|
The thing about this (potential) version of the Joker is that the character didn't really exhibit even a hint of the character's trademark diabolical cleverness, the thing that makes him actually capable of competing with Batman and fun to watch. He's just a crazy guy who committed murder and was promptly caught and confessed. The show wants their own version of the Joker, then just has the actor do a mishmash of all the other iconic portrayals. And that's basically all we see the character do. Quite a weak introduction. Also, Victor Zsaszsz can loving flawlessly brainwash people apparently? How is he not the most powerful person in the world or at least a major crime boss in the city? Also I wonder if they are thinking of new ways to make The Penguin change from shot to shot. First they had the hair spikes moving. Now sometimes he's got major freckles.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:56 |
|
|
Metropolis posted:The thing about this (potential) version of the Joker is that the character didn't really exhibit even a hint of the character's trademark diabolical cleverness, the thing that makes him actually capable of competing with Batman and fun to watch. Batman isn't batman yet. If that little ginger is the joker, he's got many years to hone his criminal genius skills.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
Metropolis posted:Also, Victor Zsaszsz can loving flawlessly brainwash people apparently? How is he not the most powerful person in the world or at least a major crime boss in the city? I think you are confusing brainwashing and torture.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
Metropolis posted:Also, Victor Zsaszsz can loving flawlessly brainwash people apparently? How is he not the most powerful person in the world or at least a major crime boss in the city? More to the point, why wasn't it him doing the "torture" of Fish instead of that painfully incompetent dude? The answer of course is that they wanted Fish to escape, but I think it would have been quite cool for Fish to have gotten one over on Zsasz just so he could become obsessed with wanting to give her a place on his flesh, and how that conflicted with Falcone or Penguin or even Butchie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
Guys, the showrunners said when the show began that they planned to introduce a bunch of different potential Jokers, there's no reason to think that's changed
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:More to the point, why wasn't it him doing the "torture" of Fish instead of that painfully incompetent dude? Wait, who? Butch you are calling incompetent?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Fog Tripper posted:Wait, who? Butch you are calling incompetent? No, the guy who was supposed to torture Fish. The guy who was supposed to be THE expert on breaking a person who was hilariously easily manipulated by Fish.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
Windows 98 posted: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. My opinion of Dany is colored by being a book reader and having her POV. I agree with her as being good writing, but she's often liked for bad reasons (she's badass), with many of her fans not seeing her ridiculous character flaws. If you're looking at it strictly from the quality of writing angle, however, I agree. Sky was kind of a different story. She was introduced as a character you were supposed to hate, and was pretty much one note for the first season or so, which set people's opinions in. It's hard for a lot of people to drop their initial opinions, even though she was written better as the show progressed, so that's where much of that comes from. You're comparing a hammy, silly network show (and the restrictions that come along with that) to two of the best written shows on TV, though. I'd find characters like Laurel on Arrow, etc. to be better comparisons as to level of writing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
Poor Barbara. She leaves Jim and IMMEDIATELY jumps in bed with her ex. Her ex finds her a source of toxins and bad habits and ends with her. She spends time with her emotionless parents and then decides Jim's an rear end in a top hat. Then she wants Jim and is upset that after all this time and leaving him he's starting a relationship with someone else. Oh the horror. Poor Barbara. Please open next week's scene with her in a bathtub filled with blood and open wrists. PLEASE. Fish too. Hi, I'm Fish and I demand your loyalty because I killed your last leader by stabbing him while sitting on his lap. Therefore I am now the infallible leader. Standing on that guy on all fours playing her podium? Doing a war-like battle speech to get their support? If Barbara's role increases and Fish is still breathing at the end of this season I'm done with this loving thing. They also literally cannot help themselves but introducing more characters for no reason. They seriously are treating this show like they have a single season to jam as much into it as they can. I like the Penguin and Riddler and even Gordon/Bullock, and they really need to continue the crime family storylines. But if they continue focusing on the "supervillain origin/supervillain father/older brother" of the week nonsense, I'm just going to stop. The show isn't good enough to deal with completely dead and useless scenes like Fish's and Barbara's. Even Penguin's scenes sucked this week. This episode just all around loving sucked.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
Darko posted:You're comparing a hammy, silly network show (and the restrictions that come along with that) to two of the best written shows on TV, though. I'd find characters like Laurel on Arrow, etc. to be better comparisons as to level of writing. I agree that Laurel is a better comparison for the quality of writing. But I thought you were bitching about the quality of writing for Fish. My point was that Dany isn't the Fish of GoT because she is actually written well. Sure she can be annoying like Fish, but at least her character has direction and an arc. Fish has just been thrown together it seems. Her entire character is garbage from front to back, and every line she says is garbage, and every scene is grossly over acted. The rest of the show is silly and hammy but at least there is some semblance of direction for the characters. Fish literally flops around.... like a fish
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
this show's already getting bloated from not tying off storylines we had like 6 separate things going on this episode gordon mainline bruce branch fish branch penguin branch barbara branch gordon/leslie romantic subplot season 2 will be an utter wreck if they don't tighten things up
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
I think a big part of the problem this show has is that the writers didn't think that this show would even last past thirteen episodes. You can see that they knew where they wanted to go with Penguin and the other characters for those first thirteen episodes but after that they had no clue about what to do next, which explains why things can to a bit of a standstill after the Christmas break.
