Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
bpower
Feb 19, 2011

imperialparadox posted:

Penguin Mom wasn't bad, wasn't good, but I just took it as the "crowd" being bored because they don't look like the kind of people who would listen to that kind of music.

Seriously, where did Penguin's clientele come from anyways?

Yeah they were an implausibly diverse crowd.

As far as show openings go a drunken clown fight followed by Penguin bottling some massive fucker is hard to beat.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Krad
Feb 4, 2008

Touche
So let's see, the Joker kid finds his mom banging a clown in his house, and the best idea that he has when he grows up is to... dress like a clown himself? You'd think he'd become a serial killer of clowns instead.

bring back old gbs
Feb 28, 2007

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Krad posted:

So let's see, the Joker kid finds his mom banging a clown in his house, and the best idea that he has when he grows up is to... dress like a clown himself? You'd think he'd become a serial killer of clowns instead.
thats not a very good joke

Fog Tripper
Mar 3, 2008

by Smythe

Davros1 posted:

Was it just me or was the WE boardroom the same set they used in The Dark Knight Rises?


And I loved the beginning with Barbara returning home to find Selena and Ivy. With everything that's going on, she just accepts them, and I thought, "Oh, this is a new Barbara."

And then she's taking fashion advice from two kids later, and I thought "Nope, same old Barbara."

She was clearly shitfaced, so...

hatelull posted:

Zsaz is always fun to watch, and I like how the not truly subtle implication that he's done some vile things to Butch played out. That was probably the best thing of that episode for me. I don't have a horse in the race to the Joker, and thought the kid did a decent job channeling the guys that came before him in that role. However, I really wonder if they know what to do with him. They filed that bullet so to speak, so unless they're going to push him back into the ether what's the point? They didn't even give him a victory lap after that final interrogation. If they don't bring him back for random "Hannibal Lecter" moments, what's the point of introducing him in the first place? It really begs the question of how long they can drag this series out, if they keep revealing all these A-List bad guys systematically with zero build up?

I wonder if it was pressure to get a second season, playing every card they could. It was admittedly one of the weakest intros and backstories for one of the most prominent characters. Christ sake, BARBARA got more backstory than the Joker kid.

pookerbug posted:

Agreed, but they're cheating a bit by just replacing Bullock and making her the buddy-cop for an episode.

I really wanted followup on Bullock's crush that he saved from drowning (sucker for a redhead). Should we assume she wasn't grateful enough and brushed him off?

LolitaSama posted:

Remember when Fish charges another guy in her cabin on the boat and the show ends. What came after that? I feel like I missed an episode between that and how she got in the facility.

Calling it now: the dungeon is the basement of a Gotham hospital.

Fog Tripper fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Feb 18, 2015

Windows 98
Nov 13, 2005

HTTP 400: Bad post
I don't know. I guess I am in the minority here. I thought the kids Joker was pretty great. You could see all the different Jokers over the years smashed into the performance. Most of it was borrowed from previous renditions of the character as opposed to knew stuff he would introduce in his own style. But I think that was a good safe choice. As people said before, how can you measure up to Ledger, Hamill, or Nicholson? You can't. You can't out perform them, especially as a young actor. So instead of colossally loving it up and trying to take his own spin on it he just borrowed bits and pieces from the people that came before him. Wise, in my opinion.

I also don't think he is going to be a recurring character on the show. I think they are just going to keep spitting through these villains episode by episode. Every other episode or so they reveal a major villain then dump them in favor of floozy filler villains they can use to justify keeping Jim on the show while anything interesting with the mafias gets Plotline A.

Fog Tripper
Mar 3, 2008

by Smythe

Windows 98 posted:

I don't know. I guess I am in the minority here. I thought the kids Joker was pretty great. You could see all the different Jokers over the years smashed into the performance. Most of it was borrowed from previous renditions of the character as opposed to knew stuff he would introduce in his own style. But I think that was a good safe choice. As people said before, how can you measure up to Ledger, Hamill, or Nicholson? You can't. You can't out perform them, especially as a young actor. So instead of colossally loving it up and trying to take his own spin on it he just borrowed bits and pieces from the people that came before him. Wise, in my opinion.

