I haven’t seen the movie (and won’t) so I’ll have to respond to the underlying question instead. I read _Arkham Asylum_ when it came out. I was still a graduate student, in the hand-cranked computer era, so my memory is … nearly null
Thank you! I make a distinction between “atomized” and “fluid”—basically, whether partial coherence is reintroduced on a creative, impermanent basis. Do either or both characters seem fluid rather than atomized?
-
-
The Joker, pretty obviously. The Joker has no special abilities, no consistent skillset, no concrete assets, no stable history and no real name. Somehow this makes him one of the most important and frightening beings in the universe.
-
He's constantly reconstructed around a few fixed points, everything else is a palimpsest. Morrison's Batman is more arcane. Morrison tried to take Batman's entire history, in and out of the comics, and enfold it into a single persona who could have been all of those people.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.