Three Jokers: Post-Issue Theories Posts (August - November 2020)
These three posts right here are probably the biggest things I've done. I don't want to spend too much time commenting on it here since I already have a lot in the posts themselves. I talk about my theories, my analysis of the story and characters and the background of why and how I did this here already. As of now, the third and final post is still the most awarded post I've ever made.
My opinion on the book overall remains the same. Some parts I've definitely grown to defend or tolerate less, but the best parts I stand by on. The experience was overall a fun one, acting like Batman figuring this mystery out, even if we admittedly don't get that answer here. The simplest one that canon will likely go with, which I mention briefly and in comments, was that the other Jokers were faked, and one that Jason Fabok has said is his personal interpretation. Nonetheless, this was a fantastic tribute to Batman and Joker's history, and a story about healing from scars through forgiveness.
Thanks again to everyone who've read and contributed to them.
Three Jokers
____________________________________________________
Three Jokers: HUGE Post-Issue 1 Theories Post (Ft. The Criminal)
SPOILERS for Batman: Three Jokers #1
Link to the original from Reddit
The Criminal Joker – Revenge and War on Crime
I’m back to the long format theory posts! I was just going to post the above crazy wall-esque image like the last several stuff I usually do but this deserves more expansion on details. Plus I have tons of thoughts.
Do take note however
This isn’t a final post on who The Criminal Joker is
Which I just did with The Clown Joker. I’ll do that for this one after issue 2 with little spoilers as possible. This is more like my old theory posts, specifically on who The Criminal Joker was and his possible motivations.
Also, stick around for the end for some slightly unrelated speculation and theories on Three Jokers that don’t necessarily have enough to be posts on their own.
SPOILERS for Batman: Three Jokers #1 ahead! Please read the issue before reading this.
Now, onto theories…
The beginning of the book has the titular Three Jokers each committing different crimes on the same night. The Comedian kills Fatman. The Clown, after stuffing a victim with a rubber chicken before this night, steals a truck of chemicals from ACE chemicals while leaving behind 3 jokerized man in Red Hood suits (more on this at the end!).
What did The Criminal do?
“continuing his war on organized crime”
He murdered the last remaining Moxons.
Who are the Moxons?
Lew Moxon (who the restaurant is named after) is an old character originating from Pre-Crisis, first appearing in Detective Comics #235 (1956). The same issue revealing that a young Thomas Wayne wore a bat costume and had his own encounter with criminals. He was forced to use his skills as a medical doctor to save a gangster’s life. That gangster was Lew Moxon.
Lew Moxon sees a “ghost”
It was Lew Moxon, who was arrested after Thomas fought his way out.
It was then revealed that Joe Chill was no random ordinary mugger. He was a hitman sent by him to kill Thomas for revenge. Bruce would later wear Thomas’ old suit which lead to him panicking and running away from the “ghost” and then being run over by a car. (note he did this because Moxon lost his memory and couldn’t be found guilty of the murders, but was still a criminal, this jogged his memory).
Here, it seems that the Moxons were exonerated for the murder after Joe Chill confessed to the murders alone. However, I think it’s possible just like in the original story, Lew Moxon may still be guilty but exonerated anyway, so Bruce still could’ve confronted him, recanonizing the original story.
Alluding to and bringing this story back isn’t necessarily something new. Grant Morrison similarly brought back Thomas’ batsuit and had Simon Hurt (a character based on a random doctor from Robin Dies at Dawn) wear it. The Brave and the Bold also combined this story with the Joe Chill story in Batman #47 (also recanonized by Morrison), similar to BTAS combining Five-Way Revenge and Laughing Fish, to make the series’ best episode “Chill of the Night”. I highly recommend checking all of those out.
Why did The Criminal kill the last Moxons?
I do believe this was a very deliberate and calculated move from him. So why did he do it?
He wanted to get Bruce’s attention, who he knows the secret identity of.
He’s hinting at a connection between them, Bruce and his past.
We know from recent modern Joker stories that the Joker(s) knows that Bruce is Batman. So, he could just be purposely attacking his greatest emotional scar. But of course, with his title and emphasis on his war on organized crime, this could be an allusion to his past. Which leads to the next segment.
According to the solicit for issue 2, the Jokers have a surprising connection to Bruce’s past:
“As Batman and Batgirl follow an unexpected thread linking the three Jokers with someone from the Dark Knight’s past, Red Hood dives headfirst into trouble and finds himself struggling to stay afloat without the aid of his allies.”
