I think the Joker would have been better

Started by Andrew, Sun, 10 Jun 2018, 18:17

Previous topic - Next topic
If he had been trying to steal/extort money rather than be indifferent to and even burn money.

It would be pretty big but probably amusing hypocrisy if he had been very hostile to society and its rules but also wanted to be rich.

Quote from: Andrew on Sun, 10 Jun  2018, 18:17
If he had been trying to steal/extort money rather than be indifferent to and even burn money.

It would be pretty big but probably amusing hypocrisy if he had been very hostile to society and its rules but also wanted to be rich.
I think that would go against Nolan's entire depiction of the character, tbh.

Quote from: Andrew on Sun, 10 Jun  2018, 18:17
If he had been trying to steal/extort money rather than be indifferent to and even burn money.

It would be pretty big but probably amusing hypocrisy if he had been very hostile to society and its rules but also wanted to be rich.
What does the Joker need money for?

He's an instantly recognisable, high profile criminal. He doesn't go into a store and buy merchandise like a regular person without causing a scene or being arrested on the spot for prior crimes.

I don't think any live action incarnation *needed* money.

Nicholson threw it away/used it as a lure to kill people.
Ledger straight up burned it.

Romero used jewellery and other luxury items to manipulate his female lackeys. Money can also be a way to keep score, or simply give a reason to justify a scheme. The thrill of taking something.

This is a man who takes what he wants, when he wants.