JOKER Origin Movie (First Poster Released)

[DataBreach]

Name one point you made that I didn't address. I'll wait.



Not as much as I focused on your stupid ass being unable to spell. A writer! LOL!



Is that why everything memorable about the Bond movies that has carried the franchise for 30 years relates to Bond? The look, the drinks, the womanizing, the lines, they're all Bond.

Like I clearly said "all ready", the main draw and constant is 007 himself, not the antagonists.

Are you partly illiterate? You said you read it but clearly missed a lot.



Do you need me to quote myself and walk you to the part where I addressed it? Do you need me to hold your hand so you don't walk into anything?



I'm sure it does for someone as stupid as you. For others having everything they say directly addressed is actually helpful. But most people don't avoid everything said like you. Not that many complete pussies around thankfully.



So you really do need someone to walk you through it?! Im not sure I've met anyone this dumb on this forum before. Here....

- me in response to your point that the villains made the Bond franchise.

Now tell me what I evaded again.




You can't even figure out how having a friend as an enemy would make a hero vulnerable, and you're criticizing the creativity of someone else?

Learn how to read, learn how to spell, then learn how to write. After that, come back and try again.



LOL "I can't have a conversation with a person who uses reason!" I wonder why? Maybe it's because you're incredibly unintelligent.



And you lack the ability to spell words like "begin" and "already". If that's the spark, I'm glad I don't have it.



I.... can't....stop....laughing. Oh man it hurts.

Learn to fucking spell before you try to critique someone else's writing you moron. Dryer is a noun, something that makes something dry. DRIER is the adjective you were looking for.

A writer should know that.



Great idea, just repeat stupid points that I've already tore to shit. I'm sure no one will notice....



I'm sorry I thought you were defending Suicide Squad? Where was Bane in that and at what point in the movie did Joker kill the love of Batman's life? It's almost like you can't use the actual movie to defend it because.... it sucked. LOL.



I'd say having to choose between one's own moral code and the person they're closest to is a bit of a test.

You probably don't agree though, because you're so stupid it's funny.





Great summary of your post.

Do yourself a favor; write a manual on how to properly respond to a post. Then read it, misspelled words and all, and do the exact opposite of everything you wrote. Clown.

Lol. Why'd you throw away my response that you were an editor at best? Struck a nerve?

Like I said dishonest. You throw away the parts of my post you don't like and evade the parts you can't argue against.

Pathetic.

You're an editor at best. Nothing wrong with editors as long as they edit and leave the writing to creative people.

 

[Davem10]

They should use the guy that played the Joker in Gotham

I thought he was excellent

 

[xcvbn]

Exciting premise completely ruined by the current crop of DC shit being spewed. Scorsese doesn't stay on as producer. Guaranteed.

 

[taurus]

The guy spent an entire post insulting me and I throw one insult and I'm a hypocrite. Lol.

This guy fool's the simple minded.

It's the same logic at starting a fight and then when the guy hits you back now he's the bully.

Use your brain.

I didn't go into details of your debate and i don't take sides in it as it is far too distracting and likely to get one or both of you dubbed. And i never called you a hypocrite, while you (i presume) imply i'm simple minded.

That said, i think his arguments (the ones i couldn't help to look at) make more sense, maybe due to the fact that I (as well as the majority of people i've talked to) also consider suicide squad to be (let's be PC here) an "inferior" movie.

 

[DataBreach]

I didn't go into details of your debate and i don't take sides in it as it is far too distracting and likely to get one or both of you dubbed. And i never called you a hypocrite, while you (i presume) imply i'm simple minded.

That said, i think his arguments (the ones i couldn't help to look at) make more sense, maybe due to the fact that I (as well as the majority of people i've talked to) also consider suicide squad to be (let's be PC here) an "inferior" movie.

Agree to disagree.

If you can't see through his methods there's not much I can say that will help you.

The guy has not disproved Bucky as a suspense-less villain. Captain chose Bucky in Winter Soldier because he was his friend and he fought against Hydra because Hydra was controlling Bucky.

Then, in Civil War, Captain has the same fears and choses Bucky rather than side with a possible "controlled" governmental oversight committee.

It all makes sense but it's not deep or provoking. And nothing to overtly challenge Captain as a proper villain.

It's just a fact. Winter Soldier and Civil War never had a good villain. Therefore, no suspense.

I'm waiting for someone to prove me wrong but it hasn't happened yet. Lol.

 

[DataBreach]

@CargoKing

What's up pussy.

 

[CargoKing]

Lol. Your brain isn't firing if you think this tool is doing anything but exposing himself. Lol Cheering for a dude who argues like a teenager.