I also don't think he is going to be a recurring character on the show. I think they are just going to keep spitting through these villains episode by episode. Every other episode or so they reveal a major villain then dump them in favor of floozy filler villains they can use to justify keeping Jim on the show while anything interesting with the mafias gets Plotline A.

For me it wasn't the kid, or his acting. It was more the "hey lets toss arguably the most high profile villain into a single episode with a weak assed buildup to what makes him what he is. I mean yeah, he had a weird childhood with a promiscuous mom. Arch villain material? Eh for :effort:

I AM GRANDO
Aug 20, 2006

He might come back. Or be a fakeout or part of a different story.

Windows 98
Nov 13, 2005

HTTP 400: Bad post

Fog Tripper posted:

For me it wasn't the kid, or his acting. It was more the "hey lets toss arguably the most high profile villain into a single episode with a weak assed buildup to what makes him what he is. I mean yeah, he had a weird childhood with a promiscuous mom. Arch villain material? Eh for :effort:

I suppose I agree with you there. That was kind of weak. I'm secretly hoping they decide to follow him on his trip to crazy town and what we saw was just the tip of the iceberg. Maybe he gets sent to Arkham, get's tortured and or something makes him more crazy. Leads a rebellion maybe? I don't know, somehow breaks out. But like Penguin's story line, any time something good happens something equally as hosed up happens. Watch his life spiral totally out of control until he is literally saying "the whole world must burn" in his sleep.

For example, maybe he gets mugged and just laughs the whole time because he's a psycho. They are like "you think this is funny little man?! I'll show you something to laugh about" *cue him getting his mouth cut into a smile*. Something like that. Basically let him slowly realize how unfair the world is and how chaos rules the world.

Windows 98 fucked around with this message at 01:32 on Feb 18, 2015

JD Bucks 7
Jul 18, 2013

Aces High posted:

it's the little moments in this show that get me to watch each week, like Penguin going and bottling a guy for booing his mother, or Leslie and Jim having supper and Jim's "oh my God this is amazing". I honestly thought when he was like "you want to go NOW?!" I had thought he was thinking more "but...the food, so good, want to finish :(" instead of "it's dark and cold and I'm still not 100% on this

And had the writers had any sense of decency, they would have put that extra :08 seconds of Jim saying "Okay, but only after I finish this delicious meal."

Instead, we get the guy who is supposed to stand up to mob bosses, corrupt cops, etc. doesn't have the boldness to say "okay, we will go, but only after this food." And oh how I love Morena Baccarin, but her whole vibe/acting up to that point would have led me to believe she could have just as easily said (after he agreed to go) "so, you didn't like the meal that much."

I may be biased because I think Jada is on a scale 13 of overacting, when we need a 6, but Jim is not far behind.

Davros1
Jul 19, 2007

You've got to admit, you are kind of implausible



Fog Tripper posted:

For me it wasn't the kid, or his acting. It was more the "hey lets toss arguably the most high profile villain into a single episode with a weak assed buildup to what makes him what he is. I mean yeah, he had a weird childhood with a promiscuous mom. Arch villain material? Eh for :effort:

The impression I got was the mother murder is just going to be the tip of the iceberg (sorry, wrong villain). That kid clearly had been doing other things.


JD Bucks 7 posted:

And had the writers had any sense of decency, they would have put that extra :08 seconds of Jim saying "Okay, but only after I finish this delicious meal."

Instead, we get the guy who is supposed to stand up to mob bosses, corrupt cops, etc. doesn't have the boldness to say "okay, we will go, but only after this food." And oh how I love Morena Baccarin, but her whole vibe/acting up to that point would have led me to believe she could have just as easily said (after he agreed to go) "so, you didn't like the meal that much."

I may be biased because I think Jada is on a scale 13 of overacting, when we need a 6, but Jim is not far behind.

