Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Headscratchers / Joker2019

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Despite initially claiming to like Arthur, his boss clearly doesn't with the sign incident having him be prebiased against anything what Arthur says because he is inherently untrustworthy as a mental patient, not even Arthur's heavy bruises seemed to convince him.

to:

** Despite initially claiming to like Arthur, his boss clearly doesn't with the sign incident having him be prebiased against anything what Arthur says because he is inherently untrustworthy as a mental patient, not even Arthur's heavy bruises seemed to convince him.him.
* Why can't the police find Arthur after the subway shooting? He gets at least one call by the police because they want to question him. He's not hiding; he's just hanging out in normal place of residence. Why not get an arrest warrant and bring him in?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** I noticed that the show's director made a "cut" gesture in the background, meaning camera feed was probably cut off and somebody may have at least tried to slip out and find a phone to call the police. (Early eighties, no cell phones.) Meanwhile, Murray was doing what he was best at. He talked to the madman, let him have his rant, give him attention, be entertaining and engaging. In doing this, he kept Joker's attention on him and off the audience and other two guests. Maybe what he does could be seen as less idiotic and more heroic in that light. "Not all people are awful."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** How is that judging him unfairly? He brought a gun in a children hospital and lied by saying it was a prop when asked why he has a gun on him. Even if he throws Randall under the bus how is the boss supposed to believe him when he tries to dodge the fault altogether on instinct because he knew he'll lose the job if he tells the truth? Plus he did bring the gun in the children hospital the same way he started dancing with it and shot the wall it's not something he did for no purpose he did wanted to carry the gun for self-defense even though it's a firing offense if he is caught with it. Arthur can't blame all his decision on other people being dicks or his illnesses some are his own poor judgement, like not reporting the beatdown to the store owner or calling the cops about it.

to:

** How is that judging him unfairly? He brought a gun in a children hospital and lied by saying it was a prop when asked why he has a gun on him. Even if he throws Randall under the bus how is the boss supposed to believe him when he tries to dodge the fault altogether on instinct because he knew he'll lose the job if he tells the truth? Plus he did bring the gun in the children hospital the same way he started dancing with it and shot the wall it's not something he did for no purpose he did wanted to carry the gun for self-defense even though it's a firing offense if he is caught with it. Arthur can't blame all his decision on other people being dicks or his illnesses some are his own poor judgement, like not reporting the beatdown to the store owner or calling the cops about it.it.
** Despite initially claiming to like Arthur, his boss clearly doesn't with the sign incident having him be prebiased against anything what Arthur says because he is inherently untrustworthy as a mental patient, not even Arthur's heavy bruises seemed to convince him.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** How is that judging him unfairly? He brought a gun in a children hospital and lied by saying it was a prop when asked why he has a gun on him. Even if he throws Randall under the bus how is the boss supposed to believe him when he tries to dodge the fault altogether on instinct because he knew he'll lose the job if he tells the truth? Plus he did bring the gun in the children hospital the same way he started dancing with it and shot the wall it's not something he did for no purpose he did wanted to carry the gun for self-defense even though it's a firing offense if he is caught with it.

to:

** How is that judging him unfairly? He brought a gun in a children hospital and lied by saying it was a prop when asked why he has a gun on him. Even if he throws Randall under the bus how is the boss supposed to believe him when he tries to dodge the fault altogether on instinct because he knew he'll lose the job if he tells the truth? Plus he did bring the gun in the children hospital the same way he started dancing with it and shot the wall it's not something he did for no purpose he did wanted to carry the gun for self-defense even though it's a firing offense if he is caught with it. Arthur can't blame all his decision on other people being dicks or his illnesses some are his own poor judgement, like not reporting the beatdown to the store owner or calling the cops about it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* When Arthur's boss fired him over the gun, how come Arthur didn't mention Randall giving the gun to him because he was told to have it for self-defense? Better yet, why didn't he mention that Randall was the one who brought the gun to work in the first place so that Randall would also lose his job, too? I know it makes sense to fire Arthur because they don't want to put others at risk, but his boss already knows Arthur doesn't think like most people, so shouldn't he have asked him where he had gotten the gun from instead of assuming Arthur brought it on purpose? It was already bad enough he blamed Arthur for stealing the sign after those teens broke it. Does he just not like Arthur? Also, how come Arthur's boss wasn't on his kill list, since he was also among the people who had judged him unfairly?

