DallasTeleAg said:

---

I mean... it looks interesting. I thought lady gaga did great in A Star is Born, so will look forward to seeing her in this. I'll hold my judgements until I see it, but this entire iteration of the Joker being so different from any story we've ever had, and in a world without Batman is something I still don't necessarily celebrate.

Also, I've always loved the backstory of Harley Quinn. As someone who grew up with the Animated Series (let's be honest, I'd still watch that **** today as a 36yo), Harley Quinn's story of being a Psychiatrist at Arkham who falls in love with the Joker and slowly is dragged into her "crazy" by the Joker is something I really would have preferred to see. This trailer makes it seem like she's just a fellow patient, but maybe we just aren't seeing something.

Guess I'm just not the biggest fan of this retcon.

---

The entire retcon, or just Harley?

I think Gaga is a really good choice based on this trailer. I don't know the right choice of adjectives, but it just feels like this Harley is an extension of her. I don't think she could play the Harley of the animated series or Suicide Squad, but this one fits.

Along the same vein, Phoenix seems to fit better in the character than he did the first film. I know it's only a trailer, but there was a lot more to be intrigued by this time around.

I think it is interesting that the setting and style do look similar to the world with The Batman. I understand it is supposedly in a different universe and all that, just found it interesting that they look so similar.

DallasTeleAg said:

---

The entire retcon... but really only since this new sequel. I was under the impression that this Joker was more of a proto-Joker, and not the true Clown Prince of Gotham. This based on his age and the age of Bruce during this time. But now that we are getting Harley Quinn, I'm assuming we are to accept this as the true Joker.

So Batman's biggest nemesis is supposed to be in his mid to late 60's by the time batman starts his crusade?

I'm not militant in my dislike of this world, because I still appreciate the movie as its own thing. But as a part of the overall Batman story, I'm not the biggest fan.

---

Gotcha. I was generally curious and not trying to start any type of debate or anything.

I, personally, have chalked it up to him being the Joker from another universe or similar to when comic authors do a side series that reimagines a character, but isn't party of the main story.

I didn't watch all of the first one because it seemed like a story about a man going insane with the Joker's name slapped on it. I think I'll give it a shot after watching this trailer, though, because the second one looks a lot more intriguing.

I really don't think this is ever meant to tie in Batman in any way, so Batman's age is not even a factor really.

We can assume a lot of what we see isn't reality, but rather his reality. We may not be able to truly understand who Gaga or anyone else is until the end of the film.

I'm in.

I think you have to mentally separate this storyline from the traditional Batman universe. Once I did that, I enjoyed the first film for what it was. But I think this one looks even better with Gaga added to the mix, plus the "non-musical, but musical" element of it.

TCTTS said:

---

I had huge expectations for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and it surpassed them.

I had next to no expectations for Joker and was still underwhelmed. Parts of it were interesting, but overall it just felt like a frat bro's version of a "deep" emo movie to me. I don't know, I just got the impression that writer/director Todd Phillips thought it was way cooler/edgier than it actually was, which is probably an unfair assessment.

---

I had quite the opposite experience with both films you mentioned. That's what makes this discussion great.

DallasTeleAg said:

---

I mean... it looks interesting. I thought lady gaga did great in A Star is Born, so will look forward to seeing her in this. I'll hold my judgements until I see it, but this entire iteration of the Joker being so different from any story we've ever had, and in a world without Batman is something I still don't necessarily celebrate.

Also, I've always loved the backstory of Harley Quinn. As someone who grew up with the Animated Series (let's be honest, I'd still watch that **** today as a 36yo), Harley Quinn's story of being a Psychiatrist at Arkham who falls in love with the Joker and slowly is dragged into her "crazy" by the Joker is something I really would have preferred to see. This trailer makes it seem like she's just a fellow patient, but maybe we just aren't seeing something.

Guess I'm just not the biggest fan of this retcon.

---

Thought she did well in AHS Hotel also.

Again, for the record, and just to echo what others are saying, this iteration of the Joker officially falls under the DC "Elseworlds" moniker "for stories that take place outside the DC Universe canon." This is nothing more than a fun "what if" scenario, where a filmmaker simply wanted to explore an alternate version/origin story/etc of the character. Now? He's simply pulling in an alternate version Harley Quinn. It just so happens that Todd Philips' whim of a first movie caught fire and made a billion dollars, so here we are now with a sequel.

But in no way, shape, or form is this meant to be the "true" Joker.

Especially considering there's already been ANOTHER Joker in ANOTHER ongoing "Elseworld" cinematic universe, in Matt Reeves'/Robert Pattinson's The Batman Saga.

If and when James Gunn decides to put (a third iteration of) the Joker into the new DCU - which kicks off in 2025 - then THAT would technically be the "true" Joker.

Otherwise, these are all simply other sandboxes that Warner Brothers/DC is letting filmmakers play in, which I think is super cool.

TCTTS said:

---

Again, for the record, and just to echo what others are saying, this iteration of the Joker officially falls under the DC "Elseworlds" moniker "for stories that take place outside the DC Universe canon." This is nothing more than a fun "what if" scenario, where a filmmaker simply wanted to explore an alternate version/origin story/etc of the character. Now? He's simply pulling in an alternate version Harley Quinn. It just so happens that Todd Philips' whim of a first movie caught fire and made a billion dollars, so here we are now with a sequel.

