Batman Begins Sequal???(Official BTS “Dark Knight” Thread.)

I'm still not totally sure how I feel about the new Joker look.
I don't like the scarring, that's for sure.

I'll be pissed if they take the easy way out and make it an explosion or something equally lame (as stated in my earlier post.)

Call me a purist I guess.

Originally posted by wu kung
I don't like the scarring, that's for sure.

The way I see it his mouth is ripped open. This will allow for the visual effect of a giant grin that we are accustomed to in the comic.

A giant grinning mouth in a live action setting is going to need some kind of explanation.

[edit on 24/5/2007 by Umbrax]

Originally posted by Umbrax

A giant grinning mouth in a live action setting is going to need some kind of explanation.

[edit on 24/5/2007 by Umbrax]

Precisely. I never understood why Nicholson got a huge grin after taking his 'bath', but I liked it still the same.

The scar or (to give it its official name) the Glasgow Smile is indicative of a twisted mind. It was used by thugs in Glasgow as a way of making an example of someone. To make it worse the victim was usually stabbed in the stomach or kicked in the groin afterwards, so their scream of pain would tear the scar wider.
The Carver, a serial rapist and mutilator, carved smiles onto the faces of his victims in the show Nip/Tuck.

Originally posted by JackofBlades

The scar or (to give it its official name) the Glasgow Smile is indicative of a twisted mind. It was used by thugs in Glasgow as a way of making an example of someone. To make it worse the victim was usually stabbed in the stomach or kicked in the groin afterwards, so their scream of pain would tear the scar wider.

Now that is very interesting. Now I'm inclined to believe that Eric Roberts must have something to do with the Joker's origin in the movie. He is playing a mob boss and the Joker must have been in a rival gang.

*smack's forehead*

I had two and two in my head but couldn't see the connection!

It makes perfect sense! He's the leader of a gang, and Jack Napire (if they use that name) works for him. His character is betrayed by Jack and in revenge he Glasgow's him and leaves him crying in the alley. The pain and the shock of what happened drive him slowly mad...

Or something like that!

Oh please no!
Why tamper with what works?
Please, say it ain't so...
I'm sorry you guys, but that is so corny, you might as well fire Christian Bale and re-hire George Clooney.

Okay, okay...fine, *sigh* we'll go with the explosion...

Originally posted by wu kung
Oh please no!
Why tamper with what works?

Christopher Nolan has looked to The Killing Joke and the first two appearances of the Joker for the basis of his movies version of the character. There for I'd expect his origin to be pretty close to the source material.

The Joker (his true name has never been revealed) was an engineer at a chemical plant. He quit his job to be a comedian but was horrible and wound up being desperate for money. So then he agrees to help two criminals break into the plant he used to work at. The plan went sour and a shoot out ended up killing the two criminals. Batman shows up and the Joker freaks out and ends up falling into a vat of chemicals. The result was Joker's disfigurement.

If they change it so instead of Batman showing up and he falls into the vat, the mob beat him to a pulp and cut him a glasgow smile I'd have no problem with it. That would be a lot closer than other versions of the Joker.

In Batman TAS, the Joker was a former hit man for the Mafia. In the 89 movie they gave him a name, Jack Napier, and made him the killer of Batman's parents.

The thing is that this isn't the comic book and the Joker has to make sence in the context already set by Batman Begins.
Batman's origin was altered a bit in that film. New charters were introduced such as Rachel Dawes. There are many, many differences between the film and the comics. Did that make it a crappy movie? Hell no.

Its not going to be an explosion, its probably going to be a combination of GBH and a chemical bath... which is fine with me.

Its hard to say how truthful the Killing Joke is as the Joker's origin. It is the best we have so far, but as the Joker says...

"Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another... if I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

I think they should keep the name Jack Napier (which actually originated in the Animated Series). It fits the whole Batman style of having villains with names that connect to their alias. Edward Nigma = E.Nigma = The Riddler. Jack Napier = Jackanapes = The Joker.

