Glanced around and couldn't find an existing thread. So here we go.
For me, my Batman's canon begins with Year One and chronologically runs through to 2003, concluding with Hush. Hush is Batman's series finale, imo.
And yet, I couldn't resist picking up Three Jokers #01. And I must say, pretty solid. Geoff Johns is invested in the story, the art is done by somebody who looks like they actually care (which is not necessarily a given anymore) and, in general, it's a quality item.
Not making any guarantees about the remainder of the series. Could be great, could be p00p, I have no idea. But #01 is worth checking out.
(srsly tho, Jason Todd is dead and he never came back to life, that's my canon, dammit)
I've been anticipating this for a while and I've read issue one. The references to all the injuries Batman has suffered over the years, particularly Bane's backbreaker, was pretty cool. Life goes on but wounds accumulate and the memory of them still linger. The concept of the three Jokers may not have been as fantastical as I first thought, if they continue with the concept they've established here. And I'm hoping they do. The byplay between Batman, Jason and Barbara has real potential.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Tue, 25 Aug 2020, 22:58
I've been anticipating this for a while and I've read issue one. The references to all the injuries Batman has suffered over the years, particularly Bane's backbreaker, was pretty cool. Life goes on but wounds accumulate and the memory of them still linger. The concept of the three Jokers may not have been as fantastical as I first thought, if they continue with the concept they've established here. And I'm hoping they do. The byplay between Batman, Jason and Barbara has real potential.
I haven't figured out Three Jokers relationship to continuity. It could be that DC editorial wanted Three Jokers to be a trial balloon. And if fans responded positively, then it could/ve been incorporated into continuity. If not, it could've been ignored.
I use the past tense up there because I am not sure that continuity is a relevant subject at DC anymore. Before the layoffs, when DC theoretically still published monthly periodicals, then yeah, continuity matters. But if they're going in YA, digital, Scholastic, Amazon directions (and that seems to be the case) then continuity is a relic. On that basis, Three Jokers could be seen as the last hurrah for DC as we knew it.
Anyway. Apparently this is a bi-monthly title so it'll be a while before the next issue comes out. I guess they're trying to maximize fan interest because Fabok has made it clear that he's been finished with his work for months now. In theory, they could have the next issue ready to go next week if they wanted to.
I enjoyed the first issue. This and Sean Murphy's White Knight series have somewhat rejuvenated my interest in the Joker. I was getting bored of the same repetitive Joker narratives being recycled in the comics throughout the last decade, but lately certain writers have been coming up with interesting new ways to approach the character.
Fabok's art is a big selling point for me. With the 9-panel layouts, it feels like they're really trying to make this a prestige title. There are obvious visual echoes of Brian Bolland's art in The Killing Joke, and I can also detect a Jim Lee influence at work.
(https://i.postimg.cc/WpJ2hvMs/lee-fabok.png)
It was also nice to see Gaggy return, however briefly. Similar nods to the Joker's history are likely to be sprinkled throughout the series. I'm looking forward to reading #2.
My little conspiracy theory is that someone (Johns?) is fed up with the Joker as a mass murdering lunatic and they want to bring him back to his criminal roots.
Without getting too spoilery, obviously (the character who calls himself) Jason Todd (but who can't actually be Jason Todd because Jason Todd is dead in TCB's canon) does something big in the last few issues of #01.
My theory is something similar will happen in #02. And in #03, the criminal will be the only one still active and he'll be the guy from now on.
Honestly tho, the Joker really has been done to death and the character needs a nice long break for a while. After the end of A Death In The Family, the Joker was gone for something like a year, was gone again, came back for Batman #450-451, went away again for like another year and came back for the Robin II miniseries. I'd like a return to annual Joker stories, or maybe even less frequent than that.
Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Thu, 27 Aug 2020, 19:44
I enjoyed the first issue. This and Sean Murphy's White Knight series have somewhat rejuvenated my interest in the Joker. I was getting bored of the same repetitive Joker narratives being recycled in the comics throughout the last decade, but lately certain writers have been coming up with interesting new ways to approach the character.
JOKER supercharged my interest. It's one of my favorite films of all time, comic book related or otherwise. It encapsulates nearly everything I like about the character in one nice, tight runtime of two hours.