Now, who is this person linking them together?
Could it have been Lew Moxon? Joe Chill?
Maybe. First, let’s look at the Criminal’s possible past
Now we know from Jason Fabok’s commentaries that The Criminal is partially inspired by Jack Nichoslon’s Joker from Batman ’89. In that film, the Joker was once Jack Napier, gangster and right-hand man of Carl Grissom, the most powerful mob boss in Gotham in the movie. Because he was having an affair with the girlfriend of said boss, he was assigned to a heist on Axis Chemicals and set up as the corrupt police are tipped off.
His transformation into the Joker here is not necessarily due to tragedy like The Comedian, but by personal betrayal.
This leads to him of course getting revenge on Grissom and taking over the mob.
A huge and controversial move in this film, is that Jack Napier murdered the Waynes (with Joe Chill helping).
“Ever Dance with the Devil in the Pale Moonlight?”
Now we do see the Wayne murders again in flashback in Three Jokers. Joe Chill is there. I don’t think they’ll make it so Joe Chill = The Criminal.
Will he then be behind the murders secretly then? Or at least involved with it in some way?
With the Moxons being innocent after all?
Maybe, but no I don’t think so.
Perhaps he could’ve known Joe Chill. The way he was portrayed in the flashback looked more like he wasn’t a professional hitman or a random drunk mugger. He was stuttering and afraid yet seemed like he killed them immediately and on purpose.
Maybe I’m just looking too deep into that. Whatever the case I am sure that The Criminal is the one with the connection to either Joe Chill or Lew Moxon.
Back to looking at the Criminal’s, well, criminal background.
Ever since Batman ’89, there have been quite a few similar Joke pasts that portray the Joker as a former criminal. Mask of the Phantasm and TNBA episode “Beware the Creeper” have the proto-Joker as a mob hitman. Spoiler for the former animated movie, he was the killer of Andrea’s father and his involvement with the mob in general links him to Bruce ultimately becoming Batman.
From Mask of the Phantasm
Later on, Paul Dini and Alex Ross would make “Case Study” for Batman Black and White, portraying the Joker as a sane and rational, evil mastermind who was once a cunning gangster who rose to the top and became the Red Hood out of boredom, with his war on Batman being born of revenge and hidden with the guise of madness. (Highly recommend reading it or watching the motion comic free on YouTube).
“Course, we didn’t call him Joker then, but damned if I can remember what his real name was”
So whatever becomes his origin here, I believe it has something to do with being a former member of the mob, possibly a hit man, a second in command or even a full on mob boss, before either being betrayed (hence his hatred for organized crime) and/or becoming the Red Hood to alleviate his boredom.
Why do I think he’ll still be a former Red Hood?
See below picture I made before issue 1’s release and thought about nearly two years ago (I still remember the moment I realized this hahaha).
The Original Joker = The Original Red Hood?
His character design in concept art released a while back has him wear a suit similar to the original Red Hood’s in Detective Comics #168. It’s slightly different from his first appearance in Batman #1.
Look at his lapels and compare it to that image from Batman #1.
The image is replicated instead by him wearing another jacket on top of the suit. Otherwise the lapels of the suit, the bowtie and the white shirt (which does admittedly also appear in his first appearance) hint at the Red Hood, who in that original cover, has an almost purple tint (which is a hint to that issue’s ending of course, as it being the Joker was a twist, great read btw).
Before I move on to the next part…
We did get a tease from Mr. Fabok of the Joker telling Batman (?) that they are more similar than he’d admit. Which is why I believe his hatred for the mob may also be due to something in his past. Is it betrayal? Tragedy? Whatever the case he seems to have some physical scars of his own above his lip. May he have some emotional and psychological scars as well?
“…You and I, we’re more alike than you’d care to admit…”
The Joker himself first appeared in 1940’s Batman #1, the first issue of the Batman solo series made after his success in Detective Comics.
I’ve read the issue several times over the years. The first few times being with my copy of The Batman Chronicles volume 1. I also read the modern remake of this story “The Man Who Laughs” by Ed Brubaker and Doug Mankhe (named after the Conrad Veidt film) which was actually really good. Clearly however Batman: Three Jokers will be basing things on the original version without the modern retcons, a true anti-reboot (which makes me personally think that this story should be a post-Doomsday Clock/Death Metal one).
