1/6 Hot Toys - MMS 249 - The Joker (Bank Robber Version 2.0) - 1/6 - TF Exclusive 2014

[cokebabies]

they gave Boba Fett an origin story... if anything, it was to the character's detriment.

As it was Darth Vader. But it's OK if you can compartmentalise as I do - OT = the real stuff, PT = silly cartoon crap of no relevance

I'd add Wolverine into that mix.

I remember those photos and analyzing every detail. I still remember seeing this photo (or maybe it was a similar photo) and wondering what he was saying

It looks like he's saying, "Ohhh... oops, sorry. It's been a while for me."

 

[DiFabio]

I don't believe Robinson just like I don't believe the Bob Kane of the 80s.

Robinson was just an inker at the time. Finger and Kane were the head haunchos. If the story was true, why did it take 68 years to come out? Why in 2008 when Robinson was made Dark Knight's "story consultant" (just like Bob was in '89)? Hmmmm.

Personally, I think the guy was just taking his 15 mins of fame while being a living figure head for WB/DC to support a new interpretation. Finger and Kane never said any such thing, and Finger, the founding father of Batman, Bruce Wayne, Robin, the cave, etc. created the Joker's origin. They're all dead now, so who knows.

 

[Hydeous]

Or...

"Oh, you look nervous. Is it the scars? You want to know how I got 'em? I'll tell you how I got these scars. Paper cuts. Now lick this for me."

View attachment 119063

Or

"You reminds me of my ex, and someone murdered my ex"

 

[morphosis]

I don't believe Robinson just like I don't believe the Bob Kane of the 80s.

Robinson was just an inker at the time. Finger and Kane were the head haunchos. If the story was true, why did it take 68 years to come out? Why in 2008 when Robinson was made Dark Knight's "story consultant" (just like Bob was in '89)? Hmmmm.

Personally, I think the guy was just taking his 15 mins of fame while being a living figure head for WB/DC to support a new interpretation. Finger and Kane never said any such thing, and Finger, the founding father of Batman, Bruce Wayne, Robin, the cave, etc. created the Joker's origin. They're all dead now, so who knows.

well if you cant believe Kane or Robinson, then who can you believe? right? Some bloggers? Theres really no transcripts of Finger talking about it ever, and it wasnt until the 80s before the talk of his origin started to come up to the forefront, like i said you want to believe 168 is the "official absolute" origin, go right ahead. Even Alan Moore called it a "muddy" origin in this interview i found from 2000. He said he went by the rules because of the story from the 50s, but still he called it a "muddy" origin.

And the Joker's origin? Had he had one before that?
Alan Moore: He'd got a kind of "muddy kind of origin". They'd said that he'd been the leader of a criminal gang called the Red Hood Mob and that while trying to escape from Batman he'd swum across this river of chemicals.

And that was about it?
Alan Moore: That was about it and this was from a story from, like, the late '50s or something and so I thought "Okay, I won't contradict that," because I kind of believe in working by the rules of the material as it already exists but I can put a lot of spin on that.

https://blather.net/articles/amoore/brought-to-light1.html

Moore has also gone on to criticize his own work on Killing Joke, he thought it was clumsy writing. Plus Killing Joke isnt canon, its just an exploration of the 2 characters which half the time they gotta ask WB first if they can do what they want to do with it.

The way i just see it is the Joker has no true origin and he wasn't meant to. But by 168 they gave him one.
If in the beginning, during the early Batman comics starting with #1 they said the Joker had ties to some kind of Red Hood or a gang, even a little hit of something that had ties to 168, i would give it more as the official origin. But 10 years of nothing...and then they create this new story of the Joker. 10 years might not seem like a lot, but still thats hundreds of issues of Batman with a very popular character, and never a mention of where he came from.

 

[Fan]

Don't really get the recent discussion.

When I go to a movie I take the info I get from the movie as given for the story nothing more and nothing less, it's all fiction anyhow.
The Joker's origin in TDK is meant to be unknown, it's clear from the storyline. They (the movie's characters) didn't know anything about him. It doesn't make sense to take information about another Joker version's fictional origin from another Movie, Comic or whatsoever into the movie and assume it's meant to be part of it or something.

As for the scars, it obviously looks cut and not edged, though it's of course left open how he "really" got them. An important part of the movie btw, as the audience is also misled at first, starting to think they get to learn something about the Joker when he tells his first version of the story. True or not? - We'll never know!

 

[Darkavatar]

As much as I like the repaint and the re-sculpted hair, I don't think the head sculpt looks like the actor. It's not bad, and I might still get this guy, but I still can't justify paying $200 + for a 2008 sculpt. Can the new paint really make the head sculpt look updated?

Never said it did, but it is Hot Toys best attempt at the Ledger Joker. The DX11 just looks like a cartoon character with those dam PERS eyes and duck shaped jaw.

I already made the purple fabric piece last year . Offered them and people laughed

What is that purple rag thing meant to be?

Nolan's films were indeed more believable, but I don't think that makes them more mature. The more fantastical elements of Batman and his supporting characters can be kept without having to sacrifice maturity or dumb down the material. It just depends on how the people involved handle it.

