Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 46,47 (click to see context) from:
* "You get what you fuckin' deserve!" But do they? It's noticeable as the movie progressed Arthur's murders get much less justified. Killing both the first Wall Street bros is straight self-defense. Killing the DirtyCoward who ran away was less justified, but understandable. Then he kills his mother for his rotten childhood, then a guy from work for playing a part in his firing, then a comedian for nothing more than making fun of him.
** It can be argued that a large theme of the film is the harm done by simple neglect and indifference. Outside of the yuppies who beat him on the subway (and the kids who beat him at the start of the film), not a single character on screen displays actual malice toward Arthur, just lack of empathy or concern. His mother failed to protect him from abuse, to be sure, but she's clearly a tragic figure, suffering from her own severe mental illness (the boyfriend who actually abused him is notably not dwelt on, or even named). Thomas Wayne and Alfred reacted understandably (if dismissively) to a creepy stranger stalking the Wayne family. Randall seemed to honestly (if misguidedly) try to help Arthur, then turned on him to save his own job. Murray and his staff embarrass Arthur, but they're running a comedy show, and probably assume an aspiring performer has a thick enough skin that a little embarrassment is worth a national platform. On a smaller level, everyone from strangers on the street to the faceless bureaucracy just kind of ignores him and hopes he goes away. The message is that it doesn't take deliberate cruelty to drive someone to despair, having no one to turn to can be enough.
** It can be argued that a large theme of the film is the harm done by simple neglect and indifference. Outside of the yuppies who beat him on the subway (and the kids who beat him at the start of the film), not a single character on screen displays actual malice toward Arthur, just lack of empathy or concern. His mother failed to protect him from abuse, to be sure, but she's clearly a tragic figure, suffering from her own severe mental illness (the boyfriend who actually abused him is notably not dwelt on, or even named). Thomas Wayne and Alfred reacted understandably (if dismissively) to a creepy stranger stalking the Wayne family. Randall seemed to honestly (if misguidedly) try to help Arthur, then turned on him to save his own job. Murray and his staff embarrass Arthur, but they're running a comedy show, and probably assume an aspiring performer has a thick enough skin that a little embarrassment is worth a national platform. On a smaller level, everyone from strangers on the street to the faceless bureaucracy just kind of ignores him and hopes he goes away. The message is that it doesn't take deliberate cruelty to drive someone to despair, having no one to turn to can be enough.
to:
* "You get what you fuckin' deserve!" But do they? they? It's noticeable as the movie progressed Arthur's murders get much less justified. Killing both the first Wall Street bros is straight self-defense. Killing the DirtyCoward who ran away was less justified, but understandable. Then he kills his mother for his rotten childhood, then a guy from work for playing a part in his firing, then a comedian for nothing more than making fun of him.
** It can be argued that a large theme of the film is the harm done by simple neglect and indifference. Outside of the yuppies who beat him on the subway (and the kids who beat him at the start of the film), not a single character on screen displays actual malice toward Arthur, just lack of empathy or concern. His mother failed to protect him from abuse, to be sure, but she's clearly a tragic figure, suffering from her own severe mental illness (the boyfriend who actually abused him is notably not dwelt on, or even named). Thomas Wayne and Alfred reacted understandably (if dismissively) to a creepy stranger stalking the Wayne family. Randall seemed to honestly (if misguidedly) try to help Arthur, then turned on him to save his own job. Murray and his staff embarrass Arthur, but they're running a comedy show, and probably assume an aspiring performer has a thick enough skin that a little embarrassment is worth a national platform. On a smaller level, everyone from strangers on the street to the faceless bureaucracy just kind of ignores him and hopes he goes away. The message is that it doesn't take deliberate cruelty to drive someone to despair, having no one to turn to can be enough.