to:

* When Arthur's boss fired him over the gun, how come Arthur didn't mention Randall giving the gun to him because he was told to have it for self-defense? Better yet, why didn't he mention that Randall was the one who brought the gun to work in the first place so that Randall would also lose his job, too? I know it makes sense to fire Arthur because they don't want to put others at risk, but his boss already knows Arthur doesn't think like most people, so shouldn't he have asked him where he had gotten the gun from instead of assuming Arthur brought it on purpose? It was already bad enough he blamed Arthur for stealing the sign after those teens broke it. Does he just not like Arthur? Also, how come Arthur's boss wasn't on his kill list, since he was also among the people who had judged him unfairly?unfairly?
** How is that judging him unfairly? He brought a gun in a children hospital and lied by saying it was a prop when asked why he has a gun on him. Even if he throws Randall under the bus how is the boss supposed to believe him when he tries to dodge the fault altogether on instinct because he knew he'll lose the job if he tells the truth? Plus he did bring the gun in the children hospital the same way he started dancing with it and shot the wall it's not something he did for no purpose he did wanted to carry the gun for self-defense even though it's a firing offense if he is caught with it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* When Arthur's boss fired him over the gun, how come Arthur didn't mention Randall giving the gun to him because he was told to have it for self-defense? Better yet, why didn't he mention that Randall was the one who brought the gun to work in the first place so that Randall would also lose his job, too? I know it makes sense to fire him because they don't want to put their audience at risk, but his boss already knows Arthur doesn't think like most people, so shouldn't he have asked him where he had gotten the gun from instead of assuming Arthur brought it on purpose?

to:

* When Arthur's boss fired him over the gun, how come Arthur didn't mention Randall giving the gun to him because he was told to have it for self-defense? Better yet, why didn't he mention that Randall was the one who brought the gun to work in the first place so that Randall would also lose his job, too? I know it makes sense to fire him Arthur because they don't want to put their audience others at risk, but his boss already knows Arthur doesn't think like most people, so shouldn't he have asked him where he had gotten the gun from instead of assuming Arthur brought it on purpose?purpose? It was already bad enough he blamed Arthur for stealing the sign after those teens broke it. Does he just not like Arthur? Also, how come Arthur's boss wasn't on his kill list, since he was also among the people who had judged him unfairly?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* When Arthur's boss fired him over the gun, how come Arthur didn't mention Randall giving the gun to him because he believed it'd be for self-defense? Better yet, why didn't he mention that Randall was the one who brought the gun to work in the first place so that Randall would also lose his job, too? I know it makes sense to fire him because they don't want to put their audience at risk, but his boss already knows Arthur doesn't think like most people, so shouldn't he have asked him where he had gotten the gun from instead of assuming Arthur brought it on purpose?

to:

* When Arthur's boss fired him over the gun, how come Arthur didn't mention Randall giving the gun to him because he believed it'd be was told to have it for self-defense? Better yet, why didn't he mention that Randall was the one who brought the gun to work in the first place so that Randall would also lose his job, too? I know it makes sense to fire him because they don't want to put their audience at risk, but his boss already knows Arthur doesn't think like most people, so shouldn't he have asked him where he had gotten the gun from instead of assuming Arthur brought it on purpose?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* When Arthur's boss fired him over the gun, how come Arthur didn't mention Randall giving the gun to him because he believed it'd be for self-defense? Better yet, when didn't he mention that Randall was the one who brought the gun to work in the first place so that Randall would also lose his job, too?

to:

* When Arthur's boss fired him over the gun, how come Arthur didn't mention Randall giving the gun to him because he believed it'd be for self-defense? Better yet, when why didn't he mention that Randall was the one who brought the gun to work in the first place so that Randall would also lose his job, too?too? I know it makes sense to fire him because they don't want to put their audience at risk, but his boss already knows Arthur doesn't think like most people, so shouldn't he have asked him where he had gotten the gun from instead of assuming Arthur brought it on purpose?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** It's not a car you buy it you keep it even if your financial situation worsens. Penny used to work for the Wayne she could have afford it then because it was a pretty good purchase to avoid missed calls.