How do I know that?
First, let’s get to another tease by Mr. Fabok.
“going all the way back to the beginning…”
I recognized that this was a golden age homage with that bat insignia, and after looking through the original story, I concluded it’s likely an homage to this scene:
“Not so fast friend”
Notice this scene involves Dick Grayson as Robin. This is because he did debut before the Joker. In fact, Dick debuted before almost every recurring Batman villain and supporting character. Commissioner Gordon, Hugo Strange, the Mad Monk, Dr. Death and Julie Madison are the exceptions. Yes, that means Dick existed before Alfred. Dick is my favorite Robin and Nightwing is my favorite batfamily member outside of Bruce, so I do wish he was in this story in some way, but I understand that a focus on Jason and Barbara.
“Okay Earthmine but what does Dick being here have to do with anything?”
Well, Post-Crisis, it was changed so Dick came long after the Joker, so in Man Who Laughs, there is no Robin. More than that, the remake has new elements and lacks old ones that make it so different. The original story is clearly the one they’re playing off of and here are a few more parts in Batman #1 that aren’t part of Man Who Laughs that may relate to The Criminal’s character to Three Jokers.
“He’s cuttin’ in on our racket!”
Likely meant to be coincidence originally, the Joker pulls off murders and heists that were originally planned heists by Brute Nelson’s gang. Something that could’ve been intentional if he did have a criminal background and hatred of organized crime.
In Man Who Laughs, the Joker only murders his original victims. The Claridge Diamond, Ronkers Ruby and other jewels are omitted entirely. The climax also has him poison the city reservoir as a reference to the ending of Batman Year One.
However, both stories do portray 1 similar thing with the Joker that could relate to The Criminal here:
He has a knack for revenge.
He settles his score with Brute Nelson
and then targeted a judge who sent him to prison.
Now that Three Jokers established his hatred of crime families (not necessarily something new, but not something I was able to place to a specific Joker or deduce as an important trait),I think it’s likely from a very personal reason that relates to how he and Bruce are similar.
They’re both the most scarred of their respective trios in this story (at least physically), they both waged a similar war on organized crime and they both seem to have an affinity for vengeance. How does it relate back to Joe Chill or Lew Moxon? I guess we’ll have to wait and see.
Before I end this post, time for some thoughts, speculating and smaller theories
Did Jason kill the right one? Did the Clown really kill him?
I’ve brought this up before, but while I do still think the Clown really did kill Jason, there is a small possibility that he didn’t, and they sort of foreshadow that a bit. The Clown likes to take credit apparently. Jason questioned if he got it right. Plus, that new trailer has the Comedian using a crowbar. There’s also a line from Five-Way Revenge (added that to The Clown in my last post) where the Joker admits he’s a notorious liar. Again, not necessarily new even for Five Way Revenge, but clearly there’s an emphasis on it here with the Clown.
Still, all the covers still portray him as Jason’s killer, and I stand by the distinction between the ADITF and TKJ. The emotional reaction he got from Jason may also mean he did recognize him as his Joker. We’ve seen panels of Jason bringing his crowbar, so the Comedian probably just got it from him.
Either way, the classic Joker of the Silver and Bronze Age is now dead.
Unless we get flashbacks in the next two issues (unlikely since the focus will be on the other two), the Clown seems to be the one with the least character depth and expansion, and yet he remains to be a favorite to me. A murderous but still funny Joker who you can still laugh at is something many longtime fans miss and still prefer. Mark Hamill’s Joker in BTAS (which adapted Laughing Fish with aspects of Five-Wary Revenge and the addition of Harley Quinn) Jeff Benett's Joker from Brave and the Bold (which adapted an issue of his solo series) and Cesar Romero from Batman ’66 (which directly adapted Joker’s Utility Belt) are perfect adaptations of this Joker and they also happen to be the most accessible to both younger and older fans. For many, he was the one true Joker as he claimed.
I’m really, really interested in how the other two will be handled. The Criminal has the most potential for a new in depth take, ironic since he’s the oldest and original. The Comedian of course is a continuation of the Moore-Bolland Joker. He’s the only one we know the origin of, and we know that it was tragic.