Civil war = Winter Soldier 2. Even lamer than the original. No villain. Cap has a differing of opinion with Stark and so they beat each other up. Lol. No villain and ZERO closer. Epic fail.

Tell us more about arguing like a teenager.

You know the splice method of arguing is only utilized on the internet, right?

Well duh, you don't quote people in real life when you respond to them. Good thing we're on the internet....

In a formal debate, or even a conversation, you can't just interrupt someone every sentence.

Well I'm online talking to a self proclaimed writer who posted "the audience all ready knows", so I've got nothing to worry about.

That's why I'm laughing at you and refuse to self correct (the way you do by going to a word file/editing program and making sure there are no errors in your post while I securely type in my phone)

BWWWWAAAAAAHHHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

A program?!! No scamp, it's called not being stupid and knowing how to write. Wow....

because your need for attention is obvious and acting tough is where you get your fulfillment via the interwebs.

Said the troll with the history of dissenting and outspoken opinions. I'm sure you know the condition well, but I'm just here telling you why you're stupid. It's your reward for being arrogant and sucking ass at the same time.

More complete people don't need to utilize passive aggressive methods for fulfillment.

More complete people know how to spell.

Just saying a bunch of stupid stuff.

Tell me about it...

I stopped reading when you said something about holding my hand to show me how you addressed my points because you did nothing of the sort.

Yes I did. I had to re-quote myself to show you exactly what you desperately tried to pretend wasn't there. It was hilarious.

I'm guessing you stopped reading because you knew it was only gonna get worse.

Your entire method of splicing is dishonest and discourages real conversation.

How? Respond to what I'm saying directly and refute my points. It's pretty simple. No one is denying you a chance to respond to anything, you're simply saying you're not up to the challenge.

You're a dishonest person because again, you didn't disprove my main points you side stepped them.

No, I did, quite clearly. But you admittedly stopped reading my post, so how would you even know...?

I think you're being.... oh what's the word.... oh yeah. Dishonest.

Hypocrite.

Both films had no real villains and therefore lacked suspense.

A movie has to have a villain to have suspense?

And nothing you have said has disproved those facts.

They're not facts. They're the opinions of a teenager who thought SuicideSquad was well-written. He happens to be dumber than a whale's asshole.

Now cut and paste my comment into your editing software and grab some more passive aggressive sense of entitlement/accomplishment. Lol.

LOOOOOL editing software! Holy shit my stomache....

Lol. Why'd you throw away my response that you were an editor at best? Struck a nerve?

You edited it in while I was replying.

Why'd you throw away everything I've said to you? Struck that pussy nerve?

Like I said dishonest. You throw away the parts of my post you don't like and evade the parts you can't argue against.

Pathetic.

Try again clown. Here, just for you....

You're an editor at best. Nothing wrong with editors as long as they edit and leave the writing to creative people

I thought I use editing software you inconsistent lobotomy victim. Try to keep up with your own stupidity. I know it's hard because there's so much, but try.

 

[CargoKing]

@CargoKing

What's up pussy.

The number of times I've wiped my ass with your being.

 

[Dragonlordxxxxx]

@DataBreach and @CargoKing

That's enough bickering. You're derailing the thread and it was getting nasty. I'm giving you both a time out and reply banning you from the thread for 6 hours to give you time to cool off. When the reply ban is lifted, please do not continue with your argument.

 

[taurus]

Agree to disagree.

If you can't see through his methods there's not much I can say that will help you.

The guy has not disproved Bucky as a suspense-less villain. Captain chose Bucky in Winter Soldier because he was his friend and he fought against Hydra because Hydra was controlling Bucky.

Then, in Civil War, Captain has the same fears and choses Bucky rather than side with a possible "controlled" governmental oversight committee.

It all makes sense but it's not deep or provoking. And nothing to overtly challenge Captain as a proper villain.

It's just a fact. Winter Soldier and Civil War never had a good villain. Therefore, no suspense.

I'm waiting for someone to prove me wrong but it hasn't happened yet. Lol.

See this is the point where his arguments (ridicule and badmouthing aside) stick as some of your statements don't make sense. Agree to disagree on what part of my post? That I didn't go into details of your debate ? Or that I never called you a hypocrite? Or that i think you imply i'm simple minded? Or simply that I THINK SS is an inferior movie? If the last one, you can't disagree on what i think. You may disagree on the quality of the movie, which is perfectly fine, but you made your opinion on it perfectly clear (in a way that no one has a single doubt anymore on what you think is the better movie). No need to beat the dead horse.