** It can be argued that a large theme of the film is the harm done by simple neglect and indifference. Outside of the yuppies who beat him on the subway (and the kids who beat him at the start of the film), not a single character on screen displays actual malice toward Arthur, just lack of empathy or concern. His mother failed to protect him from abuse, to be sure, but she's clearly a tragic figure, suffering from her own severe mental illness (the boyfriend who actually abused him is notably not dwelt on, or even named). Thomas Wayne and Alfred reacted understandably (if dismissively) to a creepy stranger stalking the Wayne family. Randall seemed to honestly (if misguidedly) try to help Arthur, then turned on him to save his own job. Murray and his staff embarrass Arthur, but they're running a comedy show, and probably assume an aspiring performer has a thick enough skin that a little embarrassment is worth a national platform. On a smaller level, everyone from strangers on the street to the faceless bureaucracy just kind of ignores him and hopes he goes away.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 46,47 (click to see context) from:
* "You get what you fuckin' deserve!" But do they? At least, do all of them? Yes, Randall hung Arthur out to dry for getting caught with the gun Randall provided him with -- but he's not the reason Arthur got caught with it, while he may be a bit of a jerk he originally gave him the weapon as an act of kindness, to help protect himself and really, does he really do anything to Arthur that justifies his rather gruesome, painful murder? Yes, Murray played Arthur's stand-up video on his show and mocked him -- but does that crime merit death either? And while Arthur can claim self-defense for two of the yuppies he kills at the station, the third is running away when Arthur kills him. He doesn't even take part in the protests against societal injustice that he inspires, and claims to be apolitical and disinterested. For all that Arthur may have a point about the way the world is treating him, it should be remembered that he is still, for the most part, lashing out against people who wrong him personally rather than the system he ends up railing against, and in a disproportionate fashion at that. [[JerkassHasAPoint Murray Franklin has a point as well]].
** Actually it's noticeable as the movie progressed Arthur's murders get much less justified. Killing both the first and second Wall Street yuppies was self-defense and justified. Killing the third guy was very clearly murder but he's still an AssholeVictim who attacked an mentally ill man and was harassing a lady who was uninterested (him running away just shows him as a DirtyCoward, it in no way means he didn't deserve to die). Killing his mom because she let him get abused and did nothing to stop people it is understandable but it isn't the right thing to do at all. While Randall was a FalseFriend and a Jerkass, Killing him simply because he got Arthur fired is going way too far especially since it's implied Randall genuinely gave him the gun for protection. Killing Murray because he mocked him once (albeit not in front of millions of people) is completely unjustified as Murray was a decent man in person. Then it's implied he killed his therapist at the end who never wronged him in any way. As his kills progress they slowly become less justified until they are completely unjustified.
** Actually it's noticeable as the movie progressed Arthur's murders get much less justified. Killing both the first and second Wall Street yuppies was self-defense and justified. Killing the third guy was very clearly murder but he's still an AssholeVictim who attacked an mentally ill man and was harassing a lady who was uninterested (him running away just shows him as a DirtyCoward, it in no way means he didn't deserve to die). Killing his mom because she let him get abused and did nothing to stop people it is understandable but it isn't the right thing to do at all. While Randall was a FalseFriend and a Jerkass, Killing him simply because he got Arthur fired is going way too far especially since it's implied Randall genuinely gave him the gun for protection. Killing Murray because he mocked him once (albeit not in front of millions of people) is completely unjustified as Murray was a decent man in person. Then it's implied he killed his therapist at the end who never wronged him in any way. As his kills progress they slowly become less justified until they are completely unjustified.
to:
* "You get what you fuckin' deserve!" But do they? At least, do all of them? Yes, Randall hung Arthur out to dry for getting caught with the gun Randall provided him with -- but he's not the reason Arthur got caught with it, while he may be a bit of a jerk he originally gave him the weapon as an act of kindness, to help protect himself and really, does he really do anything to Arthur that justifies his rather gruesome, painful murder? Yes, Murray played Arthur's stand-up video on his show and mocked him -- but does that crime merit death either? And while Arthur can claim self-defense for two of the yuppies he kills at the station, the third is running away when Arthur kills him. He doesn't even take part in the protests against societal injustice that he inspires, and claims to be apolitical and disinterested. For all that Arthur may have a point about the way the world is treating him, it should be remembered that he is still, for the most part, lashing out against people who wrong him personally rather than the system he ends up railing against, and in a disproportionate fashion at that. [[JerkassHasAPoint Murray Franklin has a point as well]].
** Actually it'sthey? It's noticeable as the movie progressed Arthur's murders get much less justified. Killing both the first and second Wall Street yuppies was self-defense and justified. bros is straight self-defense. Killing the third DirtyCoward who ran away was less justified, but understandable. Then he kills his mother for his rotten childhood, then a guy was very from work for playing a part in his firing, then a comedian for nothing more than making fun of him.