David D. Davidson fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
I feel like Barbara's role HAS to diminish to nothingness by the end of the season. Like, what else can she do for the plot exactly? Her only ties are to Gordon and Renee and neither of them want to be involved with her anymore, so she's basically just taking up space now.David D. Davidson posted:I think a big part of the problem this show has is that the writers didn't think that this show would even last past thirteen episodes. quote:Did the second season pickup change the plans at all for Season One, or alter your storytelling approach for the remainder of the season? Did you want to set up something big for Season Two as you moved toward the end? Source is here
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 05:48
|
|
|
FYI: Detective Harvey Bullock went undercover as Detective Declan Murphy on tonight's episode of Law & Order. And at one point, they even contrived a line of dialog so that he could say that someone had "Bullock-sed something up." (It also has the Amazing Unkillable Man from Constantine. They're going for broke!)
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
I was really starting to like this show once it got past the first few episodes, but they really jumped the Fish a couple weeks ago.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
Rarity posted:Guys, the showrunners said when the show began that they planned to introduce a bunch of different potential Jokers, there's no reason to think that's changed I hate that if only because my stance remains that this actor nailed it pretty drat perfectly. They blew their load too early. Also I seriously think Fish Mooney is dragging this show down so loving hard. I hope Penguin ganks her.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
Do shows actually look at feedback like forums threads or random comments online? I mean they probably aren't reading this thread specifically, but I can't imagine anyone at all likes Fish. They must see how much everyone dislikes her, and not just for her character being a dick but because it's just flat out horrible in every way. Does an overwhelming reaction from their audience ever effect what happens in the story line of a show? Or do they say gently caress it and stick to what they planned on and just hope they don't get canceled. I remember a lot of eye rolling at all the not-so-subtle name dropping and I haven't noticed very much of it since.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:16
|
|
|
Good question because I'm positive audience reaction is hugely weighted on TV, especially broadcast TV, but not sure where they look. My guess is Nielsen and critics. At this point in the Internet you'd think they would review all kinds of forums though. I never go but perhaps the avclub is more "mainstream" and possibly one they look at?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:23
|
|
|
Believe it or not a YouTube comment nailed why I liked Jerome as a potential Joker so much: that actor nailed bits and pieces of every iconic Joker performance. There are bits of Nicholson in there, mostly in the word choices, some major Ledger mannerisms and diction, and that loving laugh is Hamill-esque. They blew one of their best possible performances on what I'm assuming is a red herring. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:29
|
|
|
Darko posted:My opinion of Dany is colored by being a book reader and having her POV. I agree with her as being good writing, but she's often liked for bad reasons (she's badass), with many of her fans not seeing her ridiculous character flaws. If you're looking at it strictly from the quality of writing angle, however, I agree. Game of Thrones is one of the silliest shows on TV, and I'd rank it just about the same as Gotham.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 14:24
|
|
|
Red Hood gang episode is coming up soon isn't it? Because I thought the writers where introducing multiple Joker candidates.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 07:44
|
|
|
That was really bad, but having that kid not be the Joker really would just make it be even worse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 08:59
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:That was really bad, but having that kid not be the Joker really would just make it be even worse. Serious question, did you find the origin story bad, or the performance? The former I get, the latter I don't. Also agreed. The whole "multiple Jokers" thing just reeks of the writers hedging their bets to prevent people from  ing too much instead of sticking to something. I originally thought the Joker fakeouts thing was a good idea, but nah.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 09:30
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:I originally thought the Joker fakeouts thing was a good idea, but nah. I thought that, as well...and yup, fakeout options would actually suck just as much. The reason the classic "multiple choice" idea works so well, I think, is the sense that something more happenstance or accidental broke him. It's not that the Joker was necessarily from some crazy environment, but that some specific trauma he experienced or accident that happened changed his whole life, and his reaction was a psychotic break. In a sense, he's the potential for madness in all of us, either because "who he was before" is totally mundane or because it's a complete mystery. "He was raised in the circus and his first kill is his own slutty mother!" is such an overreaching way to 'explain' him, though...like he's Norman Bates or Rorschach. The weirdness and specificity of it casts all the craziness off onto his context, which kind of takes away from what's so strong about him as a character.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 10:56