to:

** It's not a car you buy it you keep it even if your financial situation worsens. Penny used to work for the Wayne she could have afford it then because it was a pretty good purchase to avoid missed calls.
* When Arthur's boss fired him over the gun, how come Arthur didn't mention Randall giving the gun to him because he believed it'd be for self-defense? Better yet, when didn't he mention that Randall was the one who brought the gun to work in the first place so that Randall would also lose his job, too?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* Arthur and his mother live in poverty, so how could they afford to own both an answering machine and a videocassette recorder in 1981?

to:

* Arthur and his mother live in poverty, so how could they afford to own both an answering machine and a videocassette recorder in 1981?1981?
** It's not a car you buy it you keep it even if your financial situation worsens. Penny used to work for the Wayne she could have afford it then because it was a pretty good purchase to avoid missed calls.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** The pillow is crushing the tube, probably the nose too.

to:

** The pillow is crushing the tube, probably the nose too.too.
* Arthur and his mother live in poverty, so how could they afford to own both an answering machine and a videocassette recorder in 1981?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Also -- and this may seem like a cop-out, but -- UnreliableNarrator is at play here. The entire ending, after all, plays like a deranged and alienated man's ultimate fantasy -- he publicly gets even with everyone who ever humiliated him, murders a famous celebrity live on national television, and not only does everyone love him, he inspires a mass movement that seems to worship him. A key point of the movie is that it gradually becomes clear that we cannot entirely trust anything we've seen. After all, Arthur's delusions invent an entire romantic subplot that turns out to have only been in his head. While some version of these events may have happened, there's no concrete evidence that they played out in any way like we see in the film, they could just be what Arthur believes / wishes happened. For all we know, Arthur never shot Murray Franklin at all.

to:

** Also -- and this may seem like a cop-out, but -- UnreliableNarrator is at play here. The entire ending, after all, plays like a deranged and alienated man's ultimate fantasy -- he publicly gets even with everyone who ever humiliated him, murders a famous celebrity live on national television, and not only does everyone love him, he inspires a mass movement that seems to worship him. A key point of the movie is that it gradually becomes clear that we cannot entirely trust anything we've seen. After all, Arthur's delusions invent an entire romantic subplot that turns out to have only been in his head. While some version of these events may have happened, there's no concrete evidence that they played out in any way like we see in the film, they could just be what Arthur believes / wishes happened. For all we know, Arthur never shot Murray Franklin at all.all, and is locked up at the end for one of the many other things we see him do, or something else entirely.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Also -- and this may seem like a cop-out, but -- UnreliableNarrator is at play here. The entire ending, after all, plays like a deranged and alienated man's ultimate fantasy -- he publicly gets even everyone who humiliated him, murders a famous celebrity live on national television, and not only does everyone love him, he inspires a mass movement that seems to worship him. A key point of the movie is that it gradually becomes clear that we cannot entirely trust anything we've seen. After all, Arthur's delusions invent an entire romantic subplot that turns out to have only been in his head. While some version of these events may have happened, there's no concrete evidence that they played out in any way like we see in the film, they could just be what Arthur believes / wishes happened. For all we know, Arthur never shot Murray Franklin at all.

to:

** Also -- and this may seem like a cop-out, but -- UnreliableNarrator is at play here. The entire ending, after all, plays like a deranged and alienated man's ultimate fantasy -- he publicly gets even with everyone who ever humiliated him, murders a famous celebrity live on national television, and not only does everyone love him, he inspires a mass movement that seems to worship him. A key point of the movie is that it gradually becomes clear that we cannot entirely trust anything we've seen. After all, Arthur's delusions invent an entire romantic subplot that turns out to have only been in his head. While some version of these events may have happened, there's no concrete evidence that they played out in any way like we see in the film, they could just be what Arthur believes / wishes happened. For all we know, Arthur never shot Murray Franklin at all.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Also -- and this may seem like a cop-out, but -- UnreliableNarrator is at play here. The entire ending, after all, plays like a deranged and alienated man's ultimate fantasy -- he publicly gets even everyone who humiliated him, murders a famous celebrity live on national television, and not only does everyone love him, he inspires a mass movement that seems to worship him. A key point of the movie is that it gradually becomes clear that we cannot entirely trust anything we've seen. After all, Arthur's delusions invent an entire romantic subplot that turns out to have only been in his head. While some version of these events may have happened, there's no concrete evidence that they played out in any way like we see in the film, they could just be what Arthur believes / wishes happened. For all we know, Arthur never shot Murray Franklin at all.