Originally posted by Umbrax
Now that is very interesting. Now I'm inclined to believe that Eric Roberts must have something to do with the Joker's origin in the movie. He is playing a mob boss and the Joker must have been in a rival gang.

Joker is not going to have an origin in the movie. From the start he is already Joker. From what I hear he gets the slash across his mouth at some point in the movie (as a result of a slip wire accident involving Batman so I've read) but the rest is already there (unless they choose to do a flash back scene at a later date).

Personally I'd love it if there is no origin/explaination, he's just the crime lord from the get go.

Originally posted by John Nada
Joker is not going to have an origin in the movie. From the start he is already Joker. From what I hear he gets the slash across his mouth at some point in the movie (as a result of a slip wire accident involving Batman so I've read) but the rest is already there (unless they choose to do a flash back scene at a later date).

Personally I'd love it if there is no origin/explaination, he's just the crime lord from the get go.

Do you have a source on that? I always thought it'd be cool to just have him already a baddie, instead of giving him an origin.
Plus it wouldn't make sense to give him an origin when he apparently left his Joker calling card at the end of BB.

Here's a question:

Do you think Joker will die at d of this movie OR do you think he will be put in the asylum ready to come back for other adventure's????

Got a poll up on the Joker image if anyone wants to vote.
The Braxcave

Originally posted by Umbrax
The Joker (his true name has never been revealed) was an engineer at a chemical plant. He quit his job to be a comedian but was horrible and wound up being desperate for money. So then he agrees to help two criminals break into the plant he used to work at. The plan went sour and a shoot out ended up killing the two criminals. Batman shows up and the Joker freaks out and ends up falling into a vat of chemicals. The result was Joker's disfigurement.

Yeah, I know.
I own The Killing Joke, it's my favorite Batman story.
I've read it a thousand times.
Like I said, call me a purist.

In Batman TAS, the Joker was a former hit man for the Mafia. In the 89 movie they gave him a name, Jack Napier, and made him the killer of Batman's parents.

Yeah, and in the movie, Batman kills him.
Now, how accurate to the character of Batman is that?
(not to mention how inaccurate to the comics it is)

The thing is that this isn't the comic book and the Joker has to make sence in the context already set by Batman Begins.
Batman's origin was altered a bit in that film. New charters were introduced such as Rachel Dawes. There are many, many differences between the film and the comics. Did that make it a crappy movie? Hell no.

No, I mean, I know.
Yes, the movie was awesome.
And, it did make the story believable and was much more accurate to the comics, but like I said, I'm more of a purist.
(actually, that's totally true, I have the Azrael/Batman issue 500 bat symbol tattooed on my arm)

Originally posted by JackofBlades

"Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another... if I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

I actually have that on my myspace page.

Originally posted by John Nada
Joker is not going to have an origin in the movie. From the start he is already Joker. From what I hear he gets the slash across his mouth at some point in the movie (as a result of a slip wire accident involving Batman so I've read) but the rest is already there (unless they choose to do a flash back scene at a later date).

Personally I'd love it if there is no origin/explaination, he's just the crime lord from the get go.

Now, y'see, that's perfectly acceptable.
That's exactly what I'm looking for.
That makes me very happy.
Now, I'm satisfied.

Originally posted by Chukkles
Here's a question:

Do you think Joker will die at d of this movie OR do you think he will be put in the asylum ready to come back for other adventure's????

Back into Arkham.
It's the only reasonable answer.
With each successive movie, a walk through Arkham will reveal more and more of the Rogue's Gallery villains.

wu kung I totally understand where you are coming from.
It is pretty clear you are a big Batman fan (that may be an understatement. BTW need something in a Batman avatar?) and you want to see a favorite character done right on the big screen.

A direct translation of The Killing Joke will never happen and it isn't happening. Being a purest I guess the best way to enjoy your favorite characters would be in their original medium. Really all comics are better than the movie adaptations, and that is good. Comics rock.
I think Batman Begins was great and hearing that Nolan and Ledger are both reading The Killing Joke to "get it right" in the new movie.

