WB RELEASES DELETED SCENE FEATURING !SPOILER!

[The Dark Knight]

I liked it a lot. And Batman going to The Joker for questioning is far from a new idea. So I don't know why some people are mad about it, especially since it's a deleted scene?

I also keep seeing people claim that Barry is doing an impression of Ledger, and I don't see or hear it, at all. The closest I can see, is sometimes a word with an 'S' could come across similar, but I think that has wayyyy more to do with the prosthetics and the restrictions on his mouth, more than him aping on Ledger's cadence, because when you actually hear Barry speak, he has slight Northern/New York accent to him. His voice sounds more adolescent than any Joker we've had before. I dunno, I just don't hear it with in comparison to Ledger. His laugh is also different.

I'm not entirely convinced they're genuinely angry. Some weren't on board with the film to begin with, and are looking for a reason to vent. There's no reason to be bothered by that type of noise given the successful aftermath of the film's release. I have no problem with them saying their piece.

This is an early days Joker, so the relationship hasn't been fully established. But it's getting there. The idea a homicidal killer could be a source for information is hardly unfathomable. Ted Bundy gave his insights into the mind of the Green River killer, while also shedding light on his own pathology. You take in to account some things they say and ignore others.

The scene was deleted, but I like the symmetry of Joker appearing near the beginning and also at the end - having a presence while not being the focus - while undoubtedly being an important foundation figure for Battinson. It's a smart way of integrating a character some deem essential to the Batman mythos to be considered definitive, while taking in to account the overexposure concerns.

With his film, Reeves has demonstrated how to showcase a large number of rogues effortlessly. No elaborate buildup: just show them. Featuring an iconic character doesn't mean they have to appear as a lead. I'd like this setup to continue. It should be the aim and intention of a seperate continuity focused solely on the Batman universe.

[Travesty]

With his film, Reeves has demonstrated how to showcase a large number of rogues effortlessly. No elaborate buildup: just show them. Featuring an iconic character doesn't mean they have to appear as a lead. I'd like this setup to continue. It should be the aim and intention of a seperate continuity focused solely on the Batman universe.

Not only that, but it just shows what Reeves is going for. In most live action versions, the villains can overshadow Batman. Hell, in Nolan's, I thought both the villains AND Bruce Wayne overshadowed Batman. With Reeves, he seems to put Batman as the main focus, which is such a breath of fresh air. You hear people complain about how little Bruce Wayne we got, and I'm over hear ecstatic that Reeves showcased so much Batman.

Keep Batman front and center, while introducing us to the world around him.

[thecolorsblend]

I'm not entirely convinced they're genuinely angry. Some weren't on board with the film to begin with, and are looking for a reason to vent. There's no reason to be bothered by that type of noise given the successful aftermath of the film's release. I have no problem with them saying their piece.

This is an early days Joker, so the relationship hasn't been fully established. But it's getting there. The idea a homicidal killer could be a source for information is hardly unfathomable. Ted Bundy gave his insights into the mind of the Green River killer, while also shedding light on his own pathology. You take in to account some things they say and ignore others.

The scene was deleted, but I like the symmetry of Joker appearing near the beginning and also at the end - having a presence while not being the focus - while undoubtedly being an important foundation figure for Battinson. It's a smart way of integrating a character some deem essential to the Batman mythos to be considered definitive, while taking in to account the overexposure concerns.

With his film, Reeves has demonstrated how to showcase a large number of rogues effortlessly. No elaborate buildup: just show them. Featuring an iconic character doesn't mean they have to appear as a lead. I'd like this setup to continue. It should be the aim and intention of a seperate continuity focused solely on the Batman universe.

Considering the long and established history Landis has of missing the point, I wouldn't take that his word too seriously in any case. But esp not this case. The media environment has been pretty much a famine for the past few weeks and grifters like him have to latch on to SOMETHING to talk about. And here comes a deleted scene he can serve up as outrage bait to salvage some scrap of his relevance.

I'm not saying Grace Randolph walks on water. But I am saying even she wouldn't stoop that low.

