Joker is a shorthand of a perfect comic book villain. You can do many things with him without bending over backwards. The basics of the character always stay the same - green-haired, purple-suited permanently grinning, tenaciously laughing psychopath with a knack for theatrics.
However, the characterization itself changes with the time and the attitude of the author.
Since there's a movie coming out soon, let's look at the most prominent iterations of the character.
1
The original Joker was a thug with a gimmick. He was a sociopath with no remorse whatsoever regarding his actions.
He was killing people left and right. Sometimes bluntly with no excessive theatrics. Sometimes exuberantly elaborately.
He was unhinged and somewhat reckless but not going overboard with the bombastic theatrical swoosh. He had a distinct style that differentiated him from the rest of the Gotham's crooks - a brand of sorts. But it wasn't his defining feature, just a coat of arms.
2
Later on, he morphed into a bizarre Clown Prince of Crime as seen in Silver Age comics.
Comics Code of Authority put a kibosh on the visceral violent antic, so the character needed a reinvention.
The characterization became much more cartoony, but if you think about it - the theatrics and the attitude of Silver Age Joker is rather chilling, to say the least.
All of his zany antics act as a symbolism taken to the extreme. It is weird, and you can't really tell when it is just a joke and whether it is going to be just a joke.
However, because of that, the gimmick became the personality. And that is how the character was presented from then on. It's not like it was detrimental to the concept. Quite the opposite, it helped to solidify the essence of the character.
3
On the other hand, O'Neil/ Adams Joker is a combination of the previous two iterations.
This Joker had the theatrics of the Silver Age, and at the same time, he retains the danger of a rabid dog. I think this is the definitive version of the Joker in terms of consistent characterization.
It had the right balance of nasty and odd. O'Neil/Adams' stories were showcasing Joker as an unpredictable psychopath with a knack for theatrics and quite practical managing skills in terms of maintaining a gang of crooks and planning his elaborate crimes to a tee.
This reinvention of the Joker reinvigorated the popularity of the character, and this led to Joker's most odd and random hour. He received his own solo series.
4
Solo series Joker is a very odd interpretation of the character. It is kind of O'Neil/ Adams iteration that devolved into Silver Age zany because it gagged and bound by the CCA guidelines.
In other words, Joker had to do Joker stuff, but it wasn't allowed to be anything but goofing around.
The series depicts Joker as a master criminal who a taste for the show and some blunt and nasty attitude all while channeling Silver Age goofiness and slapstick. This combination creates some intense cognitive dissonance.
There is an issue where Joker taunts an actor who thinks he is Sherlock Holmes. If you pass through the clumsy scripting - the whole thing is downright cruel.
5
Frank Miller's Joker is O'Neil/ Adams version amplified up to eleven. This Joker means trouble and when he actually means it - this is some terrible, awful, horrible news.
In terms of showcasing what Joker in action really means - this is the most striking example. He kills people left and right with no apparent reason apart from causing the commotion and enacting chaos. He is unpredictable because he got no endgame, just the process.
In addition to that, Miller's Joker got very distinct death drive. Unlike any other interpretation of the character, this Joker wants to go to the absolute extreme.
6
Alan Moore's Joker is a rather strange take on the character. His iteration is more or less inverted Batman, and that was the whole point of the story in a way (among other things).
Moore fleshed out the character to the point of dissipating the initial mystery of the character and instead of creating another mystery of Joker's train of thought. However, it did a big disservice for the character. Fleshing out the character's journey turned him into something else that is based on the concept but not really represents it.
Since the whole story was ambiguous all the way anyway - the entire thing was impressionist padding for the sake of pareidoliastic fleshing out.
With that being said - this version of the character is downright nasty. The whole Barbara Gordon episode is disturbing, and the way he attempts to break Commissioner Gordon is vile and sickening.
7
Grant Morrison's Serious House Joker had an emphasis on being a really-really violent fellow with some weird, cruel, and manipulative tints.
He was a psychopath with lapses of character and distorted perception of reality. It was a great spin on the concept - it avoided overexplaining things while retaining a nondescript but definitely unambiguous sense of threat.
On the other hand, Morrison's latter regular continuity Joker was more traditional take primarily based on O'Neil/ Adams version. It had some splashes of Silver Age zaniness, but the core character was rooted in the 70s iteration and offered no new insights.
8
The Man Who Laughs Joker takes on the original concept of the character and amps it up to eleven. There is a resonance with the O'Neil/ Adams version, but it is distinctly a thing of its own.
This Joker is a career criminal with a gimmick. He is deranged and utterly nihilistic. Nevertheless, he's a little bit improvisational here and can have a laugh for laugh's sake just because why not in the end. There also this maddening completely spontaneous streak in expressing his thoughts.
Despite that, his actions are logical and clearly planned. He's there to orchestrate mayhem that benefits him and provides with opportunities to grab what he currently wants.
This approach is further elaborated in The Devil's Advocate story. This Joker is O'Neil/ Adams version updated to the current times and a little bit intensified.
He's the man with the plan who can pretend to be absolutely mental when necessary but otherwise he is the guy who knocks. And smiles.
9
Elseworlds' Batman: Nosferatu got an interesting take on the character. In this story - he is murderous cyborg, which is an interesting direction to explore.
There is a slight reference to T-1000 with a more sadistic twist and horrifying self-awareness. It is not well-developed in the narrative, but the concept is fascinating.
10
Flashpoint version of Joker is a u-turn. For instance, instead of being an enigmatic character, the origin of this iteration is more than well-known.
In this case, the Joker is Martha Wayne, who went mad after her son was killed in a random mugging incident.
This version of Joker is implied to be a really nasty one. The comments of her misdeeds are peppered throughout the stories. But we have only glimpsed what she is capable of and what she had already done. There is a lot left to be explored.
However, suggestions and implications are working better than just showing off the stuff. It gets your imagination working, and it is the right way of building up the menace of the character.
After all, when you have such a set-up for the character - there is a lot to chew regardless.
13
Brian Azzarello's Joker is probably the nastiest, most wicked and vile, and at the same time the most grounded (for the lack of the better word) take on the character.
It depicts him as a career criminal with a lot of baggage that is expressed and elaborated through his theatrical gimmick.
In a way, he is not very different from Richard Stark's Parker. Given the fact that he just moves forward from scene to scene as a knife through butter makes him really scary. He's driven by his goal and doesn't really care where it takes him because, in the end, he will get what he wants.
13
Scott Snyder's Joker is inspired by Frank Miller's take on O'Neil/ Adams version. This Joker is nasty and deranged. He does stuff that distresses. It takes Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns Joker's death drive and elaborates on it, adding new shades and figuring more setpieces to the mix.
He enjoys being bad. There is this hollowness in the characterization that makes the character unknowable, even ununderstandable. He's not much of character to speak of but a force of nature that wrecks and wrecks and wrecks.
In order to present this new and improved iteration of the character - Snyder got his cut off his face and wears it as a mask. Then he goes on to orchestrate an increasingly chaotic spectacle that leads to literal down and dirty endgame between him and his nemesis.
***
Exploring the Joker character is an exciting journey. He was taken in many different directions and was used to represent different kinds of evil depending on the intentions of the authors and the tune of the zeitgeist.
However, in every iteration he retained that demented vibe that kept all the disparate versions of the character consistent.
That's a testament to the power of the Joker character concept.
Немає коментарів:
Дописати коментар