Sorry, but i'm not getting further in this debate, nor do I think (not like my opinion matters or anything but hey) both of you should, as it is 1) definitely off topic 2) makes both of you look bad. Carry on gents, is what my advice is.

EDIT: @Dragonlordxxxxx beat me to it.

 

[BEER]

I am neither interested in a "Joker Origins" movie (Joker doesn't have an established origin in the comics, the closest would be The Killing Joke, which isn't considered hard canon, outside of being the origin story for Oracle) nor the bickering about the Marvel universe that has plagued this thread.

 

[SingerAuto]

Okay you tryhard.

Go ahead and refute the facts in this thread rather than spamming your baseless accusations.

Civil War was crap. No proper villain. The big setup to this war was a disagreement over protocol.
The fact you defend a retarded storyline makes you even more retarded, lol.

I don't give AF if your are not interested in character development. I wanna know my characters not have some broad scope guessing as to what makes them unique.

No character development? Now I know you're trolling. Cap grew, Stark grew, we saw both Wanda and Vision become fully fleshed characters, we saw Bucky's arc, etc... That's not a valid criticism.
The villain criticism? Valid, because that was the goal of the movie. Not to have a supervillain killing people, it was a movie about how differing opinions can fracture a team.

If you truly cared about characters and didn't want broad strokes, then there is NO WAY you liked SS. It had absolutely ZERO development of any character besides Quinn and Lawton and even those were flimsy.

The shit movie you're blowing was worse than CA CW in both of your criticism. If you thought Zemo was bad, WTF was Enchantress? She may be the worst comic movie villain EVER. That's how I know you're trolling. You slam CA CW for some things then say SS was better when SS was a MUCH bigger offender of your supposed criticisms.
I'm done, you are clueless. You've been owned throughout this thread.

 

[DataBreach]

No character development? Now I know you're trolling. Cap grew, Stark grew, we saw both Wanda and Vision become fully fleshed characters, we saw Bucky's arc, etc... That's not a valid criticism.
The villain criticism? Valid, because that was the goal of the movie. Not to have a supervillain killing people, it was a movie about how differing opinions can fracture a team.

If you truly cared about characters and didn't want broad strokes, then there is NO WAY you liked SS. It had absolutely ZERO development of any character besides Quinn and Lawton and even those were flimsy.

The shit movie you're blowing was worse than CA CW in both of your criticism. If you thought Zemo was bad, WTF was Enchantress? She may be the worst comic movie villain EVER. That's how I know you're trolling. You slam CA CW for some things then say SS was better when SS was a MUCH bigger offender of your supposed criticisms.
I'm done, you are clueless. You've been owned throughout this thread.

I'll have this conversation with you but the moment you start using lame tactics like that other moron I'm out. As long as a discussion is reasonable I don't mind differing of opinions.

In my final paragraph (which you quoted) I wasn't talking about Marvel character development. I was talking about my desire to see the Joker character fleshed out. Hence, this threads topic.

SS was their first film. WS and CW were sequels. I enjoyed the first CA film. Thought it was great character development.

If you read my posts as to WHY the CA sequels needed a strong villain then you can expose me. I'm still waiting for you or anyone else to prove my points to be insufficient. I think they're right on the money.

In WS Bucky was a Hydra agent and Shield had been overtaken by secret Hydra forces. So when CA decided to not fight Bucky and eradicate shield of Hydra agents there was zero moral problems with his decision (no laws broken). Very little suspense and no chance of CA being really tested by any villain. It's a binary decision and CA made the choice everyone knew he would make (predictable). Even other agents (the director, Natasha, the blonde chick) all fought against Hydra. So trying to act like CA made this giant leap out of his character (was truly tested) is just hogwash. The fact all the other agents did as CA did means he was acting honorably.

WS = lack of villain. Meaning CA wasn't really tested. I already stated if anyone needs a strong villain it's CA. He's too vanilla , bland and predictable. Just as Batman was highly tested by Joker and Bane, both he and CA being strongly willed moral characters, you need a certain type of opposition to truly test those types. Sorry, his old best friend and Hydra was too predictable and CA did exactly what we knew he'd do. Save his friend and take out hydra. Predictable and boring.

CW was basically WS part 2. It had many of the same problems but this time instead of Hydra controlling Bucky he is falsely accused of a bombing. Therefore CA comes to Bucky's aid again, for essentially the same reason. Not only was that predictable and boring, it had just been done in the previous film, making it frustrating as well. Then, the team gets into a disagreement about how much oversight it should allow. Again, this is similar to the previous film because it was Shield that was infiltrated, so CA had his fears if there was too much oversight the team could become compromised and used to do Hydra type missions. Stark goes full retard and can't see how that's possible even though in the first Avengers movie it was Stark that hacked Shield's framework and saw Shield was using the cube to make weapons of mass destruction. In short, Stark didn't trust Shield at all but now he's willing to quickly submit to anything and even fight his friends over it? You gotta be kidding me!

