Batman: The Killing Joke | Animated Feature (spoilers)
Matt
Posts: 4,457
Anyone else see this? Not sure what to think of this yet.
Matt
Posts: 4,457
Comments
M
Babs appears to be quite the aggressor too.
M
M
I haven't re-read the book in many years. And although Ive always really liked it, I've never held it as "sacred" or such. I still find the red hood origin silly and unbelievable. The ending was the most flawed imo. It was abrupt and wholly unsatisfying. Even more so here than in the book as I remember. there was a brief musical bit that felt out of place and didn't work for me, nor did some of batmans dialog. I don't remember the music good or bad but nothing to complain about.
It was odd in spots where it seemed to awkwardly pull its punches then others where it ran w the R rating.
I give it a high rating. It was also just a great treat seeing this type product on the big screen.
M
1.) I never liked the idea of Batman & Barbara together
2.) I was 5 when I first started reading comics. The stuff I was reading didn't seem blatantly mature reading. That's why, despite not being "pure" & someone who uses expletives, I don't like reading/seeing these characters swear or engage in sexual relations
3.) albeit I've only seen that quick clip & read the plot, it seems crowbarred in there for gratuitous reasons then out of necessity.
M
For me, it didn't feel crammed at all. Maybe a bit gratuitous though, but then it usually is regardless. If anything honestly I believe it was added to lengthen and add to the movie. And as I presumed earlier, to make the connection between the two and the later events more personal and powerful. Whether it worked as such is up to the viewers, but I see why it would seem a good idea for a one off movie for the uninitiated.
It did almost feel like two different stories as a result. But without drawing out the first half by exploring Bruce and babs relationship and such, and just did a straight translation, the movie would've been 39-45 min long. There just wasn't quite enough material for a feature.
As for the ending. I've never heard there to be a definitive answer. I believed it was deliberately ambiguous and heavily implied the joker was killed. That works for me. simply arresting him doesn't so much. Ending it with shared laugh even less. Personally, the two just laughing everything off together at the end (joker taken into custody or not), the whole thing is utterly pointless and simply gratuitous. The story and both batman and jokers points of view and motivations were meaningless and empty. But that's just my interpretation.
Ending wise; TKJ carried over into the prime titles. It's hard to reference the story & maintain Joker was killed.
There's an interview with Moore where he laughs off Morrison's accusation. He stated its not the case. The ending might not be satisfying with them just laughing, but Moore gave a reason for it. When I get a few moments to post it.
Here's a link to an article posting the script for the final page in the interim.
http://comicbook.com/blog/2013/08/17/the-killing-joke-script-proves-batman-didnt-kill-the-joker/
M
It could've ended with hearing them both laughing, camera fades to black, then you hear the sound of a bone crack, making the laughter stop abruptly. Who cares how it ties into the other films? It would still be ambiguous and make it seem like there were actual consequences to raping and paralyzingly Batman's girlfriend and the commissioner's daughter.
As for the sex scene - it could have been completely excised and it wouldn't have changed this story one bit. It was gratuitous and unnecessary, just like this film has turned out to be.
At least in the movie, as the two are laughing, jokers voice disappears and batman is laughing alone as the screen fades. I liked that touch. Again. Just my opinion, but if joker doesn't die, then the story was bullshit. Without that hint or assumption or mystery, the whole thing was meaningless.
The final page of the book isn't conclusive imo. Neither is the accompanying article.
Ultimately, I'm not so attached either way, just personally think if batman and joker somehow simply "shared a moment" (wtf) and Batman just returns joker to arkham, then this story is honestly garbage. I liked the book quite a bit originally but didn't appreciate it until the notion of joker dying was presented. Looking at it now with new eyes, it makes sense. Naturally they couldn't/wouldn't let Moore kill a $$ character, so maybe that's why it was t spelled out? havmt they always argued about what parts or whether or not it was continuity? Seems like it.
At any rate, I don't really care.
But if Moore says conclusively there's no ambiguity whatsoever and batman definitely did not kill joker, I lose all respect for this book and no small amount for his talents lol.
Book-wise, I just never saw it as him killing before all the bugaboo. It's against Batman's code, he'd finally become what he fought, & Gordon, despite everything, asked Batman to arrest him by the book. I can't foresee Batman going against his wishes.
Side bar: do they use the "Joker raped Barbara" bit? I saw the images that were supposed to be in the book for that plot point, but aside from a topless Barbara, it wasn't really that different.
M
And yes, the Barbara rape is definitely implied.
And couldn't it be concluded, with just a bone crack sound, that Joker (an actual killer) killed Batman? His guard was down, Joker was close enough, so why couldnt he have done the killing?
M
If you were to fast forward past the first thirty minutes of the film, you wouldn't be wondering what you missed. It's totally detached, and that's just as bad as if you'd introduced Babs just to get shot in the stomach.
It really annoyed the hell out of me, and took me away from enjoying the rest of the feature. Azzarello phoned this one in, and I wouldn't be shocked if Bruce Timm admits as much a few years down the line as well. It just didn't work.
Haven't seen it yet, but it sounds like they may be missing the whole point of the book, IMHO. It's not a Batman story, nor a Joker one. To me, it's about Jim Gordon. Joker wasn't trying to break the Bat this time...he was trying to break Gordon, and (in the book at least) failed.
The best line is when he stops Batman before he goes after Joker: "By the book..."
Does that come across in the cartoon at all, or is Jim's role downplayed?
I also wasn't thrilled with the animation. It felt like they went cheap on frames. Movement wasn't nearly as fluid as it has been in other features such as "Under The Red Hood."
And speaking of Mr. Richard Grayson, he doesn't come up once, and they make it feel like Babs is Bat's only partner, and has been for a while; not even sure if Grayson exists. Even though a certain key Batman death is shown on a computer screen at one point. Call a number to vote on which death I'm talking about.