If you go to the cinema to see The Dark Knight and think it is horrible, start heckling the movie out loud. It is always more fun to get kicked out of a movie rather than just walk out

Umbrax, I like the cut of your jib.

Y'know...it's funny you should mention the heckling.
Back in '95, when the stupid Batman movie with Two-Face and Riddler came out (with Tommy Lee Jones and Jim Carey), my friends and I (now, keep in mind, that back then I actually had green hair) went on opening day dressed as Batman villians (yeah, corny, but we were teenagers at the time, so .)
I'll give you one guess as to who I was...
Yep...The Joker.

We thought the movie was so bad that we heckled it from opening to closing and once the movie ended and the lights went up...
the other people in the audience crowded us because they thought we were part of some promotional stunt.
HA!
ha Ha hA HA HAHAHAHA hAA hAAAA
ahem...hmm...at any rate.

That same weekend, there was a Batman promo thing at a local comics store (appropriately called "Gotham Manner") and parked right out front was the old-school Batmobile (from the old television show with Adam West and Burt Ward.) Totally sweet ride!

The owner of the shop was dressed in the lame padded Batman suit and his assistant was dressed in the equally lame padded Robin costume.

My friends and I show up to the event in full costume (again, teenagers...) and we totally stole the show.
We each took turns picking on Robin and I even made a little girl cry.
Ahhh yes...good times, good times.

Fast forward several years.
I move to another town.
I go into a real estate place looking for an apartment and up on the wall I see a picture of the old Batmobile.
I'm saying to myself 'hmmm...that pic looks awfully familiar...' and the real estate agent tells me that he rented out some of the property of the guy who owns the Batmobile.
So, I look closer at the pic and what do you know...there's my friends and me in the background dressed as villains.
It was a pic taken that very same day, years earlier at Gotham Manner.

Small island I live on.

Ahhh, I wish I still had those pics...but alas...
my evil ex-girlfriend destroyed them.
(because she's evil mind you)

Too bad.
You guys would have loved it.

I hope they don't kill the Joker. Nolan made a VERY wise decision in having Crane sectioned instead of killed.

My only beef with other comic films is that directors seems unable to even allow the possibility of a recurring villain. And they ALWAYS kill the one villain that is a the heroes main villain.They always die!
In Batman the Joker died, in Spider-Man the Green Goblin died.
Nolan left the Scarecrow alive, and as a villain the Scarecrow was pretty good. I hope the Joker gets sent to Arkham and returns in a later film more insane than ever.

What's the point in bringing a heroes nemesis to the screen if they just die and never come back?

Originally posted by JackofBlades
Do you have a source on that?

Check out BOF. There are loads of rumours and snippets of news on there. Happy hunting!

Originally posted by JackofBlades
I hope they don't kill the Joker. Nolan made a VERY wise decision in having Crane sectioned instead of killed.

My only beef with other comic films is that directors seems unable to even allow the possibility of a recurring villain. And they ALWAYS kill the one villain that is a the heroes main villain.They always die!
In Batman the Joker died, in Spider-Man the Green Goblin died.
Nolan left the Scarecrow alive, and as a villain the Scarecrow was pretty good. I hope the Joker gets sent to Arkham and returns in a later film more insane than ever.

What's the point in bringing a heroes nemesis to the screen if they just die and never come back?

I'm hoping this as well, thats why I asked the question, too many main villains have died in the movies and sometimes I think it takes away from the story. Actually I just realised ff4rotsf kept doom alive to come back didn't they.
Do you think more comic books movies will follow suit, I hope so....

Having a climatic battle that ends with the villians death is just far more dramatic in movies than "you're going to jail". That may work in comics but in movies it's just plain embarrassing (see Batman Forever when Robin says "I'd rather see you in jail", I nearly cried in embarrassment).

Also it creates a sense of closure that a movie wants, where as a comic book certainly doesn't. I hope it goes The Dark Knight Returns route though of Batman beating Joker to within an inch of his life, and breaking his spine. Although he doesn't kill him you know he's finished as a criminal.