How he interacts with mob bosses and corrupt cops is going to be slightly different than how he interacts with a woman he's dating. At least, I hope to god so.

bring back old gbs
Feb 28, 2007

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Davros1 posted:

The impression I got was the mother murder is just going to be the tip of the iceberg (sorry, wrong villain). That kid clearly had been doing other things.


How he interacts with mob bosses and corrupt cops is going to be slightly different than how he interacts with a woman he's dating. At least, I hope to god so.

Yeah maybe his fascination with clowns comes in part from the circus covering up his crimes for so long and the weird way they "deal with their own". Like the clowns cover up for him and the Graysons dole out punishment or something.

I mean they don't explain what they do but I assume it's weird.

Fog Tripper
Mar 3, 2008

by Smythe

Davros1 posted:

The impression I got was the mother murder is just going to be the tip of the iceberg (sorry, wrong villain). That kid clearly had been doing other things.

OK, then they could have built up to it. My point is if you are going to introduce a major character, put some time and effort into it. Barbara got more backstory than he did. BARBARA.

Windows 98
Nov 13, 2005

HTTP 400: Bad post

JD Bucks 7 posted:

And had the writers had any sense of decency, they would have put that extra :08 seconds of Jim saying "Okay, but only after I finish this delicious meal."

Instead, we get the guy who is supposed to stand up to mob bosses, corrupt cops, etc. doesn't have the boldness to say "okay, we will go, but only after this food." And oh how I love Morena Baccarin, but her whole vibe/acting up to that point would have led me to believe she could have just as easily said (after he agreed to go) "so, you didn't like the meal that much."

I may be biased because I think Jada is on a scale 13 of overacting, when we need a 6, but Jim is not far behind.

I think they are trying to really jam down your throat that he can be difficult to deal with sometimes because he wants to be the one in charge and calling shots. Which is causing tension between the two. That way Barbara can slip in there and really cause some romantic drama.

Also hopefully a threesome.

Fog Tripper
Mar 3, 2008

by Smythe

Windows 98 posted:

I think they are trying to really jam down your throat that he can be difficult to deal with sometimes because he wants to be the one in charge and calling shots. Which is causing tension between the two. That way Barbara can slip in there and really cause some romantic drama.

Also hopefully a threesome.

Foursome with Bullock? Well, fivesome with redhead.

Bruceski
Aug 21, 2007

The tools of a hero mean nothing without a solid core.

The best part of the trailer for next week was when Fish referred to the Manager as (spelled phonetically) "Doctor Dole-mahkur". It's Doctor Frahnkenshteen all over again.

Krad
Feb 4, 2008

Touche

Fog Tripper posted:

OK, then they could have built up to it. My point is if you are going to introduce a major character, put some time and effort into it. Barbara got more backstory than he did. BARBARA.

It's not like he did anything particularly Joker-y yet anyway, they'll probably bring him back down the line. That air rimshot was physically painful and hope they never do anything like that ever again.

Krad fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Feb 18, 2015

Fog Tripper
Mar 3, 2008

by Smythe

Krad posted:

It's not like he did anything particularly Joker-y yet anyway, they'll probably bring him back down the line. That air rimshot was physically painful and hope they never do anything like that ever again.

It was pretty groan inducing. Ah well, all I can say before dropping it, would be that it would have been vastly better imho, had they introduced a character and built up to it subtly such that down the line folks could catch on that "holy gently caress, its the joker!". Having it so forced, so obvious so quick was just a waste.

Eh, that ship has sailed. Maybe the red herring folks are right. Also Sorio is Jaquen is a faceless man. Hope springs eternal :)

Dalael
Oct 14, 2014
Hello. Yep, I still think Atlantis is Bolivia, yep, I'm still a giant idiot, yep, I'm still a huge racist. Some things never change!

NowonSA posted:

I was just popping in and out of this week's episode, but I liked the fake kid-joker. Guess I'm in the minority there.

I think the actor did a good job. While the episode itself was only okay, I must admit I kinda liked the way the Joker was brought on. I honestly expected something way worst, but what they have done will do for now.

weaaddar posted:

I really wanted to punch my screen when the manager guy was actually listening to fish. Just shoot her. Boom done. Let's see if people will play along with your rebellion now that you are dead.