** It can be argued that a large theme of the film is the harm done by simple neglect and indifference. Outside of the yuppies who beat him on the subway (and the kids who beat him at the start of the film), not a single character on screen displays actual malice toward Arthur, just lack of empathy or concern. His mother failed to protect him from abuse, to be sure, but she's clearlymurder a tragic figure, suffering from her own severe mental illness (the boyfriend who actually abused him is notably not dwelt on, or even named). Thomas Wayne and Alfred reacted understandably (if dismissively) to a creepy stranger stalking the Wayne family. Randall seemed to honestly (if misguidedly) try to help Arthur, then turned on him to save his own job. Murray and his staff embarrass Arthur, but he's still an AssholeVictim who attacked an mentally ill man and was harassing a lady who was uninterested (him they're running away a comedy show, and probably assume an aspiring performer has a thick enough skin that a little embarrassment is worth a national platform. On a smaller level, everyone from strangers on the street to the faceless bureaucracy just shows kind of ignores him as a DirtyCoward, it in no way means he didn't deserve to die). Killing his mom because she let him get abused and did nothing hopes he goes away. The message is that it doesn't take deliberate cruelty to stop people it is understandable but it isn't the right thing drive someone to do at all. While Randall was a FalseFriend and a Jerkass, Killing him simply because he got Arthur fired is going way too far especially since it's implied Randall genuinely gave him the gun for protection. Killing Murray because he mocked him once (albeit not in front of millions of people) is completely unjustified as Murray was a decent man in person. Then it's implied he killed his therapist at the end who never wronged him in any way. As his kills progress they slowly become less justified until they are completely unjustified.despair, having no one to turn to can be enough.
** Actually it's
** It can be argued that a large theme of the film is the harm done by simple neglect and indifference. Outside of the yuppies who beat him on the subway (and the kids who beat him at the start of the film), not a single character on screen displays actual malice toward Arthur, just lack of empathy or concern. His mother failed to protect him from abuse, to be sure, but she's clearly
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Joker exists ''BEFORE'' Batman [[spoiler:and so does Harley Quinn in [[Film/JokerFolieADeux the sequel]].]] It will be many years of grueling violence and mayhem before the savior of Gotham show-up.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 114,119 (click to see context) from:
** Of course it makes sense, Batman in other continuities has accepted his company is just another MegaCorp bent on enslaving the human mindset for its own interests, even when said interests are benevolent. MegaCorps are an EFFECT of Capatilism, Not the Cause.
!! FridgeLogic
* With 1981 technology, how likely was it for Murray Franklin to get good quality camera footage (with good quality sound) from Arthur's show?
** It looks like it was filmed by the club, which would have access to decent quality equipment. It's possible an employee at the club submitted a tape to Murray's show.
*** This is highly likely. One club called A Evening at the Improv (which started in 1963) has a [=YouTube=] Channel of many comedic standup recordings even as far back as the 1980s, including comedians like Michael Keaton (the 1989 Batman himself).
!! FridgeLogic
* With 1981 technology, how likely was it for Murray Franklin to get good quality camera footage (with good quality sound) from Arthur's show?
** It looks like it was filmed by the club, which would have access to decent quality equipment. It's possible an employee at the club submitted a tape to Murray's show.
*** This is highly likely. One club called A Evening at the Improv (which started in 1963) has a [=YouTube=] Channel of many comedic standup recordings even as far back as the 1980s, including comedians like Michael Keaton (the 1989 Batman himself).
to:
** Of course it makes sense, Batman in other continuities has accepted his company is just another MegaCorp bent on enslaving the human mindset for its own interests, even when said interests are benevolent. MegaCorps {{Mega Corp}}s are an EFFECT of Capatilism, Not the Cause.
!! FridgeLogic
* With 1981 technology, how likely was it for Murray Franklin to get good quality camera footage (with good quality sound) from Arthur's show?
** It looks like it was filmed by the club, which would have access to decent quality equipment. It's possible an employee at the club submitted a tape to Murray's show.
*** This is highly likely. One club called A Evening at the Improv (which started in 1963) has a [=YouTube=] Channel of many comedic standup recordings even as far back as the 1980s, including comedians like Michael Keaton (the 1989 Batman himself).Cause.