Added DiffLines:

*** WordOfGod also indicates that this isn't necessarily ''The'' Joker we're seeing here. It could just be ''a'' Joker.


Added DiffLines:

** Also, WordOfGod suggests that this isn't necessarily supposed to ''be'' the actual Batman-fighting Joker. It's possibly him, but it could be someone who inspired him, or someone who wants to be him, or any number of possibilities. Leaving out "the" introduces a necessary ambiguity; after all, a key part of most versions of the Joker is that no one, not even he, truly know knows who he is or where he comes from.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:


* Murray Franklin acts like a complete idiot at the end of the movie. Arthur is clearly unstable and wears the terrifying clown makeup, but Franklin never screens him for weapons. As the show starts, Franklin keeps talking to him as he begins a nihilistic rant and starts implicitly threatening him, rather than run or call security, [[spoiler: resulting in his death]]. Especially considering the tense situation in Gotham at this time, why on earth didn't Franklin screen Arthur or leave when it was clearly going south on him?
** The same reason [[spoiler: the Waynes are apparently dim enough to go see Zorro in the middle of a city-consuming riot against the upper class. Also, Arthur doesn't seem inherently unstable at first - when they meet he's just an enthusiastic fan, and based on the footage he played Arthur is just incredibly awkward and sad; it's arguably not clear until it's too late that Arthur is actually a danger]].

to:

* Murray Franklin acts like a complete idiot at the end of the movie. Arthur is clearly unstable and wears the terrifying clown makeup, but Franklin never screens him for weapons. As the show starts, Franklin keeps talking to him as he begins a nihilistic rant and starts implicitly threatening him, rather than run or call security, [[spoiler: resulting in his death]].death. Especially considering the tense situation in Gotham at this time, why on earth didn't Franklin screen Arthur or leave when it was clearly going south on him?
** The same reason [[spoiler: the Waynes are apparently dim enough to go see Zorro in the middle of a city-consuming riot against the upper class. Also, Arthur doesn't seem inherently unstable at first - when they meet he's just an enthusiastic fan, and based on the footage he played Arthur is just incredibly awkward and sad; it's arguably not clear until it's too late that Arthur is actually a danger]].danger.

Changed: 139

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


*** ** Then there's his word, an unemployed mental patient who'd just been fired from his job for bringing a gun to a children ward, that he needed to defend himself with lethal force from three upstanding upper-class businessmen with their well-off families and the Wayne company backing them in a court case.

to:

*** ** Then there's him only having his word, an unemployed a lower-class middle-aged mental patient who has been committed in the past and who'd just been fired from his job for bringing a gun to a children ward, that he needed to defend himself with lethal force from three younger upstanding upper-class businessmen with their well-off families no doubt pressing murder charges and the Wayne company likely backing them in a court case.trial.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*** ** Then there's his word, an unemployed mental patient who'd just been fired from his job for bringing a gun to a children ward, that he needed to defend himself with lethal force from three upstanding upper-class businessmen with their well-off families and the Wayne company backing them in a court case.

Added: 195

Changed: 172

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** There were bullets in the bag with the (there could have been 15-20 or more in there)gun.He only carried the gun with enough to fill the chambers but did'nt carry extra. On the subway, he simply used up all the bullets that were in the gun and did'nt reload. He simply could have reloaded later with some bullets he left at home.

to:

** There were bullets in the bag with the (there could have been 15-20 or more in there)gun.He only carried the gun with enough to fill the chambers but did'nt didn't carry extra. On the subway, he simply used up all the bullets that were in the gun and did'nt reload. He simply could have reloaded later with some bullets he left at home.