On Jason killing him in general
I kind of saw it coming but, wow, the way it was done…
I really hope Barbara doesn’t give into vengeance too and that Jason realizes the emptiness in it. I think it’s possible them learning about the pasts of the other two can let them understand them more and learn to not be like them. The Comedian exemplifies the idea of someone “healing wrong” as he inflicts the pain he gained on others (which makes him the worst in a way). The opposite of Bruce, who is Batman to prevent others from ever feeling his pain. Jason needs to understand that. But still, I’m not saying he’s already as bad as the Joker himself, but scars and revenge make him closer to that path.
Is Jason really the Joker’s Robin? Let’s hope not.
Foreshadowing of the end in the beginning?
Early on in the book, we the Clown makes the following crime:
3 Red Hoods. Each representing the men present in the Killing Joke accident.
Two stay dead. One lives and is on his way to heal.
Is this foreshadowing of the fate of each Joker? One Joker dies. Another will likely die too. But will the final Joker “wake up”?
One thing I’d like to bring up and end this post on, is the conversation after the interrogation.
Bruce and Barbara treat him as a victim, but Jason disregards it because of his past sins.
Jason of course is a victim of the Joker who then killed him. He is still a victim despite his sin.
So, is the Comedian Joker still a victim despite his sins?
____________________________________________________
Three Jokers: After-Issue Theories Post 2
(The Jokers' Pasts, Jason Todd’s true killer, the Wayne Murders and more)
SPOILERS for Batman Three Jokers #1-2
Link to the Original from Reddit
"it Hurts when I Laugh/Smile"
This is a Part 2 as I made as an after-issue theories post for the first issue:
After-issue Theories Post 1 (Ft. The Criminal Joker)
This one though is even bigger.
Of course, once issue 3 releases the book will be done so this would also be the last.
Like last time I’ll break down some pages, look at their inspirations and theorize.
If I do make a post after issue 3, then I guess that’ll mostly be discussing references and putting in my thoughts but I’m not sure if that’s worth making a huge post over. We’ll see.
SPOILERS for Batman: Three Jokers #1-2 ahead! Please read them before reading this.
Now onto the theories.
The issue begins with the Comedian Joker coming home to his wife and son.
Only for it to be revealed that his wife and son are in fact...
…fantasies.
This is of course, the Joker from The Killing Joke, complete with the Brian Bolland design.
The blonde wife is Jeannie from the flashbacks of TKJ. She died along with his unborn child. Nothing in it about the baby being a boy but in an arc in Gotham Knights that does its own spin on that origin, the Comedian believes it’s a boy.
credit to u/Lerychan for her post bringing this up and comparing the images in her post
Something I brought up in older posts is that this arc also has it, so his wife didn’t die by accident. A cop paid off by the criminals killed her. The same ones forcing him into a heist.
I believe something similar will be revealed by the end of this. I’ve brought this up multiple times now, but I think the Criminal created the Comedian. He would have had to or else it would be a coincidence. But more than that it explains and re-contextualizes a lot of things from The Killing Joke.
More on that later but first, let's take a look at some more MOTP references
Besides The Killing Joke, this scene might also be an homage to “Mortal Clay”, another Alan Moore Batman story (credit to u/Cranyx for pointing that out in a discussion thread), with how it used a mannequin to represent his fake wife.
Another possible homage work that I noticed, was Mask of the Phantasm…
“Meatloaf again?”
which features a scene where the Joker treats a robot as his wife. He even has the same line coming in with Sal Valestra (“Honey I’m Home!”).
There are multiple DCAU references in this book. Not surprising as Geoff Johns has homaged the DCAU multiple times before. Lex’s Metallo mech suit in Secret Origin homage STAS’ Last Son of Krypton three-part premiere for example.
I also noticed a possible homage in the last issue to Mask of the Phantasm again. Might be a bit of a stretch but the fake Red Hood/Jokerized victim being interrogated by Jason is similar to when Bruce interrogated a jokerized Arthur Reeves. Both times the victims were made calm, but the interrogation got them to laugh even more uncontrollably.
Arthur Reeves
In my last after-issue post, I also brought up how MOTP, inspired by Batman ’89, gave the Joker a past as a mobster. This time as a hitman. In Black and White Case Study he was said to eventually climb the ladder to become a mob boss (more on that later).
Anyway, enough about the references for now.
Back to Three Jokers
The Comedian is the modern Joker. The most twisted, insane and violent one.