Seriously, If fish lives until season 2 I'll be furious with this poo poo show. When the jumped the snake it was bad enough, but her parts were worse than Barbaras.

Depressio111117 posted:

I have stuck with this show through Balloon Man and Fish's completely ineffective 'secret weapon' and seemingly countless Barbara scenes, but god drat this new Fish plot might be what does me in. These are the most rock loving ineffectual henchmen to ever hench.
Look, I've solved this problem and have only thought about it for five seconds tops - "Oh, you guys wanna rebel? Okay, cool, have fun not eating for a week."
The basement prisoners have no upper hand whatsoever, and the guards are negotiating with them? Why? WHY?! If they had just SHOT FISH with THE GUNS THAT THEY WERE HOLDING, you've only lost one prisoner, and boom! No more rebellion!
I would gladly take a dozen Balloon Men if it meant this loving Fish plot would just end. I don't care if it's ever even resolved. It can just disappear Chuck Cunningham style.
Anyway, the Joker thing was dumb, Barbara is dumb, and if it weren't for Bruce and Alfred I don't think I'd still be watching this show.


I think I understand what the show was trying to do with this. Considering these people are kept to harvest the parts, the henchmen can't take the chance that a full blown Rebellion happens. If so, too many may die which would cost his boss a fortune in spare parts. The thing is, it doesn't loving make sense in this case. If Fish has been there for a long time and people were definitely loyal to the death, then this scene would make sense. But these guys don't know a loving thing about her and have no real reason to give a poo poo or risk their lives for her. I'm sorry but I don't buy Fish as their messiah who commands enough respect to turn these guys into loyal followers.

But as bad as that part was.. I'm sorry but Barbie's part were worst. She was always irrelevent but that was just.. loving awful. She shows up in her old place, finding 2 kids she has never met. Does she give a poo poo? Nop... Not even after they tell her Gordon left his spare keys over a week ago. Then she takes advice from them on how to dress to get Jim back in her life? That was just loving awful.

Jerusalem posted:

I thought the Joker-esque kid was okay, though I'm firmly of the opinion that we should never see any origin for the Joker (or have it be clear it is coming from a VERY unreliable narrator) and still hold out hope it was just a complete red herring and he was just some random psychotic kid who grew up among carnies.

That said, the worst parts of his performance came where he tried to go for the iconic crazy eyes smile, because it really seemed like the actor was putting everything into trying to get it and the laugh spot on and so the rest of his acting went out the window while he carefully contorted his face in just the right way.

I really, really like the Dr. Leslie Thompkins character, and I keep hoping against hope that every time Barbara stands gaping at Jim moving on with his life after SHE dumped him, that it is the last time we're going to see her and she just disappears from the story. Speaking of which, what the hell happened to Montoya?

Technically, we already know the Joker's origin thanks to the Killing Joke back from 88... About his performance, I think the kid did great with this. It was a bit forced but as you said, iconic. I think he needs to be given the benefit of the doubt. We've been spoiled by ledger and need to put that aside.

Am I the only one who didn't care much for Leslie this episode? This whole "I believe in ghost" scenario was just awful in my opinion. I understand the idea of being open minded, but that was pushing it too far. She seemed genuinely pissed at Gordon for taking it lightly.

Rarity posted:

Not gonna lie, I would watch an entire episode of Barbara being a hot mess, taking dating advice from two street kids and watching Jim be happy with her mopey eyes.

Rocksicles posted:

Babs is hot, and she's got style. I'm happy to watch her life collapse. We all know who she is and what that means, so she's not going anywhere.

More legs for sure though.

At this point, its the only thing Barbie is good for. Looking good on screen.. Which she did admirably this week. I still want her gone tho.

