
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 7:46, Reply)

It's a deliberate character piece full of eye candy, which isn't a bad way for a hopeful series of films to start.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 7:50, Reply)

I hope Karl Urban doesn't do much Stallone-eques gurning through out. He looks a little gurnie in this clip.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 7:54, Reply)

the cartoon jaw is the one thing Stallone had right
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 7:57, Reply)

like Heath Ledger redefined The Joker in The Dark Knight.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:01, Reply)

granted that particular version hadn't been on the big screen before
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:08, Reply)

If you read killing joke & Arkham asylum for some classic joker.
The "goofy" Nicholson joker just looks hollow.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:24, Reply)

he was well chuffed.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:29, Reply)

Story of Batman when he's old and retired.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:35, Reply)

I had to ask about Batman comic when I was looking for his present and was introduced to a complete Batman Geek who was blinding me with his knowledge and he could see my eyes glazing over. So this helps a lot thanks.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:40, Reply)

Killing Joke
Arkham Asylum
Dark Knight Returns
are the best I've read
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:45, Reply)

Chris Nolan says it's the book he returned to the most often when making his trilogy.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 9:12, Reply)

It's an Elseworlds Batman set in the 30's and is fucking excellent.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 13:03, Reply)

but the Heath Ledger one... how or why exactly was he the joker? no backstory in the movie, no reason for him to look like he did, or be called the Joker. He was a great villian, but didn't need the make-up or the name
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:30, Reply)

he was called The Joker because of the The Joker Playing Card he left as his calling card. Some people didn't get the idea that he changed his story about how he got his facial scars and thought it was a continuity error, but instead it illustrated that The Joker didn't want people to know his back-story and he makes it up as and when it suits him.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:38, Reply)

but why would it need to actually show it? films don't have to take you by the hand through everything do they? I liked the ambiguity.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 8:38, Reply)

but there was the Scarecrow, he made sense, he scared you, and with that burlap sack looked like a scarecrow, fine. Harvey Dent made sense, the whole half face thing, Bane has that mask which pumps him full of anaesthetic and whatnot, it all makes sense. But with the Joker, there was just no reason, he didn't tell jokes, the playing card thing isn't explained, or the make-up. He was just a (very good) generic psychopath. It just feels like a big plot hole.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 9:01, Reply)

It's all theatrics, he's anarchistic there is no reason other than because he is.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 9:06, Reply)

I like the fact that we don't know who he is, his backstory, or why he wears makeup like a clown it adds to the mystery.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 9:43, Reply)

Superheroes get their own movies, supervillians should too!
The whole 'air of mystery' thing seems tacked on after the fact, to explain away a hole. It could still have been done in a few minutes in the movie with a 'what do we know about him?' scene, with a few rumours etc. throwing some possibilities up. It didn't need to be definitive. The only reason that they could get away with this is because everyone is as familiar with the Joker as they are Batman.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 10:12, Reply)

( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 9:07, Reply)