!! FridgeLogic
* With 1981 technology, how likely was it for Murray Franklin to get good quality camera footage (with good quality sound) from Arthur's show?
** It looks like it was filmed by the club, which would have access to decent quality equipment. It's possible an employee at the club submitted a tape to Murray's show.
*** This is highly likely. One club called A Evening at the Improv (which started in 1963) has a [=YouTube=] Channel of many comedic standup recordings even as far back as the 1980s, including comedians like Michael Keaton (the 1989 Batman himself).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 114 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Of course it makes sense, Batman in other continuities has accepted his company is just another MegaCorp bent on enslaving the human mindset for its own interests, even when said interests are benevolent. MegaCorps are an EFFECT of Capatilism, Not the Cause.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 104 (click to see context) from:
** Adding to this theory, we now know of a condition called CTE, which can occur after constant severe head trauma. Its not discovered until a person is deceased, because of the area a doctor needs to look to diagnosis it. Given the cruel violent abuse Arthur suffered from his mother's boyfriend, he could have easily developed this condition as a child, and many of the symptoms for CTE you see play out in the film, making the supervillain Arthur becomes a lot more understandable.
to:
** Adding to this theory, we now know of a condition called CTE, which can occur after constant severe head trauma. Its It's not discovered until a person is deceased, because of the area a doctor needs to look to diagnosis it. Given the cruel violent abuse Arthur suffered from his mother's boyfriend, he could have easily developed this condition as a child, and many of the symptoms for CTE you see play out in the film, making the supervillain Arthur becomes a lot more understandable.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 82 (click to see context) from:
to:
* It is easy to right off Hoyt as a BadBoss who was totally unsympathetic to Arthur. But Hoyt's life isn't sunshine and rainbows either.
** Gotham City is depicted as a decaying WretchedHive in the midst of a recession. Hoyt's business is probably one of the many businesses that is struggling to make ends meet. Hoyt isn't just being a jerk for no reason: his business is also on the brink and he's suffering a good deal of financial stress. While taking his anger out on Arthur and docking his pay was a dick move, Hoyt's acting more out of desperation and stress than pure malice.
** However sympathetic you may find Arthur, his behavior has gotten him a lot of complaints and he made the reckless decision to bring an unholstered gun into a children's hospital. No matter how nice of an employer you may be, an employee who makes such a stupid decision and acts inappropriately ''is'' a liability. Since Hoyt is struggling to keep himself and his employees afloat, [[ShootTheDog firing Arthur is a harsh but wise business strategy]].
** While Hoyt did drive Arthur down a dark path, like Arthur, he's living in a rough and dirty city that's spiralling out of control and is driven to do cruel things he wouldn't normally do.
** Gotham City is depicted as a decaying WretchedHive in the midst of a recession. Hoyt's business is probably one of the many businesses that is struggling to make ends meet. Hoyt isn't just being a jerk for no reason: his business is also on the brink and he's suffering a good deal of financial stress. While taking his anger out on Arthur and docking his pay was a dick move, Hoyt's acting more out of desperation and stress than pure malice.
** However sympathetic you may find Arthur, his behavior has gotten him a lot of complaints and he made the reckless decision to bring an unholstered gun into a children's hospital. No matter how nice of an employer you may be, an employee who makes such a stupid decision and acts inappropriately ''is'' a liability. Since Hoyt is struggling to keep himself and his employees afloat, [[ShootTheDog firing Arthur is a harsh but wise business strategy]].
** While Hoyt did drive Arthur down a dark path, like Arthur, he's living in a rough and dirty city that's spiralling out of control and is driven to do cruel things he wouldn't normally do.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 69 (click to see context) from:
* The Joker from ''Film/TheDarkKnight'' seeks to be an agent of chaos, bringing about a reign of terror and violence to Gotham, but ultimately (kind of) fails. This Joker is far more successful in bringing this about, succeeding in not only causing a riot but [[DarkMessiah gaining a loyal following of people]] who rescue him but cheer him on. There's a reason why the two Jokers had different degrees of success.
to:
* The Joker from ''Film/TheDarkKnight'' seeks to be an agent of chaos, bringing about a reign of terror and violence to Gotham, but ultimately (kind of) fails. This Joker is far more successful in bringing this about, succeeding in not only causing a riot but [[DarkMessiah gaining a loyal following of people]] who rescue him but and cheer him on. There's a reason why the two Jokers had different degrees of success.