Jerusalem posted:

For me it really comes back to one of the major issues with this show - it's very deliberately and explicitly about Gotham City BEFORE Batman showed up, and that both means that Gordon's impact has to be (or should be) limited, and that many of the key villains can't be TOO developed because for the most part they really only came to prominence after Batman showed up. While guys like Riddler make a certain kind of sense, and Penguin makes an enormous amount of sense, characters like the Joker really don't, especially the Joker since he's usually framed in direct opposition to Batman as a character. The show should be more focused on the organized crime and the corruption, but while they play a lot of lip service to that, they still seem to be obsessed with the idea of fanservice in terms of shoving in every character they can.

Remember how Harvey Dent shows up for basically one episode in the first half of the season and he's already mentally unbalanced and showing signs of being willing to act immorally to get the results he wants... that's from his very first episode. Where can you really go from there with the character? You've already taken a supposedly incorruptible character whose moment of change is such a big deal and established that he's got feet of clay from the very beginning. If you keep him incorruptible, then you've basically just got another version of the main character of the show - Jim Gordon. The obvious thing to do would be to NOT include Harvey as a character at all, at least not this early into the show, but this show was ALWAYS going to have Two-Face show up in an episode regardless of if it made sense or not. Then he's gone, and basically had zero impact on the show.

You're definitely on to something with this. They're trying to include too many people this season, which means we get to see some of these people once or twice and then that's pretty much it. In a way, the format of the show does not help. I hate those shows in which there's a new villain for each episode and each episode has a conclusion. Its what ruined The sword of Truth for me. That and the fact the show was really lovely compared to the books.

Spanish Matlock
Sep 6, 2004

If you want to play the I-didn't-know-this-was-a-hippo-bar game with me, that's fine.
When falcone says that the club is a moneymaker I think he means through laundering.

Dalael
Oct 14, 2014
Hello. Yep, I still think Atlantis is Bolivia, yep, I'm still a giant idiot, yep, I'm still a huge racist. Some things never change!

hatelull posted:

Zsaz is always fun to watch, and I like how the not truly subtle implication that he's done some vile things to Butch played out. That was probably the best thing of that episode for me. I don't have a horse in the race to the Joker, and thought the kid did a decent job channeling the guys that came before him in that role. However, I really wonder if they know what to do with him. They filed that bullet so to speak, so unless they're going to push him back into the ether what's the point? They didn't even give him a victory lap after that final interrogation. If they don't bring him back for random "Hannibal Lecter" moments, what's the point of introducing him in the first place? It really begs the question of how long they can drag this series out, if they keep revealing all these A-List bad guys systematically with zero build up?

Also, has it always been implied that the Joker and Wayne were mostly the same age?

Finally, is it a given that the not Lucy Liu lady and the other smirky guy on the board of Wayne Enterprise are probably in bed with Ra's Al Ghul?

I do not understand what is the appeal with Zsaz. I put him in the same boat as Fish. An exaggerated comic-book villain at its worst. The only scene in which he was interesting, was the first time you see him. The boldness of the character, the supreme confidence... but that is it. In this episode, the whole thing about Zsaz having done some unspecified thing to Butch, trying to make it feel as if it was all so dreadful.. That didn't cut it for me. Replace Szaz by Fish (or literally anyone else) and Butch by literally anyone else, and the whole thing would have made everyone bitch and moan.. But because Szaz is involved, its suposed to be a good thing? C'mon.

Regarding Wayne and the Joker, I am not sure they're suposed to be the same age.. but the way I see it, Bruce is about 12 to what.. 14? That Jerome guy was probably considered between 18 and 20. Its not that big a difference.

Spanish Matlock posted:

When falcone says that the club is a moneymaker I think he means through laundering.

I think he meant that the club was popular and brought in a rich crowd which used to spend money.... But it would make more sense through laundering. Another failing of the writers maybe?

