In the opening minutes of the film, before the credits, even, it's revealed that he and his minions dress as clowns partly to keep from being identified, partly because it's a stylistic choice of consistent disguises.
And that's okay, really.
I'm wondering how they're going to write the "the mask is permanent now" part. I hope it's not as incredibly stupid as their "microwave machine" from Batman Begins.
Batman Begins was good (the microwave machine was damn stupid though, I agree). I was sad at what they did to Ra's al Ghul though. The whole thing about his magic vs Batman's belief that everything can be explained through science is brilliant and they just left it out of his character (as far as I can tell). He better not actually have died at the end of that movie.
(I am totally not a fan of the Batmobile as a concept, really. I liked what Matt Wagner did in Monster Men: the Batmobile as a fleet of nondescript-looking grey sedans - which are tricked out to the max, with bulletproof metal and glass, a screaming engine, and emergency supplies in the trunk. That made sense.)
Because the Batmobile, like the Batarang and the Bat-flyer and the Bat-utility-belt and Bat-Man himself, SUCK ASS.
Batman is crap. Batman has always been crap. It's only when you eliminate everything that makes Batman into Batman, and take the violent, scarred antihero, that Batman becomes a character even remotely worth looking at.
Ditto The Joker.
The Joker is a waste of celluloid and processor power. It's only be rewriting him completely, and making him into a monster instead of a literal joke, that you can make a character worth the time it takes to look at him.
This is mostly because I don't really read comics that much. I like the idea rather than the actual character. And yeah, most of what makes him Batman is disgusting and silly.
People have done some good things with him when they focused on the person rather than the gimmicks. The death of Robin was good. I like it when comics kill someone and they stay dead.
There's plenty to work with, it's just that most people don't.
You know--way back in pre-Code days--he wasn't that bad. A third-rate rip-off of the Spirit[1], okay, but "non-powered masked hero using his brain to catch vicious murderers" is *not* an inherently bad concept, dammit. And yeah, the writing was intended for kids, and the art got belted out (and still wasn't bad; a little crude, maybe, but the composition's good and the flow's decent--I mean, this *is* Bob Kane). Maybe not great, but not crap.
Now, WRT the Joker:
He started as a monster.
He was a vicious murdering extortionist and thief, whose modus operandi involved killing people who didn't pay him (or who he was robbing, or who he thought it would be fun to kill), occasionally with a horrible chemical concoction that caused their face muscles to spasm into a terrible grin. Before they cleaned him up into a glitzy punny clown.
There is camp in Batman's history. There is a lot of crap, and a lot of jokes. But it did not start that way, dammit, and the Joker as callous monster and Batman as devoted detective[2] exist all the way back to the 1939 comics (or 1940, for the Joker).
They've changed (added to?) Batman, to make him darker and more broken and a better foil for the Joker.
For the Joker? Really, they're just going back to what he started as. --- [1] Or the Lone Ranger, or the Scarlet Pimpernel, or Zorro, or whoever the hell you want to go with. [2] Yes, I know he's turned into a driven detective. That's okay. That they're currently writing for an audience who goes "Uhm, he dresses as a bat...?" and requires the response "Yeah, this is *really* important to him" does not strike me as a change, more an expansion.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-13 08:28 pm (UTC)And that's okay, really.
I'm wondering how they're going to write the "the mask is permanent now" part. I hope it's not as incredibly stupid as their "microwave machine" from Batman Begins.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-14 12:02 am (UTC)And Batman better get a real Batmobile.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-14 02:09 am (UTC)(I am totally not a fan of the Batmobile as a concept, really. I liked what Matt Wagner did in Monster Men: the Batmobile as a fleet of nondescript-looking grey sedans - which are tricked out to the max, with bulletproof metal and glass, a screaming engine, and emergency supplies in the trunk. That made sense.)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-14 02:34 am (UTC)They'd have to be oldschool-looking cars tho, I hate modern cars.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-14 02:45 am (UTC)Because the Batmobile, like the Batarang and the Bat-flyer and the Bat-utility-belt and Bat-Man himself, SUCK ASS.
Batman is crap. Batman has always been crap. It's only when you eliminate everything that makes Batman into Batman, and take the violent, scarred antihero, that Batman becomes a character even remotely worth looking at.
Ditto The Joker.
The Joker is a waste of celluloid and processor power. It's only be rewriting him completely, and making him into a monster instead of a literal joke, that you can make a character worth the time it takes to look at him.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-14 02:52 am (UTC)This is mostly because I don't really read comics that much. I like the idea rather than the actual character. And yeah, most of what makes him Batman is disgusting and silly.
People have done some good things with him when they focused on the person rather than the gimmicks. The death of Robin was good. I like it when comics kill someone and they stay dead.
There's plenty to work with, it's just that most people don't.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-14 03:08 pm (UTC)You know--way back in pre-Code days--he wasn't that bad. A third-rate rip-off of the Spirit[1], okay, but "non-powered masked hero using his brain to catch vicious murderers" is *not* an inherently bad concept, dammit. And yeah, the writing was intended for kids, and the art got belted out (and still wasn't bad; a little crude, maybe, but the composition's good and the flow's decent--I mean, this *is* Bob Kane). Maybe not great, but not crap.
Now, WRT the Joker:
He started as a monster.
He was a vicious murdering extortionist and thief, whose modus operandi involved killing people who didn't pay him (or who he was robbing, or who he thought it would be fun to kill), occasionally with a horrible chemical concoction that caused their face muscles to spasm into a terrible grin. Before they cleaned him up into a glitzy punny clown.
There is camp in Batman's history. There is a lot of crap, and a lot of jokes. But it did not start that way, dammit, and the Joker as callous monster and Batman as devoted detective[2] exist all the way back to the 1939 comics (or 1940, for the Joker).
They've changed (added to?) Batman, to make him darker and more broken and a better foil for the Joker.
For the Joker? Really, they're just going back to what he started as.
---
[1] Or the Lone Ranger, or the Scarlet Pimpernel, or Zorro, or whoever the hell you want to go with.
[2] Yes, I know he's turned into a driven detective. That's okay. That they're currently writing for an audience who goes "Uhm, he dresses as a bat...?" and requires the response "Yeah, this is *really* important to him" does not strike me as a change, more an expansion.