* When Arthur smothers his mother in the hospital, she's wearing a nasal cannula presumably hooked up to oxygen - how did she asphyxiate?

to:

** Same reason why he is not called the Arthur by his co-worker or the Happy by his mom, Joker is his new name.
* When Arthur smothers his mother in the hospital, she's wearing a nasal cannula presumably hooked up to oxygen - how did she asphyxiate?asphyxiate?
** The pillow is crushing the tube, probably the nose too.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** He's like his buddy, sometimes he's called Batman, other times "The Batman."

to:

** He's like his buddy, sometimes he's called Batman, other times "The Batman.""
*When Arthur smothers his mother in the hospital, she's wearing a nasal cannula presumably hooked up to oxygen - how did she asphyxiate?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* This is so very nitpicky, but why is it just "Joker" and not "The Joker"? It's kind of jarring that Arthur never gets the "the", honestly.

to:

* This is so very nitpicky, but why is it just "Joker" and not "The Joker"? It's kind of jarring that Arthur never gets the "the", honestly.honestly.
** He's like his buddy, sometimes he's called Batman, other times "The Batman."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** There were bullets in the bag with the (there could have been 15-20 or more in there)gun.He only carried the gun with enough to fill the chambers but did'nt carry extra. On the subway, he simply used up all the bullets that were in the gun and did'nt reload. He simply could have reloaded later with some bullets he left at home.

to:

** There were bullets in the bag with the (there could have been 15-20 or more in there)gun.He only carried the gun with enough to fill the chambers but did'nt carry extra. On the subway, he simply used up all the bullets that were in the gun and did'nt reload. He simply could have reloaded later with some bullets he left at home.home.
* This is so very nitpicky, but why is it just "Joker" and not "The Joker"? It's kind of jarring that Arthur never gets the "the", honestly.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* Where does he get the bullets? We saw that Arthur ran out of ammo during the subway scene, but then he had some when going on TV. I get the "unreliable narrator" and "some of it isn't real" thing, but he clearly did kill both the Wall Street guys and the TV host... unless ''everything'' had been just a dream.

to:

* Where does he get the bullets? We saw that Arthur ran out of ammo during the subway scene, but then he had some when going on TV. I get the "unreliable narrator" and "some of it isn't real" thing, but he clearly did kill both the Wall Street guys and the TV host... unless ''everything'' had been just a dream.dream.
** There were bullets in the bag with the (there could have been 15-20 or more in there)gun.He only carried the gun with enough to fill the chambers but did'nt carry extra. On the subway, he simply used up all the bullets that were in the gun and did'nt reload. He simply could have reloaded later with some bullets he left at home.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


*** Given Arthur is also an unreliable narrator - like his relationship with his neighbour and the circumstances under which he got the gun - it's also difficult to discern whether he ''was'' actually attacked first.

to:

*** Given Arthur is also an unreliable narrator - like his relationship with his neighbour and the circumstances under which he got the gun - it's also difficult to discern whether he ''was'' actually attacked first.first.
* Where does he get the bullets? We saw that Arthur ran out of ammo during the subway scene, but then he had some when going on TV. I get the "unreliable narrator" and "some of it isn't real" thing, but he clearly did kill both the Wall Street guys and the TV host... unless ''everything'' had been just a dream.

Added: 623

Changed: -19

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** The same reason [[spoiler: the Waynes are apparently dim enough to go see Zorro in the middle of a city-consuming riot against the upper class. Also, Arthur doesn't seem inherently unstable at first - when they meet he's just an enthusiastic fan, and based on the footage he played Arthur is just incredibly awkward and sad; it's arguably not clear until it's too late that Arthur is actually a danger]].



** The first two, arguably very true. But the third guy is already wounded and running away. That’s murder in most jurisdictions. Plus, Arthur isn’t allowed to own a gun— so he’d go down for that at least. And that’s assuming Arthur is in a right enough state of mind to think it all through; he might just be running in a blind panic.

to:

** The first two, arguably very true. But the third guy is already wounded and running away. That’s murder in most jurisdictions. Plus, Arthur isn’t allowed to own a gun— gun— so he’d go down for that at least. And that’s assuming Arthur is in a right enough state of mind to think it all through; he might just be running in a blind panic.panic.
*** Given Arthur is also an unreliable narrator - like his relationship with his neighbour and the circumstances under which he got the gun - it's also difficult to discern whether he ''was'' actually attacked first.