Hollismason
Jun 30, 2007
An alright dude.
Yeah that was loving terrible, why would you ruin such a amazing and iconic character like the Joker with giving him a back story that his mom was a whore that banged clowns and that's why he dresses up like a clown. What the loving gently caress. That's awful and lovely. Sorry I'm only in it for the Penguin and Riddler, skipping all other storylines except theirs, Penguins fantastic.

bring back old gbs
Feb 28, 2007

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
I like Zsasz, instead of a stoic gravelly voiced tough guy he has a higher pitched voice and is pretty conversational. I'd actually like to see more of him

Probably Magic
Oct 9, 2012

Looking cute, feeling cute.
Honestly, I view the Joker's intro here to be more as a plot device for Thompson-Gordon's story anyway. The show needed to show that Thompson was gung ho for even the darkest, creepiest corner of Gotham, a bravada that is probably going to bite her in the rear end sometime around the season finale and end her and Gordon's relationship. So what's the darkest rabbit hole you can go down? The start of the Joker. And Thompson looks at it and says, "Gee, what fun!"

Maybe that's giving the screenwriters way too much credit and they just really wanted the Joker to show up for the sweeps week. But I think it works (unless you idolize the Joker as the pinnacle of villains which I don't because whatever). I really liked this episode. Nice uses of transitions, and the flipping from character to character with some music playing from Penguin's nightclub worked well for me. The Barbara thing is over-the-top stupid, which is right where it belongs. The Fish thing stretches a bit, but by and large, I think Jada's acting and the character played as more interesting and layered than it has been. They clearly want her around for awhile and want to answer the question of, "How did Fish get this far anyway? What makes her in any way formidable?" So here we are. She is probably going to stick around into next season, maybe longer.

SamuraiFoochs
Jan 16, 2007




Grimey Drawer

Probably Magic posted:

Honestly, I view the Joker's intro here to be more as a plot device for Thompson-Gordon's story anyway. The show needed to show that Thompson was gung ho for even the darkest, creepiest corner of Gotham, a bravada that is probably going to bite her in the rear end sometime around the season finale and end her and Gordon's relationship. So what's the darkest rabbit hole you can go down? The start of the Joker. And Thompson looks at it and says, "Gee, what fun!"

Maybe that's giving the screenwriters way too much credit and they just really wanted the Joker to show up for the sweeps week. But I think it works (unless you idolize the Joker as the pinnacle of villains which I don't because whatever). I really liked this episode. Nice uses of transitions, and the flipping from character to character with some music playing from Penguin's nightclub worked well for me. The Barbara thing is over-the-top stupid, which is right where it belongs. The Fish thing stretches a bit, but by and large, I think Jada's acting and the character played as more interesting and layered than it has been. They clearly want her around for awhile and want to answer the question of, "How did Fish get this far anyway? What makes her in any way formidable?" So here we are. She is probably going to stick around into next season, maybe longer.

Yeah, I'm with this with regards to the Joker. I may be forgiving it in the sense that I thought the actor was actually really good (it's hard to do psychotic breaks like that seamlessly and in a way that builds and he nailed it, IMO), and really, why would anyone get their panties in a wad about any Joker origin story when a huge part of The Joker is that his origin is ambiguous? He has no concrete origin, because he's loving insane. Is this really any worse than a guy falling in a vat of chemicals or a lovely standup comic deciding to snap?

Jetfire
Apr 29, 2008

SamuraiFoochs posted:

Yeah, I'm with this with regards to the Joker. I may be forgiving it in the sense that I thought the actor was actually really good (it's hard to do psychotic breaks like that seamlessly and in a way that builds and he nailed it, IMO), and really, why would anyone get their panties in a wad about any Joker origin story when a huge part of The Joker is that his origin is ambiguous? He has no concrete origin, because he's loving insane. Is this really any worse than a guy falling in a vat of chemicals or a lovely standup comic deciding to snap?

It could be the showrunners are going to throw us multiple possible origin stories for Joker (i.e. several insane laughing people) throughout the show and in the end have none of them end up being The Joker.

SamuraiFoochs
Jan 16, 2007




Grimey Drawer

Jetfire posted:

It could be the showrunners are going to throw us multiple possible origin stories for Joker (i.e. several insane laughing people) throughout the show and in the end have none of them end up being The Joker.

That would actually be great but that actor did such a legit great job that I'm torn.