As such I'm always open to good new Joker stuff. But even then, we could be getting good stuff from
other characters. For example, The Riddler will get overdue time to shine in the Reeves film.
I'd like to get back to a place where the Joker is just one of many villains in Batman's rogues gallery, rather than the only one that matters. The 66 TV show managed to execute that brief. Every villain is dangerous and come with different skill sets. And as an aside, I could also persuasively argue Bane is an even better arch nemesis and dark mirror to Batman.
From what I gather, Three Jokers is standalone, but it could be in continuity if other writers want to pick up those strands. I'll see what I think after the series ends.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Tue, 25 Aug 2020, 21:30
For me, my Batman's canon begins with Year One and chronologically runs through to 2003, concluding with Hush. Hush is Batman's series finale, imo.
Not a bad place to finish. Actually, I've never thought much about the beginning and ending of my own 'personal' Batman canon. I didn't mind some of the stuff that came after HUSH like Under the Red Hood, the Morrison run (though not all of it), and some of the New52 stuff. I'll admit, I lost a lot of interest with the New52 Bats towards the end there, with ENDGAME bringing me back momentarily. When Rebirth started, the Batman books got me back for about 5 minutes, and I haven't really looked back since. Other than the book that is the topic of discussion of course.
Quote(srsly tho, Jason Todd is dead and he never came back to life, that's my canon, dammit)
I can dig that. I was one of those fans who started reading comics in the very early 1990's, and thought that sidekick character's like Jason and Bucky served a purpose that not everyone and their grandma will eventually return from the dead. To me, their deaths gave Batman and Captain America a unique degree of pathos in terms of consequences to their own personal devoted missions.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Thu, 27 Aug 2020, 20:40
My theory is something similar will happen in #02. And in #03, the criminal will be the only one still active and he'll be the guy from now on.
There appears to be a theme of the 3 Joker's having made a tragic impact on the lives of the 3 protagonists (Batman, Jason, Babs). The Clown Joker with Jason. The Comedian Joker with Batgirl, and if I were to surmise, there's something linking The Criminal Joker with Batman. Although exactly what between batman and the Criminal Joker remains to be seen right now.
QuoteHonestly tho, the Joker really has been done to death and the character needs a nice long break for a while. After the end of A Death In The Family, the Joker was gone for something like a year, was gone again, came back for Batman #450-451, went away again for like another year and came back for the Robin II miniseries. I'd like a return to annual Joker stories, or maybe even less frequent than that.
Batman #450-451 story line with the Curtis Base Joker was one of the very first Joker stories I recall ever reading. And to which is kinda amusing to me considering the plot of "The Three Jokers" featuring multiple versions. But yeah, even as a Joker guy, the character is overexposed. There's no way around it, DC.
Quote from: The Dark Knight
I'd like to get back to a place where the Joker is just one of many villains in Batman's rogues gallery, rather than the only one that matters. The 66 TV show managed to execute that brief. Every villain is dangerous and come with different skill sets.
I get that. Personally, I remember growing up thinking in the '66 verse, the Penguin was more or less Batman's arch nemesis. Due to him being one of the most consistent villain on the show, and I'm sure the Penguin always barking orders towards Joker, Riddler, and Catwoman on the penguin submarine in the '66 movie influenced that presumption as well.
QuoteFrom what I gather, Three Jokers is standalone, but it could be in continuity if other writers want to pick up those strands. I'll see what I think after the series ends.
Given the sales, I just don't think DC will be able to help themselves in this being referenced in the main books at some point. Original intentions are nice, but we know how that works out.
Edit: And if this 'does' end up in continuity, I already have some mixed feelings as it pertains to the Clown Joker. Who represents the Joker from the influential Silver/Bronze ages.... :o
Quote from: The Joker on Fri, 4 Sep 2020, 20:04There appears to be a theme of the 3 Joker's having made a tragic impact on the lives of the 3 protagonists (Batman, Jason, Babs). The Clown Joker with Jason. The Comedian Joker with Batgirl, and if I were to surmise, there's something linking The Criminal Joker with Batman. Although exactly what between batman and the Criminal Joker remains to be seen right now.