But in no way, shape, or form is this meant to be the "true" Joker.

Especially considering there's already been ANOTHER Joker in ANOTHER ongoing "Elseworld" cinematic universe, in Matt Reeves'/Robert Pattinson's The Batman Saga.

If and when James Gunn decides to put (a third iteration of) the Joker into the new DCU - which kicks off in 2025 - then THAT would technically be the "true" Joker.

Otherwise, these are all simply other sandboxes that Warner Brothers/DC is letting filmmakers play in, which I think is super cool.

---

Could you provide more info on the "true Joker" part? and why wouldn't they just give Barry Keoghan that film? I dont know how it all works, clearly. TIA

I put "true" Joker in quotes only because that's what DallasTeleAg called him/was assuming in his post, and then what the conversion morphed into. That said, I'll explain the situation as best I can...

- The newly rebooted/interconnected DCU begins next year with James Gunn's Superman movie, which will spawn an entirely new cinematic universe, and new iterations, of all the DC characters. Including yet another Batman, the movie for which is titled The Brave and the Bold, set to be directed by Andy Muschietti, which will release sometime in 2026 or 2027. Because the new DCU is canon, and will be the primary timeline/thrust of the DC brand going forward, if and when James Gunn (who's also running the new DCU) decides to introduce another iteration of the Joker for that timeline/universe, in The Brave and the Bold or a subsequent movie, THAT will be the "true"/main Joker going forward - technically speaking - who will interact with the new Batman, new Superman, etc.

- Matt Reeves'/Robert Pattinson's The Batman Saga is now considered - and is officially deemed - an "Elseworld" title by Warner Bros/DC. Meaning it's NOT part of the new DCU and thus NOT technically "canon." It's its own, contained thing that will never interact or crossover with the new DCU. Thus, Barry Keoghan's Joker in that universe will not be the "true"/main Joker of the DCU, if there ever is one.

- Same goes for Todd Philips'/Joaquin Phoenix's Joker. He's *a* Joker, in an "Elseworld" title, but NOT part of the new DCU and thus NOT technically "canon." He's his own, contained thing that will never interact or crossover with the new DCU.

Does that make sense?

TCTTS said:

---

I had huge expectations for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and it surpassed them.

I had next to no expectations for Joker and was still underwhelmed. Parts of it were interesting, but overall it just felt like a frat bro's version of a "deep" emo movie to me. I don't know, I just got the impression that writer/director Todd Phillips thought it was way cooler/edgier than it actually was, which is probably an unfair assessment.

---

this is completely fair. i hadn't really thought abojt it unit this thread, but the origin story of arguably the most famous villain of all time is based on the the cause being an unstable mother, rejection by his "father", has no friends, and can't get girls?

at least TDK had an abusive backstory for why the joker was so crazy

I enjoyed the first Joker movie with JP. What some are complaining about - how it did not follow the comic book villain - is what I liked about it. I absolutely loathe comic book movies and have only seen one - Black Panther, which I found painful to watch. I'll probably check this one out.

The only true Joker is Jared Leto's version.

Here's the reason this movie is going to be another smash.

It's got the comic nerds:


It's got the horror geeks:


It's got the "Dudebros":


And it's's got the Gaga fans / theater kids / alphabets:

I'm glad my "take" entertained you.

Yes, it's a genre that does not interest me at all. Of the ones I've seen - now that I think about it, at my brother-in-law's house, we also had to watch a spiderman movie - I've not enjoyed at all. It bugs me that Hollywood can only seem to make comic book movies. Some folks feel the same way about horror movies. They don't wish to see them and are certain they would not enjoy them if forced to watch one. This is how I feel about comic book movies. I don't need to see them to know I will not enjoy them. Spiderman and Black Panther I saw only because I was in situation where if I dismissed myself, it would have come across as being unwilling to spend time with family.

Back to the point, I really like JP and this version of the Joker. Whether it stayed true to underlying comic book story is irrelevant to me. I liked it because it seemed more like a movie about a fellow with psychological issues than a comic book character.

To each their own.

Quote:

---

He's his own, contained thing that will never interact or crossover with the new DCU.

---

Unless the Flash manages to screw things up again....

Thank you for posting that summary. I remember reading something like this a few years ago but could not recall the details.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

The only true Joker is Jared Leto's version.

---

I never saw any of the movies with him as Joker. Is his version really good?

It was an embarrassingly bad bait post that nobody took.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

It was an embarrassingly bad bait post that nobody took.

---

It was about the equivalent of trying to fish with a shoe. Ain't no one falling for that.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

It was an embarrassingly bad bait post that nobody took.

---

Hate the performance, but respect the guy getting to do this mutiple times.

Knowing nothing I predict that there will be Fight Club style theories about this movie that Harley Quinn only exists in the Joker's head.

This clip is from A Hard Day's Night.

Joker: Folie à Deux (2024) pic.twitter.com/qJrReB9Afs

— lina (@optmistaradical) April 14, 2024