Rarity
Oct 21, 2010

~*4 LIFE*~

Dalael posted:

I do not understand what is the appeal with Zsaz. I put him in the same boat as Fish. An exaggerated comic-book villain at its worst. The only scene in which he was interesting, was the first time you see him. The boldness of the character, the supreme confidence... but that is it. In this episode, the whole thing about Zsaz having done some unspecified thing to Butch, trying to make it feel as if it was all so dreadful.. That didn't cut it for me. Replace Szaz by Fish (or literally anyone else) and Butch by literally anyone else, and the whole thing would have made everyone bitch and moan.. But because Szaz is involved, its suposed to be a good thing? C'mon.

How dare you suggest that anything could replace Butch's amazing tap routine? :colbert:

Phenotype
Jul 24, 2007

You must defeat Sheng Long to stand a chance.



Dalael posted:

Technically, we already know the Joker's origin thanks to the Killing Joke back from 88...

It's been a while since I've read it, but while I remember the Joker telling the story, I would also swear there was a bit shortly afterwards where Batman or Gordon said "is that the truth?" and Joker responds "who can really say? I've always preferred the past to be multiple-choice."

I had always thought that was the basis for the multiple origin stories the Joker gives in The Dark Knight.

SamuraiFoochs
Jan 16, 2007




Grimey Drawer

Phenotype posted:

It's been a while since I've read it, but while I remember the Joker telling the story, I would also swear there was a bit shortly afterwards where Batman or Gordon said "is that the truth?" and Joker responds "who can really say? I've always preferred the past to be multiple-choice."

I had always thought that was the basis for the multiple origin stories the Joker gives in The Dark Knight.

That's pretty much it, yep. He voluntarily undermines his own narrative.

hatelull
Oct 29, 2004

Hollismason posted:

Yeah that was loving terrible, why would you ruin such a amazing and iconic character like the Joker with giving him a back story that his mom was a whore that banged clowns and that's why he dresses up like a clown. What the loving gently caress. That's awful and lovely. Sorry I'm only in it for the Penguin and Riddler, skipping all other storylines except theirs, Penguins fantastic.

He hasn't dressed as a clown yet. There's no indication that he WILL dress as a clown, other than the idea that everyone associates the character with the iconic image of purple duds, green hair, and white face paint. I'm still holding out hope that the writers are attempting some sort of re-envisioning of the story. Sure, it will probably end up with similar version of the end result but the journey might still have some legs.

B.B. Rodriguez
Aug 8, 2005

Bender: "I was God once." God: "Yes, I saw. You were doing well until everyone died."

Guys. He's not The Joker. The people running this show may have made some ham-handed decisions with regards to future villains, but you can rest assured that Batman's greatest villain will not be introduced this way. This is entirely a ploy to get you talking about the show. Fanboys gonna bitch, moan, and whine about it and casual viewers get to think an iconic character is being shown. It's not. He's not. He's just a crazy kid who happened to be raised in the circus.

Krad
Feb 4, 2008

Touche
The future Red Hood episode would be an ideal moment to introduce another proto-Joker and give some credibility to the "it's not him!" theories floating around.

Then again, people forget that this is the show that gave us such subtlety as "has anyone told you that you walk like a Penguin™?" I mean, this isn't exactly Breaking Bad tier of writing, you know?

bobkatt013
Oct 8, 2006

You’re telling me Peter Parker is ...... Spider-man!?
Also if it was the joker there is no way that they would not have him share a scene with Bruce.

Count Thrashula
Jun 1, 2003

Death is nothing compared to vindication.
Buglord
Ugh, Fish Mooney is the Daenerys Targaryen of Gotham. I could really not care less what happens to her, and every time there's a Fish scene, I think, "oh, good, I had to go pee anyway."

Other than her I'm really enjoying where things are going, in a "turn off my brain and enjoy the ride" kind of way.

Windows 98
Nov 13, 2005

HTTP 400: Bad post

COOL CORN posted:

Ugh, Fish Mooney is the Daenerys Targaryen of Gotham. I could really not care less what happens to her, and every time there's a Fish scene, I think, "oh, good, I had to go pee anyway."

Other than her I'm really enjoying where things are going, in a "turn off my brain and enjoy the ride" kind of way.