But here we see that he’s also the most human one. The only one who’s obsession with Batman isn’t his one, single or true desire. Unlike these two:
“There is no one else but the Batman”
Something that the Criminal seems to find as a weakness.
Here he seems to be manipulating him. Making him focus on his hate for Batman and forget about the life he could have. More on this later.
This in a way is why he’s the worst. He’s the one Joker who has a desire for something he knows he can never have. He is not happy like the Clown. He’s not as focused as the Criminal. But he is very, very angry. Hence the whole absurdist nihilist stuff about everything being a joke, something that he seems to have inherited from the Comedian from Watchmen.
This also makes sense to why he even got Harley Quinn in the first place.
They’re the only two people that laughed at his jokes genuinely.
They’re both blonde too.
”…and you know how to make me laugh”
The Harley Quinn Graphic Novel had Paul Dini introduce Harley to comics continuity during No Man’s Land. There, the Joker said she tried to throw her away because she reminds him of when he was loved. So, there is precedence in that idea.
Why does he abuse her then? Well even in the flashbacks he was venting his anger on her but apologized after. Becoming the Joker would exacerbate that behavior. Furthermore, not only is Harley a reminder of Jeannie, also makes him remember that Jeannie is dead. As the Joker said in Killing Joke:
“Remember? Ohh, I wouldn’t do that!”
An interesting thing to take note of is that the Criminal confirms
It was the Comedian’s idea to reveal there were three of them.
I’ve discussed theories a lot with others and u/Hmz_786 suggested that the Criminal might’ve intentionally let the Clown die by choosing him to do that task. I guess him being angry he died disproves that, but I think he might be on to something.
What if the Comedian intended to betray the other two?
What if the reason he did all this is in a way, he actually wants Batman to find out about them. To stop the Criminal and end the Joker once and for all? Why else would he do that now of all times, just when he now found himself being sentimental and fantasizing about an alternate life.
Guess we’ll have to wait and see.
Just a small part I’d want to discuss before moving on.I’ve made several posts and been in several discussions on which Joker Endgame can be, such as those with u/WarWolf343. I’ve made a whole post on it it recently in fact.
The Comedian is the most obvious choice. And really, I’m 50-50 on it, but I do think there is a case to be made that it’s not. He’s either the Clown or (unlikely) another Joker entirely.
Scott Snyder has said before that he writes the Joker as someone that can’t exist without Batman. Besides maybe TDKR (speaking of Frank Miller), his Joker is the one most obsessed with Batman there is. That in addition to all the other stuff makes me think he might not be the Comedian after all.
Though then again darker nature and more complex motivations and plans do lean towards him in that respect.
BUT
I am sure that the Comedian is in fact the one in Doomsday Clock. Made a post on that too. But in short, the book is a sequel to a book written by Alan Moore featuring a nihilistic character called the Comedian. Three Jokers in many ways is a spiritual sequel Killing Joke according to Jason Fabok. And in DDC the Joker even wears the Comedian’s Button.
This issue has another murder. This time a judge. Not the first time the Joker’s done this. He killed a judge in his first appearance. The Dark Knight even made homage to that along with his police disguise.
That along with the Joe Chill fingerprint of course implies this was a plot of the Criminal.
Speaking of Joe Chill
In my last post I went into detail about how Tim Burton’s Batman ’89 (along with MOTP and Case Study), where the Joker was a former gangster who murdered the Waynes, inspired this Joker. As said by Jason Fabok in interviews and commentaries.
From his claims, it’s further implied that he in fact, was a gangster who controlled the mob before Batman. Just like in Case Study.
“Before Batman…I ran Gotham”
“If so then, why would he hate organized crime like the first issue said? Why did he call himself “the Joker” when he’s more of a serious crime lord?”
Well, in his original appearance in Batman #1, he didn’t pull jokes or think life is a joke like the other two. In Case Study, he named himself the Joker because of the playing card.
The Joker is a chaotic wild card. Set apart from the organized deck of gangsters.
Might be brought up in the final issue. Or not.
But back to movie inspirations, there’s one more thing this book either made homage to or just happened to be similar to.
"Just Smile"
In a great scene in this issue, the Criminal for the first time in this book, smiles and laughs. And it’s very painful for him it seems. To the point that he tears up.
(Great art by Jason Fabok and colors by Brad Anderson)
It’s quite similar to the 2019 film where he suffers from “Pseudobulbar affect (PBA)” which is a real-life neurological condition that causes one to uncontrollably laugh and/or cry, often in inappropriate times.
