Comic book adaptations are beloved for a number of reasons. They’re almost always summer hits or cult films, regardless of if they’re enjoyed or hate-watched. What these blockbuster titans mean to people now has evolved greatly, to the point where many “new” Marvel Comics fans were introduced to the comic world by the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

What these adaptations mean to longtime comic nerds is another story. While the MCU has been a monument to culture for the past decade, superhero shows and movies have been treading alongside us for far longer, and what their intent and effect is is far different than it is for the “new” fan.

An adaptation of any material is destined to be altered, for better or worse. In the case of books or shows, or in the rare case, board games, there is usually the sense that the source material is better, or more hallowed than the films. In the case of comic books, this can also be true, but, the idea of keeping canon is less important. What people seek is the essence of character, with a vague version of familiar events.

This blend of originality and familiarity is what makes superhero movies fun for the comic fan. We want to see characters we know and love experience their journey with new obstacles, while still keeping the moments we reread over and over intact.

Doing this right is more than a task than you might expect. Take, for instance, the curious case of Batman v. Superman. There is a lot to be frustrated with as far as this movie goes. However, even many people who hate this movie and consider it one of the worst movies in history will often cite Ben Affleck’s portrayal of Batman to be their favorite out of all who have come before him. Why? Because what Affleck brings to the table is not only the collected, methodical brutality that Batman is known for, he also blends that perfectly with the cocky faux-manneredness of a seasoned Bruce Wayne. When you strip away the strange character choices that Zack Snyder made, Ben Affleck’s acting choices make his Batman the pinnacle of live action portrayals for many fans.

A superhero movie that can do this and provide a story the audience can get behind is a success. Few movies outside the MCU can do this. The DC Extended Universe (or, whatever the studio actually calls it) is one place where we see consistent hit-or-miss situations. Few DCEU movies, or DC Comics films in the last several years in general, save the Dark Knight trilogy, have provided a feel of character understanding and enjoyable content. Which brings me to something that has plagued me from the moment it has been announced.

Todd Phillips’s Joker was announced with next to no rhyme or reason. To say people aren’t interested in seeing the origin of the Joker would be incredibly off base. Looking at cult shows like Gotham, where the origin of the villain is the hottest topic in most circles, as well as popular comics, like The Killing Joke and all of its discussions and fan-adapted versions, it’s clear that the origin of the Clown Prince of Crime is important to many people. And yet, there’s something so bizarre about Warner Brothers greenlighting a movie featuring an event DC Comics has always kept ambiguous.

What seemed to worry people early is not only the lack of reason behind this, but also the fact that this movie was not connected to the DCEU. Warner Brothers will now have two Jokers on the big screen, Jared Leto in the “canon” universe, the DCEU, and Joaquin Phoenix in the alternate universe of Joker.

Now that time has gone on, we’ve also gotten to see some footage, some by design and some leaked from various sources. Originally, an image of the man who will become the Joker was released, to mixed opinions, and not long after, a camera test showing Joaquin in his full makeup, green hair and all, was released by Todd Phillips as well.

There’s something interesting about Joaquin’s look. It’s reminiscent of Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight, sans the scars, but also similar to real-life killer clown John Wayne Gacy Jr. There are things about it to love (fan of the blue eye makeup myself), but other things about it are too clown-y. That may sound odd, given the character of the Joker, but there’s always been a balance with the character that feels like it’s gone here. In addition, it seems more and more likely that in this film, Batman will be absent, or appear in a form that is not Bruce Wayne, as Thomas Wayne is still alive and active as of the movie’s events. While there is not a clear-cut, 100% certain origin for the Joker, it seems odd that Batman is not going to be directly integral to that origin in a traditional capacity.

All of this information has been giving me a bit of cold feet about Joker. Sure, there was never obvious reason to just be blindly excited. This whole thing seemed like a weird marketing decision by Warner Brothers. And the more details that come out, the weirder this version of the Joker feels. I wouldn’t use the word “hype” for how I initially felt, but certainly not now.

And then, another movie came and restored the hope I had originally had and more.

Venom was set up by Sony to be a colossal mess of a movie. Amidst ridiculous misinformation, unclear rights issues, and the obvious fact that Spider-Man would have to be absent from Venom’s origin, the premise of the film seemed shaky at best, and with the ludicrous trailers that seemed to shatter the horror vibe everyone had pegged on the film, no one knew what to expect.

It was a cakewalk for critics. Venom is a semi-campy, unorthodox superhero(villain?) movie, which means it stood no chance in the professional review scene. And yet with audiences, it seemed to be a big hit. Personally, I loved the movie. While I feel the lack of Spider-Man painfully, it otherwise was everything I could have asked from a Venom movie.

Watching Venom sent me thinking, and watching it a second time brought me to this: I am excited for Joker again. What makes Venom one of my favorite supervillains (second only to the Joker himself) was kept intact in spite of the changes to the character’s mythos. Those changes may have hampered the continuity, but they didn’t kill Venom.

I think that it is likely that Joker can do this as well. Joaquin Phoenix is a top-tier actor with determination to bring his best to every role, and it seems like everyone involved with the movie is putting their hearts into providing a Joker story fans can appreciate, changes or not. There’s plenty that I haven’t liked so far. I think the Joker should be comparable in age to Batman, that Batman should be in some way integral to the story, and I am struggling to get past the makeup, but I feel more optimistic about this movie than I had even upon the initial announcement.

What I think Venom did for me was flip how I’d been thinking about adaptations. I was the type to keep certain ideas sacred for each character, but now, I’ve been less accustomed to this. I was so enthralled by the Venom movie, beyond my expectations, that I think, even in spite of the gripes I have with Joker to this point, I could see myself really loving it.

I want to keep hope in check because I’ve been disappointed plenty in the past. But, for now, I can say we have plenty more reason to be excited for Joker than I imagined. If it makes me feel even half of what Venom did, I call it a success.

 

Thank you for reading! If you want to be notified of when new posts, feel free to follow the site, and you can also follow me on Twitter. I published my new fantasy book in July, and it’d mean the world if you’d check it out, and if it’s not your cup of tea, share it with someone who might like it. Thanks again, and I hope to see you here next time.

-Vincent

 

© 2018 Vincent C. Russo. All Rights Reserved. This post is intended for review and constitutes fair use.