Considering how loving awesome Daenerys Targaryen is Id say you have poor taste.

Even though you are in fact correct and Fish sucks

bobkatt013
Oct 8, 2006

You’re telling me Peter Parker is ...... Spider-man!?
At this point is like Jada Pinkett Smith is the biggest star in the cast so they have to do something with her, when she should have been killed off midseason by Penguin.

Darko
Dec 23, 2004

Windows 98 posted:

Considering how loving awesome Daenerys Targaryen is Id say you have poor taste.

Even though you are in fact correct and Fish sucks

If by awesome, you mean borderline psychotic and terrible at ruling due to not considering the ramifications of anything she does...

I kind of settled into the Fish story, as I said before. It's no goofier than anything else at this point, and I see what they're attempting to do, so I just roll with it now.

And yeah, I'm definitely in the camp that, with The Joker, they're going to just keep introducing a ton of possible Jokers to see the reaction, and either stick with one if people like that one, or just have one out of nowhere at the end of the show that may or may not be one of the possible ones we've seen introduced.

Windows 98
Nov 13, 2005

HTTP 400: Bad post

Darko posted:

If by awesome, you mean borderline psychotic and terrible at ruling due to not considering the ramifications of anything she does...

That is exactly what I mean. Her entire story line is that she became kahlesi(so?), and had an over inflated sense of how to rule. She then gets dragons and comes into a situation that may actually require her to rule properly. She makes a bunch of bold moves without thinking about the consequences, even though the moves seemed relatively justified at the time. By chance things work in her favor by being bold, and now that her dragons are finally getting big enough to gently caress poo poo up her empire is starting to crumble. On top of it all she fired her best advisor. If you saw her story as annoying as opposed to a well developed character arc than you are being very near sighted. It's like the people who hate Skylar on breaking bad. She wasn't incredibly likable but her story made sense and her character did have emotional and behavioral changes that fit her circumstances. You should be excited to see if her empire crumbles and she loses everything even though she was in such a powerful position with dragons. Or if she can pull it off and start making better decisions. With so many characters who claim to be rulers you get every taste. Borathian was neglectful and shallow. Stark was fair and just and a proper King. Joffrey was crazy and violent. Etc. It only makes sense that one of the people ruling was a young person with an over inflated ego due to powerful weapons and military, that doesn't think decisions through thoroughly and may gently caress themselves over before they even get a chance to conquer because she has tunnel vision.

And now I am realizing that if the writers put even a 10th as much effort in as GRRM did Daenerys (who is more or less a B plot, like Fish), Fish wouldn't suck. I think they wanted her as an introduction to Maroni and Falcone beef that penguin slithers through. But then realized they went too far with her, she was a big name, and writing her off completely would probably work best as a mid season finale. So they are just filling time with her and using her to segue into what is probably the Doll Maker taking organs. She's gonna try to get in with him and take a cut then gently caress him over when the time is right. Then she will be in a position to start her organization again, being "reborn".

I'm hoping she dies violently and is forgotten forever and we just have zombie butch + penguin team ups instead of what they use for her screen time. But guessing by how ham fisted her hatred for the penguin is she will probably stick around as a enemy of his once he solidifies himself as a position of power in his organized crime family and he has killed off both Falcone and Maroni.

Windows 98 fucked around with this message at 22:45 on Feb 18, 2015

bobkatt013
Oct 8, 2006

You’re telling me Peter Parker is ...... Spider-man!?

Windows 98 posted:

I'm hoping she died violently and is forgotten forever and we just have zombie butch + penguin team ups instead of what they use for her screen time. But guessing by how ham fisted her hatred for the penguin is she will probably stick around as a enemy of his once he solidifies himself as a position of power in his organized crime family and he has killed off both Falcone and Maroni.

Maroni is sticking around for a long time as he has a tie to Harvey Dent. However, I could see Penguin getting Harvey Dent to investigate him in order to destroy him.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

hard counter
Jan 2, 2015





i can't do it anymore

the fish speech finally did me in

  • Locked thread