|
|
|
I wouldn't have a problem with Joker fakeouts if the writers were skilled enough to keep them subtle but if it means they there are just 500 people in Gotham who act exactly like the loving Joker then no thank you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
I get tired of "the new thing" just being a re-tread of some old thing. So far, every Joker has been a different portrayal. Cesar Romero, Jack Nicholson, Mark Hammil, and Heath Ledger had their own takes on the Joker. I don't want to see someone just imitating their style for Gotham's Joker. Give us something new, someone else's take on it. Sure it could flop, or it could be really awesome. In my perfect dream Gotham world, the writers would keep throwing out red herrings (Joker Fish!) of having some actor have some tragedy happen, and they respond by imitating one of the famous Jokers when they have their breakdown, then when they finally reveal the Joker, it's none of those guys, just some unknown actor doing their own take on the Joker. And forget about the back story, have someone ask where he came from and just have him blow it off. "Who cares where I came from, I'm here now, and it's time to have some fun! <manic laughter>" Do something new and exciting with an old character. Don't just give us something we've already had.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
Wa11y posted:I get tired of "the new thing" just being a re-tread of some old thing. So far, every Joker has been a different portrayal. Cesar Romero, Jack Nicholson, Mark Hammil, and Heath Ledger had their own takes on the Joker. I don't want to see someone just imitating their style for Gotham's Joker. Give us something new, someone else's take on it. Sure it could flop, or it could be really awesome. This I like. You want logic? Cause and effect? Nah man, those times are gone. *Releases troop of rabid baboons into Gotham Cathedral*
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 15:38
|
|
|
Xealot posted:I thought that, as well...and yup, fakeout options would actually suck just as much. Agreed. The origin story was poo poo but I thought the performance was fantastic. Also "no origin story" doesn't work unless he's a lot older than Batman or is some criminal wunderkind and to me, Kid Joker who's 100% Joker is somehow worse. SamuraiFoochs fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Feb 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Serious question, did you find the origin story bad, or the performance? Mostly the former, but the performance sort of punctuates it. It was way way too "fully formed Joker," just put a clown suit and some make up on him, and he's already the Joker. His performance wasn't "disturbed kid with disturbing grin that hints of the Joker" it was "take the most noticeable parts of the three most famous depictions of this character and do that all at once." This is not a subtle show, and it outdid itself in not being subtle, and I think it's hilarious anyone could think this kid isn't the Joker. It's more likely that Nygma isn't the Riddler or Cobblepot isn't Penguin.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Agreed. The origin story was poo poo but I thought the performance was fantastic. Yeah, I guess a fully formed Joker right out the gate would be kinda dumb. But they could do some character building with him. Having him start out just crazy and loving to do "harmless pranks, oops they're dead!" type stuff, and slowly build into the Joker. Start wearing purple and green a lot, then the iconic suits, and eventually onto face paint and squirting lapel flowers. Oops, it squirts poison! I'd just rather have no back story for the Joker than "Wah, my mommy was such a nag, and she hosed clowns for money, so now I'm a crazy evil clown that kills!" or some other stupid, "It's somebody else's fault that I'm all evil!" story. And I think no back story could work for the Joker. Leave out the multiple choice stuff, it's been done before. Just have him be straight up someone who's born wrong. Can't bad guys just be evil anymore, and not the victim of someone else's abuse?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
In my mind the Joker has always just been a normal, boring, run-of-the-mill guy who just snapped. For absolutely no observable reason. Maybe it was hearing a news story about Batman. Maybe it was being bullied by his co-workers. Maybe it was nothing at all. He just quietly goes insane one day, then goes in to work and brutally slaughters everyone there, then goes home and carves himself a permanent grin.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Wa11y posted:I'd just rather have no back story for the Joker than "Wah, my mommy was such a nag, and she hosed clowns for money, so now I'm a crazy evil clown that kills!" or some other stupid, "It's somebody else's fault that I'm all evil!" story. And I think no back story could work for the Joker. Leave out the multiple choice stuff, it's been done before. Just have him be straight up someone who's born wrong. Can't bad guys just be evil anymore, and not the victim of someone else's abuse? I hope you're not implying that having a slutty mom is the kind of life experience that breaks an otherwise healthy child. Other than her lying about who his real father was, I didn't notice any indication that Jerome's mother mistreated or neglected him, and IMO the fact that his entire rationale for matricide is "my mom banged clowns AND ALSO expected me to do chores!" is an indication that he was, in fact, "born wrong."