The fact Stark wasn't opposed too and more objective like CA makes zero sense. Therefore, the Civil War was based on a flimsy premise to begin with.

CW = Again, lack of villain and the team fighting itself was based on a bad premise. It suffered from the same problems WS had and made far less sense than CA eradicating Hydra from shield in WS. So when you actually think about it, it's worse than WS.

My reasons for liking SS was it was the first film and we are introduced to the team for the first time. Unlike CA: The First Avenger, SS had to introduce to an entire team and even before that, introduce us to the corrupt team that would use and abuse this team. Long story short that's a lot of team to introduce us to. I thought they did a great job perfectly melding the two.

They were perfectly able to show us how bad ass the SS was and also how bad ass the team would be to keep them controlled and under their thumb. They did this in like 30 minutes. This allowed them to then focus on the main villain.

The scene where the government doesn't want to use enhanced people. Then the demonstration where the enchantress takes that military book from the Iran vault. That scene was money for a few reasons. It not only set up the villain in a stellar manner it was the turning point in creating and allowing the SS in missions. It's great writing. The future villain is actually the final reason the SS is allowed.

This is basically why she was so mocking toward the SS. Because she knew without this demonstration the SS would not even be permitted to be a squad.

I can go on but would like to hear some of you rebuttals.

 

[Cool Hand Luke]

Jesus Christ guys, can you not shit up these threads with your fucking over analysis of a comic book movie? These fucking wall of texts are tedious and only prove one thing: YOU NEED TO SHUT THE FUCK UP.

 

[Dragonlordxxxxx]

Update: August 29, 2017

Rumor: Brendan Schaub Says Origin Movie to Feature Joker Bullied as a Kid

Like it or not, the Joker is about to make a big comeback on the big screen. Last week, DC Films announced it was working on two new features about the Joker, and it appears one of them will feature a twisted take on the Joker’s origins.

Thanks to Batman News, fans just learned a bit about how Martin Scorsese and Todd Phillips will approach the Joker in their standalone movie. Joe Rogan did an interview with former MMA fighter Brendan Schuab who is friends with Phillips’ agent, and the athlete had some surprising things to say about the movie.

“My boy [agent] Todd Feldman put this together with Todd Phillips,” Schaub started. “It’s dark. It’s like a dark Joker. As a kid, he had a permanent smile and everyone made fun of him. It’s like on the streets of Brooklyn. It’s super dark and real.”

While the rumor’s source comes from an unexpected place, fans are nonetheless interested to hear about where the film is heading. Schuab’s comments do line up with reports fans have already gotten about the Joker origin film.

Rumor: DC's Joker Origin Film To Feature A Dark and Bullied Joker

 

[MadSquabbles500]

They should get the guy who plays him on Gotham to play Joker. He does a great job.

 

[Dragonlordxxxxx]

My pick for Joker as of this time is Martin Wallstrom from Mr. Robot. He looked and acted really creepy in that show.

 

[irish_thug]

Update: August 29, 2017

Rumor: Brendan Schaub Says Origin Movie to Feature Joker Bullied as a Kid

Like it or not, the Joker is about to make a big comeback on the big screen. Last week, DC Films announced it was working on two new features about the Joker, and it appears one of them will feature a twisted take on the Joker’s origins.

Thanks to Batman News, fans just learned a bit about how Martin Scorsese and Todd Phillips will approach the Joker in their standalone movie. Joe Rogan did an interview with former MMA fighter Brendan Schuab who is friends with Phillips’ agent, and the athlete had some surprising things to say about the movie.

“My boy [agent] Todd Feldman put this together with Todd Phillips,” Schaub started. “It’s dark. It’s like a dark Joker. As a kid, he had a permanent smile and everyone made fun of him. It’s like on the streets of Brooklyn. It’s super dark and real.”

While the rumor’s source comes from an unexpected place, fans are nonetheless interested to hear about where the film is heading. Schuab’s comments do line up with reports fans have already gotten about the Joker origin film.

Rumor: DC's Joker Origin Film To Feature A Dark and Bullied Joker

Considering Brendan's sidekick broke the Bruce/Caitlyn news, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Nameless Ghoul]

....the "need" to make the Joker a product of being a victim and being misunderstood hurts my heart.

 

[TheRuthlessOne]

I refuse to watch this movie

I hope you all do the same..Dont let them get away with this crap