off elseworlds. Mainstream Joker should stay as he was before.

No, but that's not the Joker, so whatever.

He's not sympathetic, he's a pathetic simp

Attached: 1590093188170.jpg (221x225, 5.11K)

So he's simpathetic?

boooo

Even the joker would be disappointed such a simple joke.

I don't know if I'd call him The Joker nor if I'd call him sympathetic, but he was wonderfully deranged and I liked the character.

No, contrarians with with no reading comprehension just think it was

rhetorically, jokes are appeals to pathos, so that was literally simplepathetic

no

Attached: 1533360637393.jpg (300x222, 8.98K)

I don't think it's anything about contrarianism, the film is far more like a more insane, more deranged take on Taxi Driver than it is similar to any other comic book movie. Not even in a "not muh Joker" way. I can see where people come up with "guy wanted to make story X but studio only allowed it if it involved a popular franchise" theories, even if that's a bit simplistic of an explanation.

I love Arthur

Not being like a comic book movie was the point the director wanted. The contrarianism I'm talking about is the thoroughly shilled lie that the movie was originally supposed to be something else, but WB thought it was horrible and would bomb so they ordered reshoots so it could be a joker movie

The movie is super similar to Moore backstory, in fact closer to the source than most capeshit movies.

The only movie actually nearly identical to the comics afair is Snyder Watchmen and even so there is some clear differences.

Oh, no, don't get me wrong, there are definitely plenty of COMICS that have similar tone, story, and character. Ample, actually. But not any ones super recent and not in-line with comic movies. I just think it threw a lot of people for a loop and they're looking for an "aha!" moment type explanation.

Well, I just think the reason it's shilled so successfully is because a lot of people find it easy to believe. And that, ulterior motive or not, that theory was always going to percolate.

Actually it's not when you know that the Joker movie plans were public ever since they started discussing it, this movie production was never a secret so the theory is completelly impossible.

This, plus the simple fact that during filming Phoenix lost an unhealthy amount of weight, so reshoots not only did not happen, but would be impossible to sneak in.

What do google'able facts have to do with anything? You should know better than this.

the word has truly lost all meaning

It'd be nice if people put some work into properties that haven't been done to death.

i lose

Attached: homer laugh.gif (300x196, 2.66M)

This.
I'd be perfectly happy with a Babylon 5 remake. But nooooooooooooooooo, we need to remake the remake of the remake of Star Trek the Motion Picture.

im actually curious about something. Would a sequel revolve around a young Batman fighting against the age-experienced Joker? Who would we root for?

Sure. Babylon 5 is based on worlds' worth of information. Shit, so is Star Trek. You've got to be able to do something with that.

You're not supposed to be rooting for Arthur. It's like Breaking Bad, being the protagonist isn't the same as being the hero.