Changed line(s) 80 (click to see context) from:
** Arthur complains about his lot in life, and his mental issues, and begs for pity and hope despite being a nuisance. But he refuses to show ''any'' sympathy, kindness, or forgiveness to the people who cross him. While his anger toward his mom might be understandable, his ''vicious'' murder of someone incapacitated by a stroke without even getting their side of the story is definitely an act of evil.
to:
** Arthur complains about his lot in life, and his mental issues, and begs for pity and hope despite being a nuisance. But he refuses to show ''any'' sympathy, kindness, or forgiveness to the people who cross him.''him''. While his anger toward his mom might be understandable, his ''vicious'' murder of someone incapacitated by a stroke without even getting their side of the story is definitely an act of evil. Murdering Randall and Murray for getting him fired and mocking him on television, respectively are even less acceptable acts.
Changed line(s) 92 (click to see context) from:
* Going on the above, there are documented cases of ultraviolent media, from ''Film/AClockworkOrange'' to ''Literature/{Rage}''. inspiring antisocial deviants to commit violence, and then those violent miscreants inspiring copycat killers. The UsefulNotes/{{Columbine}} killers were discovered to have possessed a nihilistic worldview. It wouldn't be hard to imagine some broken human being adopting the Joker's "creed", either to find meaning in the world or to reinforce an already twisted view of society.
to:
* Going on the above, there are documented cases of ultraviolent media, from ''Film/AClockworkOrange'' to ''Literature/{Rage}''.''Literature/{{Rage}}''. inspiring antisocial deviants to commit violence, and then those violent miscreants inspiring copycat killers. The UsefulNotes/{{Columbine}} killers were discovered to have possessed a nihilistic worldview. It wouldn't be hard to imagine some broken human being adopting the Joker's "creed", "creed" either to find meaning in the world or to reinforce an already twisted view of society.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 104 (click to see context) from:
** For all his other faults, Thomas Wayne is ''not'' an abusive father. He decks Arthur for putting hands on Bruce. He clearly cares for his son.
to:
** For all his other faults, Thomas Wayne is ''not'' an abusive father. He decks Arthur for putting his hands on Bruce. He clearly cares for his son.
** Also, Bruce's stoicism is probably how anybody would react to some creepy stranger coming up to his house.
Changed line(s) 108 (click to see context) from:
to:
* The Wayne Enterprises executives had no problem harassing an innocent woman and beating on a (then) innocent clown. If Arthur hadn't had a gun, how far would they have gone? Could they have killed Arthur? And how many other people have these guys harass and beat?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 22 (click to see context) from:
** Triple irony depending on the ''ComicBook/FlashpointDCComics'' storyline, where Bruce died and that Thomas ended up becoming Batman, and ''ComicBook/Earth2'', where Thomas Wayne was revealed to still be alive and decided to honor his son's legacy by becoming the new Batman.
to:
** Triple irony depending on the ''ComicBook/FlashpointDCComics'' storyline, where Bruce died and that Thomas ended up becoming Batman, and ''ComicBook/Earth2'', where Thomas Wayne was revealed to still be alive and decided to honor his son's legacy after Bruce, Superman and Wonder Woman fell fighting against the forces of Apokolips by becoming the new Batman.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 22 (click to see context) from:
** Triple irony depending on the ''ComicBook/FlashpointDC'' storyline, where Bruce died and that Thomas ended up becoming Batman, and ''ComicBook/Earth2'', where Thomas Wayne was revealed to still be alive and decided to honor his son's legacy by becoming the new Batman.