In general, however the movie’s biggest connection to comics is The Killing Joke. There are many differences, big and small, but it is generally the same.
A man is driven to absurdist insanity due to the harshness of his life and the loss of his remaining dreams and human connections.
So I think this applies to both or all of them. Especially since he asked Jason the same thing.
Man, this issue was really harsh on Jason. I don’t mean that in a writing sense but literally in what he ended up going through here. Even after killing the Clown, his pain and trauma with the Joker(s) was far from over.
First thing I’d want to cover, is the Comedian implying Jason killed the wrong Joker.
Did the Clown lie? Or is the Comedian lying? Who really killed Jason?
I still think the Clown really did kill Jason. Why?
Summing up what I said last time, ADITF’s Joker is much goofier and simpler in characterization, killing him not for a point but for fun and for Batman’s attention. It’s implied he was the one that escaped Arkham in the first issue, so it’s also implied he still works in the present even with the Comedian taking the spotlight.
Another thing I said, is that his words to Jason was what got him on an emotional level. He brought up things Jason apparently said as he was beaten. Like he was reminded of a memory he repressed. Neither Joker really did that here. But I guess the Comedian could’ve told the Clown about it and he took credit.
But finally, I believe Jason Fabok’s art hints visually that the Comedian is not his killer.
"...first time"?
The hair style, the expressions (wide, happy smile vs deranged, almost fake smile), the hands used to hold the crowbar, and the opposite directions of the swings for me hint at that.
But that’s not all that happened to Jason.
If reenacting that wasn’t enough, just before this the Criminal pointing out their similarities and bringing up how it makes sense for Jason (a Red Hood) to be the next Joker…but then decides he’s not smart enough. They don’t kill him or even put him in a vat of chemicals. They leave him alone, naked (aside from his jokerized helmet) and bloody.
Bruce and Barbara find him and at that point he was on the brink.
We then get another homage to DCAU, this time to Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker.
Credit to u/CaseyKalinowski who posted this image comparison here
Another excellent DCAU film, and one of the Batman films period, like MOTP. For those unfamiliar, this is where the Joker turns Tim Drake into Joker Jr. (similarly making a false family). Before Adventures Continue released, Tim was essentially the DCAU Jason Todd and this was his ADITF.
Back to Jason, u/NomadicJaguar64t theorized that this could in fact get him to abandon the Red Hood identity entirely. Which of course could be trouble for continuity. Hopefully if this does become canon it doesn’t take place in the past.
Couldn’t forget to deal with this one.
As the issue nears its end Bruce finally starts investigating and differentiating the three. Hopefully that means there would be more focus on the mystery in the last issue. A lot of people criticize the book for the lack of the focus on it and I do agree somewhat. But so far, they still gave us tons of clues.
But anyway, the big reveal coming…
Did the Criminal have Joe Chill kill the Waynes?
Again, this is from Batman ’89. Modified so Joe Chill was still the killer, but now he was a hitman. A lot of people are against this and I understand. Ideally, I do prefer Chill being a petty thief.
But even before Batman ’89 this was in fact canon Pre-Crisis. As I said in my last post, the story of Lew Moxon is a classic that’s been referenced in the first issue. But of course, it also confirms that they seem to be innocent and the Joker was behind it…
…or was he?
One thing I hope they might do is keep it ambiguous.
I’ve made a post a while back about Gotham’s Cameron Monaghan portrayed all Three Jokers very closely with 5 seasons of Jerome and Jeremiah.
In season 5, Jeremiah was upset that Bruce’s ultimate villain would always be Chill, not him, because he was the one who took his parents away and gave him his biggest scar (this book’s biggest theme).
So, what does he do?
“I want to be the star of the show!”
He tries to reenact it by killing Jim Gordon and Leslie Thompkins while they’re wearing the clothes and pearls the Waynes were, in Crime Alley, in front of Bruce. He fails of course.
Now, they could make it definitive so the Joker would be the cause of Bruce’s biggest scar, like the other two stars of this book. Which I guess was foreshadowed since the beginning with the scars montage.
Or Bruce could, like the moment in Endgame, prove him wrong (or at least invalidate the evidence with detective work) and tell him he will never be the cause of his biggest scar.