I don't have access to special inside spoiler info or anything. But if I were a betting man, I'd say that the criminal Joker will be revealed as (1) Jack Napier and (2) the killer of Thomas and Martha.
The B89 angle there is obvious.
But Fabok drew Batman in a very Bob Ringwood uniform and a very Anton Furst Batmobile. Are the uniform and Batmobile meant to visually foreshadow something? Hmm.
3J #1 opened with, among other things, flashbacks to Jason's "death", Babs's paralysis and the Wayne murders. The personal connection to the Joker that Jason and Babs both have is kind of obvious. But what's Bruce's personal connection to the Joker? Canonically speaking, none.
Unless he killed the Waynes, that is. And then it
is personal for Bruce. Who's to say that Bruce wasn't the criminal Joker's first pass at building a better Joker? In that sense, it's hard to say that the criminal Joker wasn't partially successful. If the criminal Joker killed the Waynes, that would certainly explain the Wayne murder flashback, yes?
Maybe I'm wrong tho.
Unless Johns is setting us up for some sort of swerve, then yeah, the Criminal Joker would obviously have something to do with the murder of the Wayne's. Either directly, or indirectly. Making the Criminal Joker visually older than the other two Joker's lends itself to this going either way (the 1989 route, or the 2019 route). In addition, I'm thinking there's something to that bit about the Moxons crime family being eliminated. Which has ties to the 1956 story involving Lew Moxon and Thomas Wayne donning his own bat costume.
Oh, and tough break, Gaggy. You got Samuel L. Jackson'd in this one.
Quote from: The Joker on Fri, 4 Sep 2020, 20:04
I can dig that. I was one of those fans who started reading comics in the very early 1990's, and thought that sidekick character's like Jason and Bucky served a purpose that not everyone and their grandma will eventually return from the dead. To me, their deaths gave Batman and Captain America a unique degree of pathos in terms of consequences to their own personal devoted missions.
I'm okay with Jason coming back because of the emotional trauma of his death is amplified. Shame and anger must be directly addressed. I like the powerful character dynamics the rebirth provides. And by the way, I'm hoping we get a clean extended version of Dig It for the LIB 50th Anniversary. I'd place it before Dig A Pony, which is my favorite Beatles song. Singing so soulfully about nonsense with a melancholy atmosphere. Brilliance.
Quote from: The Joker on Fri, 4 Sep 2020, 20:04
I get that. Personally, I remember growing up thinking in the '66 verse, the Penguin was more or less Batman's arch nemesis. Due to him being one of the most consistent villain on the show, and I'm sure the Penguin always barking orders towards Joker, Riddler, and Catwoman on the penguin submarine in the '66 movie influenced that presumption as well.
Joker is important, no doubt about it. I think he should take on an elevated connection with Batman in the stories he appears in. But indeed, I'd prefer him to be rested for a while while a healthier villain balance is made. Power can be gained by staying in the shadows.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Fri, 4 Sep 2020, 23:49
Quote from: The Joker on Fri, 4 Sep 2020, 20:04There appears to be a theme of the 3 Joker's having made a tragic impact on the lives of the 3 protagonists (Batman, Jason, Babs). The Clown Joker with Jason. The Comedian Joker with Batgirl, and if I were to surmise, there's something linking The Criminal Joker with Batman. Although exactly what between batman and the Criminal Joker remains to be seen right now.
I don't have access to special inside spoiler info or anything. But if I were a betting man, I'd say that the criminal Joker will be revealed as (1) Jack Napier and (2) the killer of Thomas and Martha.
The B89 angle there is obvious.
But Fabok drew Batman in a very Bob Ringwood uniform and a very Anton Furst Batmobile. Are the uniform and Batmobile meant to visually foreshadow something? Hmm.
Glad someone mentioned it. Batman's suit is like a mix of comics and Bob Ringwood. Also, Monarch Theatre makes an appearance, plus the architecture of some building facades looks inspired by Anton Furst - the Aquarium with those Flugelheim-like windows.
This comic feels like a Joker tribute/Best Of with obvious references to the past (B'89, Killing Joke, Death in the Family, Laughing Fish, Batman #1), The Criminal Joker being Jack Napier is not unlikely.