to:
** Triple irony depending on the ''ComicBook/FlashpointDC'' ''ComicBook/FlashpointDCComics'' storyline, where Bruce died and that Thomas ended up becoming Batman, and ''ComicBook/Earth2'', where Thomas Wayne was revealed to still be alive and decided to honor his son's legacy by becoming the new Batman.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 22 (click to see context) from:
** Triple irony depending on the Flashpoint storyline where Bruce died and that Thomas ended up becoming Batman.
to:
** Triple irony depending on the Flashpoint storyline ''ComicBook/FlashpointDC'' storyline, where Bruce died and that Thomas ended up becoming Batman, and ''ComicBook/Earth2'', where Thomas Wayne was revealed to still be alive and decided to honor his son's legacy by becoming the new Batman.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 106 (click to see context) from:
to:
* Penny being institutionalized might explain her own psychological distress: decades ago, mental asylums were abysmal places where mentally disturbed people endured mistreatment and torment, and so Penny being sent there would've made her problems worse. If she was an innocent person who was wrongfully institutionalized, that would make the situation even ''more'' tragic. Had she not been locked up, she could've been a wonderful parent to Arthur.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
** Super Cats might be an allusion to another famous figure from the Batman mythos: Catwoman. Catwoman is often written as a thief who fights even worse criminals than her. In other words, a cat that kills rats.
Changed line(s) 78 (click to see context) from:
* Arthur's murders are understandable, but they show that Arthur is ''not'' a hero.
to:
* Arthur's murders are sort of understandable, but they show that Arthur is ''not'' a hero.
Changed line(s) 80,81 (click to see context) from:
** Batman abides by ThouShallNotKill, even when the Joker goes out of his way to destroy Batman's life.
to:
** Batman abides by ThouShallNotKill, even when the Joker goes out of his way to destroy Batman's life. Batman deals with his problems by doing good, while the Joker responds by making the lives of others worse.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Arthur's murders are understandable, but they show that Arthur is ''not'' a hero.
** Arthur complains about his lot in life, and his mental issues, and begs for pity and hope despite being a nuisance. But he refuses to show ''any'' sympathy, kindness, or forgiveness to the people who cross him. While his anger toward his mom might be understandable, his ''vicious'' murder of someone incapacitated by a stroke without even getting their side of the story is definitely an act of evil.
** Batman abides by ThouShallNotKill, even when the Joker goes out of his way to destroy Batman's life.
** Arthur complains about his lot in life, and his mental issues, and begs for pity and hope despite being a nuisance. But he refuses to show ''any'' sympathy, kindness, or forgiveness to the people who cross him. While his anger toward his mom might be understandable, his ''vicious'' murder of someone incapacitated by a stroke without even getting their side of the story is definitely an act of evil.
** Batman abides by ThouShallNotKill, even when the Joker goes out of his way to destroy Batman's life.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Going on the above, there are documented cases of ultraviolent media, from ''Film/AClockworkOrange'' to ''Literature/{Rage}''. inspiring antisocial deviants to commit violence, and then those violent miscreants inspiring copycat killers. The UsefulNotes/{{Columbine}} killers were discovered to have possessed a nihilistic worldview. It wouldn't be hard to imagine some broken human being adopting the Joker's "creed", either to find meaning in the world or to reinforce an already twisted view of society.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 69 (click to see context) from:
** The Joker from the 2008 movie may have made some accurate observations about human nature...but he proved himself to be nothing but a monstrous terrorist who made ''everyone'' miserable: the police, the judicial system, the mafia, the poor people in the hospital he blew up, and the civilians and criminals in the boats. The Joker was also [[BadBoss murderous to the people]] he worked with, meaning he would have no real loyalty from anybody. That Joker failed because he caused so much mayhem as to make himself into a figure to rally against. A mobster [[EnemyMine tried to work his Gordon to bring him down]], and the civilians and prisoners on the ferries banded together to not give in to his madness. It is weird that while the Dark Knight Joker had far more resources behind him, [[MachiavelliWasWrong he created so much hatred toward himself]], there was nobody who wanted anything to do with him.
to:
** The Joker from the 2008 movie may have made some accurate observations about human nature...but he proved himself to be nothing but a monstrous terrorist who made ''everyone'' miserable: the police, the judicial system, the mafia, the poor people in the hospital he blew up, and the civilians and criminals in the boats. The Joker was also [[BadBoss murderous to the people]] he worked with, meaning he would have no real loyalty from anybody. That Joker failed because he caused so much mayhem as to make himself into a figure to rally against. A mobster [[EnemyMine tried to work his with Gordon to bring him down]], and the civilians and prisoners on the ferries banded together to not give in to his madness. It is It’s weird that while the Dark Knight Joker had far more resources behind him, [[MachiavelliWasWrong he created so much hatred toward himself]], there was nobody who wanted anything to do with him.