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:For absolutely no observable reason. Part of the charm of the Batman/Joker dynamic, though, is that they are in so many ways really just the same. As Joker himself puts it in Killing Joke, that they are both the product of one particularly bad day. Which is also a reason I hated this as an origin story, his mother's nagging doesn't weigh very well against Bruce's parents being killed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:Part of the charm of the Batman/Joker dynamic, though, is that they are in so many ways really just the same. As Joker himself puts it in Killing Joke, that they are both the product of one particularly bad day. He also implies that it's most likely a lie. Personally, I like the idea of a quietly insane guy who just sees a news story on Batman on the television one night and says to himself, "Oh, is that what's happening now? Okay, time to kill some people, I guess."
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Did they ever state that killing his mother was his first murder? It's a traveling circus. Maybe he's left bodies all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Agreed. The origin story was poo poo but I thought the performance was fantastic. I don't know, I like the "no origin story" thing because it gives the Joker a supernatural like quality. Part of the charm of Heath Ledger's Joker was that he had no origin which made it almost as if he was the devil in human form.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Pththya-lyi posted:I hope you're not implying that having a slutty mom is the kind of life experience that breaks an otherwise healthy child. Other than her lying about who his real father was, I didn't notice any indication that Jerome's mother mistreated or neglected him, and IMO the fact that his entire rationale for matricide is "my mom banged clowns AND ALSO expected me to do chores!" is an indication that he was, in fact, "born wrong." Not trying to imply that at all. That would in fact be a terrible back story for just that reason! A lot of people have parents that nag them, or have parents that have sex with people other than their spouse, or even both, and they don't turn into crazy killers. I get that as proof that he's "born wrong" because he breaks from that where most normal people don't. But in modern story telling, there seems to be a need to justify everything. Nobody can just be evil because they're evil. There has to be someone who did something that drove them to it. It makes the bad guy a victim. Can't they just be a bad guy, and that's why they do bad things? Do they always have to have someone who wronged them and started them on this path? Can't crazy evil motherfuckers just be crazy evil motherfuckers?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
Wa11y posted:I'd just rather have no back story for the Joker than "Wah, my mommy was such a nag, and she hosed clowns for money, so now I'm a crazy evil clown that kills!" or some other stupid, "It's somebody else's fault that I'm all evil!" story. There are still a lot of ways this can be fixed. I'd love for them to revisit the kid some time later and he tells a completely different story about why he killed his mom every time. For that matter, do we know she is his mother? Do a DNA test later and then reveal she stole him somewhere as a baby.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:Mostly the former, but the performance sort of punctuates it. It was way way too "fully formed Joker," just put a clown suit and some make up on him, and he's already the Joker. His performance wasn't "disturbed kid with disturbing grin that hints of the Joker" it was "take the most noticeable parts of the three most famous depictions of this character and do that all at once." That's a fair point, I guess I'm jussayin' the writers probably told the kid "go full Joker" and I think he deserves props for nailing that part even if it's a dumb writing/directing/whatever else decision. Davros1 posted:Did they ever state that killing his mother was his first murder? It's a traveling circus. Maybe he's left bodies all over the place. Not at all. Dude could be full blown sociopath and this is just what they caught. In fact, kinda implied in the exchange with Cicero. I took it that this "kindness" was NOT the first one he extended to Jerome. Shadoer posted:I don't know, I like the "no origin story" thing because it gives the Joker a supernatural like quality. Part of the charm of Heath Ledger's Joker was that he had no origin which made it almost as if he was the devil in human form. I didn't say it was a bad idea. I said it wouldn't work on Gotham unless A) he's significantly older than Bruce and I always got the impression Batman and the Joker are supposed to be close in age to drive home that the truth is they're a couple steps away from being the same or B) you have "fully formed wunderkind Joker" which is this criticism cranked up to 11.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:56 |
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:
Fair enough. Although in quite a few portrayls he's shown as significantly holder than Bruce. Jack Nicholson's Joker was definitely a decade and a bit older than Batman and Mask of the Phantasm showed Joker was also Bruce's senior. So it wouldn't be out of place for him to be older.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2015 18:57
|
|