Yes, the art is fantastic and looks like a lot of thought and work went into almost every panel. Like said above, this feels like they try to do a prestige title. I don't know if it is, but I know that the first time I browsed through its pages, I just admired the craftsmanship without reading the balloons.
I've read issue #2, and I have to say this is a damn good book. I'm hoping the series maintains this level of intensity and enjoyment. It's a pleasure to read, and the character work is strong.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Tue, 29 Sep 2020, 12:14
I've read issue #2, and I have to say this is a damn good book. I'm hoping the series maintains this level of intensity and enjoyment. It's a pleasure to read, and the character work is strong.
Goings on with Chill sort of up the ante with Bruce's origin. My little conspiracy theory about criminal Joker being the killer of the Waynes may yet come true.
People can say what they lack about Three Jokers's lack of canonicity. But the instant a comic book Joker is implicated in the deaths of the Waynes, it's canon
of some kind.
#2 is weaker than #1. But that's to be expected. The stakes were set in #1 so #2 has to develop the story for a big climax in #3. It makes sense.
Looking forward to how this all plays out.
I've been debating on whether I should pick up both issues, or just wait for it to go up in a vol set?
How many issues? Is it 4?
Quote from: Travesty on Tue, 29 Sep 2020, 22:41
I've been debating on weather I should pick up both issues, or just wait for it to go up in a vol set?
How many issues? Is it 4?
The collected volume has it down as 160 pages.
I liked this issue as much as the first, possibly more. It's a dark tale but it doesn't forget to show Batman is still inherently a fun character to read with cool gadgets at his disposal.
The artwork, the scenario and byplay going on with Batman, Batgirl, Red Hood, the Jokers and now Chill feels meaningful and considered rather than throwaway.
It's something I haven't really felt with Batman comics since the Scott Snyder run, the War of Jokes and Riddles or Cold Days. Fingers crossed they nail the landing.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Wed, 30 Sep 2020, 03:30
Quote from: Travesty on Tue, 29 Sep 2020, 22:41
I've been debating on weather I should pick up both issues, or just wait for it to go up in a vol set?
How many issues? Is it 4?
The collected volume has it down as 160 pages.
I liked this issue as much as the first, possibly more. It's a dark tale but it doesn't forget to show Batman is still inherently a fun character to read with cool gadgets at his disposal.
The artwork, the scenario and byplay going on with Batman, Batgirl, Red Hood, the Jokers and now Chill feels meaningful and considered rather than throwaway.
It's something I haven't really felt with Batman comics since the Scott Snyder run, the War of Jokes and Riddles or Cold Days. Fingers crossed they nail the landing.
This is the first new Batman comic book I've bought in years. Maybe the #Comicsgate model is rubbing off on me. But I think this type of presentation is how superheroes should be done going forward. A miniseries or two each year and then allow the character to have a break for the rest of the time. Then come back the next year with another short miniseries.
There's absolutely zero chance of that ever happening. But it would be effective.
I'd be for that. I'm more excited about Earth One Volume 3, and Three Jokers #3, than the ongoing Batman series.
Standalones are special events, and like I said above, of the entire King run I only liked two of his arcs. Those two were good, but give them to me as singles, rather than an album full of disappointing filler.
It's like handing out merit certificates at school – someone has to get one. But they should only be printed and awarded if they're truly deserved.
A struggling comics industry should inspire creativity and excellence – an elite product almost akin to waiting for a movie. Earth One has reached that platform from my point of view. We need more consistency, and to produce content THE FANS want. It has to be good or the company could go under.
If the industry embraces SJW garbage it deserves to die.
The GN collection of "The Three Jokers" is set for November.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjL9p1qU8AAGNDN?format=jpg&name=large)
Yeah, I'll just pick that up and read all at once. That looks good.
Just finished reading #3. Can't wait until others have finished the series too, because there's juicy material to discuss. Three Jokers lived up to the hype. Reading that last issue was gripping. Every conversation and panel meant something and carried weight. Definitely one of the best Batman stories in recent years.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Tue, 27 Oct 2020, 23:01
Just finished reading #3. Can't wait until others have finished the series too, because there's juicy material to discuss. Three Jokers lived up to the hype. Reading that last issue was gripping. Every conversation and panel meant something and carried weight. Definitely one of the best Batman stories in recent years.
