|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 20, 2019 5:25:12 GMT
Well, there's no argument. Everyone knows that Arthur Fleck nicely embodies the spirit and the characteristics of The Joker in his early phase of life. It's The Joker, not a deranged clown. That's it. There's no argument because that's not what I said. Quite the opposite. I'm saying he IS The Joker, and this IS a Batman movie because it's examining why criminals like Joker exists and thus why Batman exists, and why his methods are not the solution to Gotham's problems. I think the premise that Bruce and his family are in the movie as meaningless fan service and it should just be some Joker tale that exists in a vacuum is strange, and I'm trying to understand the thought process there. For me personally, I just don’t like the idea of the movie potentially spawning yet another new universe of Batman films. The movie was pitched as an experimental standalone made in the style of a Martin Scorsese film, and I’d rather it stay that way. Killing off Bruce Wayne would’ve been a perfect way of reinforcing the idea that the movie is supposed to be a one-off. Instead, we now have to worry about the possibility that the movie will either connect to the Robert Pattinson films, or that it’s going to kickstart its own comic book movie universe.
|
|