No it's because they had depth to them, whereas the rest of the non Nolan movies were just like watching corny comic book characters on screen and obviously meant for kids, well Burton's were a bit creepy. Nolan's films do not appear to me aimed at kids but rather adults.

 

[Fan]

(...)

No it's because they had depth to them, whereas the rest of the non Nolan movies were just like watching corny comic book characters on screen and obviously meant for kids, well Burton's were a bit creepy. Nolan's films do not appear to me aimed at kids but rather adults.

Could imagine that's gonna cause another "firestorm" in this section...

But I have to say I share the opinion that it's more adult/ more evolved. I'm sure many even love the movies who weren't even interested in Batman before and of course some who loved previous Batman versions don't like Nolan's Batman. That's okay but I'm also wondering what they expected. Another Batman, almost exactly like 89 Batman, just recorded with new cameras? Don't get it. 89 Batman (for example) was great for it's time for everybody who likes it, so is Nolan's Batman.

Hope for no more endless pointless discussions, but I don't see it.

 

[Darkavatar]

Could imagine that's gonna cause another "firestorm" in this section...

Oh great.

But I have to say I share the opinion that it's more adult/ more evolved. I'm sure many even love the movies who weren't even interested in Batman before and of course some who loved previous Batman versions don't like Nolan's Batman. That's okay but I'm also wondering what they expected. Another Batman, almost exactly like 89 Batman, just recorded with new cameras? Don't get it. 89 Batman (for example) was great for it's time for everybody who likes it, so is Nolan's Batman.

Hope for no more endless pointless discussions, but I don't see it.

I agree, I was away for one day and when I came back I couldn't believe that this thread has gone completely off topic.

 

[Fan]

My opinion: Batman versions / universes have to be different from one interpretation to the next. Without the development over the versions and the influence of them we probably would never have seen Nolan's version in the imo extraordinary great way it is.
For me this trilogy, specially The Dark Knight is the ultimate Batman version I'll always admire and I doubt there'll ever be anything Batman-wise for my taste to top this.
I'm open and curious for new versions coming and I'm sure I'll enjoy them but comparing to much and thinking about why others like this or that more or less would destroy the passion. So I'm not doing it.

My advice: Watch the movies, like what you like and better don't give a damm about what others think about it or like, time is valuable fellas!


This is my final statement on all the discussions btw, I'll only copy and paste this one if I feel the need to.

 

[Fan]

(...)
I agree, I was away for one day and when I came back I couldn't believe that this thread has gone completely off topic.

Not your fault buddy, it happens all the time, not only in this thread. It's just soo pointless.

 

[Darkavatar]

Not your fault buddy, it happens all the time, not only in this thread. It's just soo pointless.

 

[Lakhota]

I think threads go off topic because there is no new news. Everyone has established the 2.0 is a remake , people that missed it want it , people that have it might want it etc. We now are diving into the origins of the Laughing Man himself into his mind, into his soul and into his pants.........

 

[Cammo]

Well no Bank Robber for me. Ridiculous pricing: 289,99 EUR

Saves me money to buy the UCS Lego Tumbler that will be announced soon.

 

[Fan]

Is that the price a local retailer at your side already listed it for? If so, it's probably because (from what I experienced) the toy fair exclusives are sometimes harder to get at the local retailers since they sadly don't always seem to get as many as they/ their customers want. At least that's what I was told by two of them.

So I think this one might try to make some better money from the few he will try to get, which is understandable imo. But you can also wait and see what Sideshow will put it up for, you can also order from them if you're from the EU.

 

[Lakhota]

Well no Bank Robber for me. Ridiculous pricing: 289,99 EUR

Saves me money to buy the UCS Lego Tumbler that will be announced soon.

Is that the official price mate? I am USD I will have to do the conversions to my money >>>>

 

[Fan]

No way, that would make approx. $ 390, think it's like I wrote in the post above.

 

[egel]

No way, that would make approx. $ 390, think it's like I wrote in the post above.

That is the price in the EU yes, but here stuff is always more expensive so a straight € - $ conversion is not always accurate. We will have to wait for SS prices.

 

[Fan]

That is the price in the EU yes, but here stuff is always more expensive so a straight € - $ conversion is not always accurate. We will have to wait for SS prices.

You're right that the straight conversion isn't always accurate, actually almost impossible due to the various kinds of import fees and shipping costs. But I don't think that's the regular price in the EU either, just:

(...) it's probably because (from what I experienced) the toy fair exclusives are sometimes harder to get at the local retailers since they sadly don't always seem to get as many as they/ their customers want. At least that's what I was told by two of them.

So I think this one might try to make some better money from the few he will try to get, which is understandable imo. But you can also wait and see what Sideshow will put it up for, you can also order from them if you're from the EU.

 

[Sidious-66]

None of my 'go to' places have him up yet for PO so I will wait and see what the official price is over here in Europe.

 

[tenpacstan]

A shot between takes. Such an amazing opening scene.