I happened to be awake early this morning when #3 became available.
As with so many things, the journey is more important than the destination. That's worth remembering here because I thought #3 was kind of a dud compared to what came before. I've only read it once and may change my mind later but the third issue didn't seem to line up with where #1 and #2 seemed to be going.
Doesn't matter tho. I enjoy the atmosphere of these books. The story, eh, whatever. Besides, the B89'ish suit, the Furst'ish Batmobile, Monarch Theater, that stuff hits my fanboy buttons in a big way.
Not a fan of the white text but I'll do it anyway, because I know Travesty hasn't read the story yet.
#3 worked for me on a number of levels.
Batman knows the Joker's name because of course he does. He's a detective and The Joker is his arch nemesis. The fact he kept this a personal secret all this time is true to his character.
The Joker's family still being alive works for me. Ted Bundy has a daughter called Rose, and what she's done as an adult is a complete mystery. She should be left alone to live her life. She had no part of her father's deeds and going public would only bring unnecessary negativity. Batman is applying the same common sense logic with the Joker's family. He knows Jason and others would make their lives hell.
I think it humanizes the Joker in a subtle but also large way. He is a man, not a myth, even though the myth is always going to be more persuasive. We probably won't see the family but they're out there. The Joker is a lost, wayward son, which as a concept can't help but tug at the heartstrings in some way.
The arc of Joe Chill explores something I'm big on: that people are always evolving over time. Is Joe Chill the same man who pulled the trigger all those years ago? No. But regardless, the legacies of killers will always be defined by their actions that are forever frozen in time. Chill knew this. But Batman still seemingly makes peace with it. Which does serve to give victory to the Joker's ultimate plot of having Batman hate only him.
The uneasy dynamic with Jason and Batman again shows why I'm glad he was resurrected. The letter on the door for Barbara is old fashioned but in terms of doomed romance it's perfect. I like that type of melancholy.
Having the confrontation in the haunted ruins of the Monarch Theatre was perfect. It's like the old cathedral in B89 but with more significance. Very cinematic. All in all, I had a good time reading this and think the character work is spot on. The art is as good as Hush in its own way.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Wed, 28 Oct 2020, 01:41
Not a fan of the white text but I'll do it anyway, because I know Travesty hasn't read the story yet.
Can't quote all of your post.
Still, you raise a good point about the art. Fabok has enough Gary Frank influence to bring real atmosphere to the art but he doesn't have Frank's horror DC Vertigo style... which is a plus in my book. Basically, I consider Fabok to the best of both worlds with Jim Lee and Gary Frank. A very interesting and very welcome middle ground. I'll probably buy any Batman stuff he does from here on out.
Nice concise review, TDK. You bring up a lot of good points, and some I wholeheartedly agree with. Following my reading of the entire 3 issue series, I can't help feeling a bit mixed about the whole thing. To which I'll try to quickly address below.
Overall, I found Three Jokers to be a fun and enjoyable story, but one that I am left having mixed feelings on, and honestly don't know how I feel about in terms of it's place in possible continuity. Course, I've been out of the loop on the current stuff for a good number of years now, so that needed to be said as well.
In terms of living up to what the hype for this book was, I don't believe the story reached that level. If memory serves, The Three Jokers was stated to be a new once-and-for-all definitive origin story of the Joker. One that may be so controversial, that DC decided to put it under the black label just in case there was a backlash to said origin. As a way out for DC of course. Only in the story, we're not given a newly revealed origin story, but rather the one that fans have most accepted for decades now. Which is Alan Moore's Killing Joke origin, that further expanded upon the 1951 "The Man Behind the Red Hood" Joker origin story. Yes, we learn of the revelation that his wife, Jeannie, from TKJ, is alive and well and raising a son. Which is interesting. But that's the big reveal honestly. In terms of a bold Joker origin story? Not so much. I guess I expected, going into this, was that the outcome would be controversial with readers in terms of what it reveals about the Joker's origins. Evidently, they played it rather safe. As, from what I can gather, the most controversy that stems from this book is the Jason and Babs thing if anything.