Accents aside, I think I hear a similarity to the Tom Waits tone of voice that Ledger used for the Joker in Barry's own performance. But even there, his Joker tone of voice seems pretty similar to his regular tone of voice. So, I think the "similarities" people claim to hear aren't as serious as anyone thinks.

Besides, how many jokes did Ledger make anyway? If someone (Landis) wants to pillory Barry for that, shouldn't he do the same for Ledger?

[Travesty]

One thing that someone pointed out on twitter that I didn't notice, was that Joker takes one of the paperclips from the papers.

Looks like there may be an escape from one of the inmates very soon. 

[The Dark Knight]

With his film, Reeves has demonstrated how to showcase a large number of rogues effortlessly. No elaborate buildup: just show them. Featuring an iconic character doesn't mean they have to appear as a lead. I'd like this setup to continue. It should be the aim and intention of a seperate continuity focused solely on the Batman universe.

Not only that, but it just shows what Reeves is going for. In most live action versions, the villains can overshadow Batman. Hell, in Nolan's, I thought both the villains AND Bruce Wayne overshadowed Batman. With Reeves, he seems to put Batman as the main focus, which is such a breath of fresh air. You hear people complain about how little Bruce Wayne we got, and I'm over hear ecstatic that Reeves showcased so much Batman.

Keep Batman front and center, while introducing us to the world around him.

Perhaps to maintain this dynamic Reeves doesn't drastically increase Bruce's screen time in the sequel - he simply makes it clear Bruce is more approachable and willing to listen. Substitute the funeral scene for a board meeting, or some other business related venture. Have Alfred mainly in radio contact from the railway station/cave, making it more of a team effort and less of a destructive one man obsession. And also serving to increase Alfred's presence in the film while juggling other characters like Gordon, Selina and other villains.

Just because Batman is looking to be a more heroic figure in terms of public perception doesn't mean his darkness is eroded. He always needs to remain a scary thought to criminals. The people just need to think he's doing it all for them.

Besides, how many jokes did Ledger make anyway? If someone (Landis) wants to pillory Barry for that, shouldn't he do the same for Ledger?

If he had any credibility. Ledger's incarnation was very much about the world being a joke, rather than telling jokes of his own per se. The dialogue in the deleted scene is coming from the point of view The Joker finds the truth funny. He knows Batman thinks the deceased victims deserved what they got even though he's acting as a morally righteous sheriff. The Joker know that "everyone plays a role, and no one says what's truly on their mind."

And again, I have no immediate concern about Joker being used as a main villain in the next film. I still like the idea of Mr Freeze. I'm not sure how 'real' Reeves would want to go. Meaning ideas such as Victor dealing crystal meth (ice) and/or freezing his enemies solid like Richard Kuklinski in order to disguise the time of death. Or going the whole hog and giving him an ice cannon like Schwarzenegger. I think the Nora backstory should be there at least, along with a suit of some kind.

[Silver Nemesis]

Meaning ideas such as Victor dealing crystal meth (ice) and/or freezing his enemies solid like Richard Kuklinski in order to disguise the time of death.

This is an intriguing suggestion. I thought Dano's Riddler benefitted from intentionally echoing the Zodiac Killer, and I wonder if the portrayals of other villains in Reeves' universe might similarly derive influence from the MOs of real life criminals. I haven't read up on the subject like you have, TDK, so you'll know more about it than I do. But a quick Google search on Kuklinski reveals some disturbing information that might potentially inform a more grounded portrayal of Mr. Freeze. I'd still prefer him to wear the armoured suit and wield some variation of the freeze gun, but there's definitely room to ground his modus operandi in more realistic psychopathology.

I wouldn't mind if Reeves deviated from the earlier depictions in the interests of updating the character. As has often been pointed out on this site, Mr. Freeze is one Batman villain who's been defined more by his media appearances than his comic book stories. His literary roots are arguably indebted more to Captain Cold and the Cryonic Man than to any actual Mr. Freeze comics. So I see no reason why Reeves' cinematic reinvention of the character shouldn't herald the next stage of his evolution in other mediums as well. The Riddler was overdue for an update, and so is Freeze.