Added: 1391

Changed: 175

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Had responses


* The 3 guys in the subway attacked Arthur first. Couldn't he tell the cops he killed them in self-defense?

to:

** As it is a stand-alone Joker is able to avoid this problem; while this discussion might be better for WMG, some possibilities are:
*** 1) Joker is not a physical threat by that point, simply a supervillain who uses traps, bombs and psychotically loyal goons.
*** 2) Arthur’s actual age isn’t as old as Phoenix and he just looks that way because he’s unwell and a smoker; Fleck could begin taking care of himself and be a villain for a very young Batman (depending on Canon Batman starts at 25, so if Fleck is just an old looking 35, he would be 52 when “Year One” takes place). 2b) would be Batman starts even younger, similarly to how the show Gotham is running, with a 40-something Joker a realistic threat to a teenage Bruce. And finally...
*** 3) The name joker ends up being a title that Gotham’s craziest, most dangerous and influential criminal takes over; this would allow for a “Jokerverse” where each style of Joker gets his day. Failed comedian turned anarchist murderer, mob boss using the insanity plea, a pure force of chaos and evil- Gotham’s dark side personified.
* The 3 guys in the subway attacked Arthur first. Couldn't he tell the cops he killed them in self-defense?self-defense?
** The first two, arguably very true. But the third guy is already wounded and running away. That’s murder in most jurisdictions. Plus, Arthur isn’t allowed to own a gun— so he’d go down for that at least. And that’s assuming Arthur is in a right enough state of mind to think it all through; he might just be running in a blind panic.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* The 3 guys in the subway attacked Arthur first. Couldn't he tell the cops he killed him in self-defense?

to:

* The 3 guys in the subway attacked Arthur first. Couldn't he tell the cops he killed him them in self-defense?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* The 3 guys in the subway attacked Arthur first. Couldn't he tell the cops it was self defense? Gotham is a crime-infested cesspool, after all.

to:

* The 3 guys in the subway attacked Arthur first. Couldn't he tell the cops it was self defense? Gotham is a crime-infested cesspool, after all.he killed him in self-defense?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* How would Arthur and Bruce's rivalry work in the future? Arthur will be an old man by the time Bruce becomes the dark knight.

to:

* How would Arthur and Bruce's rivalry work in the future? Arthur will be an old man by the time Bruce becomes the dark knight.knight.
* The 3 guys in the subway attacked Arthur first. Couldn't he tell the cops it was self defense? Gotham is a crime-infested cesspool, after all.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* Murray Franklin acts like a complete idiot at the end of the movie. Arthur is clearly unstable and wears the terrifying clown makeup, but Franklin never screens him for weapons. As the show starts, Franklin keeps talking to him as he begins a nihilistic rant and starts implicitly threatening him, rather than run or call security, [[spoiler: resulting in his death]]. Especially considering the tense situation in Gotham at this time, why on earth didn't Franklin screen Arthur or leave when it was clearly going south on him?

to:

* Murray Franklin acts like a complete idiot at the end of the movie. Arthur is clearly unstable and wears the terrifying clown makeup, but Franklin never screens him for weapons. As the show starts, Franklin keeps talking to him as he begins a nihilistic rant and starts implicitly threatening him, rather than run or call security, [[spoiler: resulting in his death]]. Especially considering the tense situation in Gotham at this time, why on earth didn't Franklin screen Arthur or leave when it was clearly going south on him?him?
* How would Arthur and Bruce's rivalry work in the future? Arthur will be an old man by the time Bruce becomes the dark knight.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* Murray Franklin acts like a complete idiot at the end of the movie. Arthur is clearly unstable and wears the terrifying clown makeup, but Franklin never screens him for weapons. As the show starts, Franklin keeps talking to him as he begins a nihilistic rant and starts implicitly threatening him, rather than run or call security, [[spoiler: resulting in his death]]. Especially considering the tense situation in Gotham at this time, why on earth didn't Franklin screen Arthur or leave when it was clearly going south on him?

Top