However, I do agree with TDK in the idea that the Joker is just a man at the end of the day is the way to go. I remember hearing something about the Joker being alluded to as being 'supernatural', and/or 'immortal' a few years ago (was this Endgame or something?), and instantly thought it was a horrible idea. Course I personally wasn't that big on the whole Leatherface Joker thing from New52's "Death of the Family" story line either. But in The Three Joker's, I found the third issues handle on the Joker, and his ultimate goal with Joe Chill, much more practical. In terms of the Joker's character, it makes absolute sense for a egotist like him. So that works.
Another thing I agree with TDK on, is how this story handled the conclusion of Joe Chill. Personally, I never found "Year Two" or "Joe Chill in Hell" to be very satisfying finales for the Batman/Joe Chill dynamic being resolved, but I found this one to be probably the most worthwhile conclusion ever since the original from Batman #47 way back from 1948 (along with it's remake in Untold Legend of Batman)!
As far as the notion of there being three Joker's that have crisscrossed in battles with Batman over the years .... I've had some mixed thoughts about that right from the jump to be perfectly honest. Which became rather intense with the "Clown" Joker getting capped in the very 1st issue of this series. As the "Clown" Joker represents the classic Silver Age/Bronze Age Joker, who is now, ultimately, considered a imposter for all intents and purposes. The Joker who appeared in "The Joker's Five Way Revenge", "The Laughing Fish", and many others (in addition to being an influence on Nicholson's and Hamill's Jokers) is now revealed to be a fake? A major retcon like that, really results in nothing but minimizing that incarnation of the Joker, and his stories, to some degree. Which I think is unfortunate, considering how influential the Silver/Bronze Age Joker really is.
As far as the "Criminal" Joker goes, and who created who with the "Comedian" Joker, issue #3 seems rather blatant that the "Comedian" Joker is the original, and created the "Criminal" Joker. Especially with conclusion with Batman revealing he's known the Joker's true identity shortly after first encountering him (and then following that up by referring to his wife and son, which connects to TKJ "Comedian" Joker) for some time now. Which, again, I am left feeling rather mixed on. As out of the three, I was more intrigued by the "Criminal" Joker for the most part. But like the "Clown" Joker, this guy is evidently retconned as a imposter as well. Despite Batman saying the "Criminal" Joker was who he remembers facing off against with during Batman's early career. Which makes sense considering the "Criminal" represented the Golden Age Joker, but I can't imagine Batman wouldn't have at least noticed an age differential between the "Criminal" and "Clown/Comedian" Jokers. Evidently, he didn't. Considering his reaction on the mobius chair, but ok. We'll just go with it. Course with this sort of angle on multiple Joker's, and with Batman stating that the "Criminal" Joker was more like the Joker he battled in the early days, did the real Joker, "The Comedian", create the "Criminal" and just simply sat back for awhile to observe? The notion that Batman's first battle with the Joker (and later Golden Age Joker appearance stories), is retconned as a Joker who is now a imposter, is rather, well, disappointing.
Course I could go on and on, but the overall affect of the Golden/Silver/Bronze Age Jokers being retconned as 'imposters' just feels strange. To me, this is literally akin to the whole "Clone Saga" experiment Marvel attempted in the mid 1990's, and even being so bold in saying that Ben Reilly was the 'real' Spider-Man. With the Spider-Man that had adventures with the black symbiote costume, battled Hobgoblin, survived Kraven's Last Hunt, dealt with Venom/Eddie Brock, endured the death of Harry Osborn, ect was a 'imposter' clone. Yes, as a Joker guy, the underwhelming feeling of the possibility that imposters, and not the Joker himself, were featured in classic Batman comics, is that profound.
I'm aware that this is supposedly considered out-of-continuity, and if so, great. I enjoy it as a elseworlds story for sure. Actually, and TDK can probably speak better on this than me, The Three Jokers is probably one of the better Batman books that have come out in some years. But I can't help but think, and I may have mentioned this in a prior post, that with the sales of this, this story won't eventually just end up in canon. Slippery slope and all that jazz.
More than likely, I'll probably pick up the trade. As again, I didn't hate it, liked some of it, and generally prefer it as a elseworlds story than something I want to overwhelmingly embrace. Actually, with my thoughts in the post about canon/continuity/elseworlds, I am kinda reminded about Colors' statement of having a personal head canon. Something to which I never really put a whole lot of thought into to be perfectly honest, but may very well do so in the near future. I pretty much like everything up to around the middle of Morrison's run. Which I then began falling in and out of Batman comics until I just left completely. So where I decide to bookend on may be a little tricky.
Damn, it's late. And I've rambled on long enough!
Three Jokers is an enjoyable story to read on its own, and I'd be okay with it not being in continuity.
But that said, I think some of the events are open to interpretation.
I have no reason to doubt that the surviving Joker is the Joker, but that Joker clearly has a good time making you think twice about that. It's also not out of the question the army of Jokers was only a recent experiment, rather than a long term operation, which I would prefer.
Generally speaking I see it as a postmodern, 'real world' commentary on the character's changes throughout his publication history. That's the main hook here, and why it would ultimately work best as a standalone. I like that the comedian Joker is the last man standing though, because it makes it feel like a true spiritual sequel to The Killing Joke. It keeps that well know origin intact, and it's the same guy who attacked Barbara.
Just bought this, so I'll try to get through it all this Thanksgiving. I'm really looking forward to it. Heard good things about it.
Back in 1990 or even 2000, Three Jokers would be interesting but not really super important. People would've known about it and probably even cared about it. But it just wouldn't have been all that big a deal in the grand scheme of things.
It's a sad testimony of where the industry is rn that Three Jokers is hands down, without question THE comic book event of 2020 (aside from the industry itself cratering, that is).
Unexpected, this was. And unfortunate.
Quote from: Travesty on Tue, 24 Nov 2020, 21:52
Just bought this, so I'll try to get through it all this Thanksgiving. I'm really looking forward to it. Heard good things about it.
Based on nothing but gut feel, I'm see Three Jokers becoming like a new Hush. A decent story that's elevated by the art and is something fun to flick through. Hush is way better but I think the comparison is reasonable.
Other than the fantastic art by Jason Fabok and the nods to the Burton films, one of the reasons I enjoyed this is that it has a sort of classic Batman feel, like comics from the 90s/early 00s, none of the "new" things introduced later. It could (almost) be a stand-alone three-part story from Shadow of the Bat or Legends of the Dark Knight.
I really liked it. Not the best, but it was a good standalone story, and the art may just be some of the best I have ever seen. The Batsuit was almost a pure Keaton suit, aside from the blue and grey color scheme, and all of The Joker art was fantastic. I understand the comparisons to Hush, but I prefer this to Hush in every regard. Tighter story, better art, easier to pick up, etc.
Again, not the best Batman story ever told, but it was an easy read with beautiful art. Hard to complain.
Quote from: Azrael on Wed, 25 Nov 2020, 20:08
Other than the fantastic art by Jason Fabok and the nods to the Burton films, one of the reasons I enjoyed this is that it has a sort of classic Batman feel, like comics from the 90s/early 00s, none of the "new" things introduced later. It could (almost) be a stand-alone three-part story from Shadow of the Bat or Legends of the Dark Knight.
I agree. These are the types of Batman stories I want to be reading. I want my comics to be high value. A story can be interesting but we eat with our eyes. Good art can make mediocre stories worthwhile. If the story is good the whole product is elevated further. Three Jokers has some of the best art you will find in a Batman comic.
The high value classification also includes emotional depth. Batman presents himself as a dark, closed off individual. And in many ways he is. But the introverted man is very sensitive to the world around him. I find the best stories contain important moments in a character's life, and more often than not it includes tragedy and some kind of melancholy conclusion. Three Jokers has that element.
Thirdly, I want believable and engaging character engagement. ZSJL demonstrates this really well, and Three Jokers does as well. Character juggling can be a hard thing to pull off, but with proper planning it can be done. It elevates the overall product into something special. If we don't care about the characters nothing matters.
Three Jokers still holds up for me.
Someone created a variation of the Three Jokers cover, featuring Nicholson, Ledger, and Phoenix that I think is pretty cool.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GDr_si2X0AAd_iO?format=jpg&name=large)
Ha, that's pretty cool. But man, there's just something so unsettling about Joaquin Phoenix's Joker. He's the creepiest live action Joker to me.
Can't say that I disagree.
(https://i.postimg.cc/FRX6v0My/GIF-32838732.gif)