Would be interesting either way but I do hope we get to see more detective work and initiative on Bruce’s part, which the second one could do too.
Before I wrap this up, I’d like to go back to that fantasy. Notice how he’s still the Joker and his family still fears and is disgusted by him. Maybe when this book ends, he’ll have another fantasy where he’s no longer the Joker and his family is happy.
I could see that happening in two ways of course:
He dies, but not because of Bruce, Barbara or Jason. He could be killed by the Criminal for his betrayal or he could kill himself.
He finally accepts the offer of sanity and rehabilitation offered to him by Batman all the way back from The Killing Joke.
Last post I talked a lot about a scene foreshadowing the human Joker as a victim despite his sins and will get some sort of healing in the end. In this issue, they foreshadow it again. Like last time, through dialogue:
Bruce: More Jokers.
Barbara: No. More victims.
Meanwhile the Criminal could be killed by him (like Return of the Joker with Tim and Joker), suicide or by an accident. Hopefully not by Bruce. Why do I think the Comedian could kill him?
Remember how he seems to manipulate him, force his Batman obsession on him?
I believe he set up those events.
He found a desperate and depressed former chemical engineer and failed comedian struggling to support his pregnant wife and wanting to move out of his neighborhood.
He set him up with two acquaintances and gave them his old Red Hood suit for him to be a decoy of for an easy job.
He killed his wife and unborn child and had the two criminals force him to go with the heist anyway.
Then he tipped off the cops and Batman, explaining how security increased unexpectedly and how Bruce got there so fast.
Does the Comedian even know it at this point? Maybe. Maybe not.
So with two gone, that leaves no Jokers left….unless a new one rises.
It could be a fourth entirely new Joker. Or it could be…
Endgame Joker!
Jason Fabok has hinted at a reference to Endgame specifically in this book.
Maybe the Dionesium still resides in the Clown’s body and he comes back to life. Or Scott Snyder’s Joker could be a new one. Which I’m not sure would happen since this, continuity and all, should still be after Endgame.
Guess we’ll have to wait and see.
Thanks for reading. That'll be all for now.
____________________________________________________
Batman: Three Jokers – After-issue Post 3 –
Final Breakdown and Theories -
(SPOILERS)
Link of the original from Reddit
I wasn’t sure if I was going to make this at first, but after reading the final issue, I just had to. Like the last two, I’ll break down the issue, find some references/easter eggs, theorize and give my thoughts.
I thought there wouldn’t be much left to theorize but fortunately for me, there’s still quite a ton. I recognize that reception is a bit more mixed, but I personally really enjoyed this book with a few minor disappointments IMO. I’ll get into that.
This’ll also be my big farewell to this series after theorizing on it for almost two years. So, I know I’ve said it before, but this is the biggest post I’ve made, ever.
The issue begins with the trio, after a brief fight, putting aside their differences and finally focusing on detective work. Something hinted at last issue with Bruce looking into his leads on the Jokers.
Credit to u/XxRambo-ApocalypsexX for the following image from his post:
Flashbacks
First let’s break down each.
The first we see is the Criminal, who Bruce confirms is the first he encountered and points out his more serious and focused personality. A calculating mastermind indeed.
The flashback is from a panel in Batman #1 (1940, the Joker’s first appearance), specifically the very first Joker story (there are two in this issue).
If you’ve been following my posts, this should be familiar as I pointed it out in the first post as Jason Fabok teased this on Twitter earlier this year.
I called it!
As I said last time, this means that the original version of their encounter takes precedence over Man Who Laughs retconned version. Dick Grayson is now once again already Robin, so the Criminal likely stole jewels as well as murder his victims. His conflicts with organized crime may also be back.
Next up is the Clown, and we once again see a reference to Gaggy (the Original Court Jester and Sidekick of the Joker) and his first appearance in Batman #186 (1966). The way Bruce describes him of course matches what we know, and also very much reminds me of Mark Hamill’s Joker. Like I said in the first post, he’s my personal favorite, even if he’s the least in depth as a character.
But finally, here we have the Comedian.
Credit to u/WarWolf343. It is the obvious choice, and that actually adds a lot to the Comedian in the end which I’ll get to. Of course, that means that Rebirth image was inaccurate after all.
The implication of this of course is that Scott Snyder’s run IS considered canon to this story (which is a given if this is in main continuity), meaning Zero Year is canon. The story featuring a new version of the Red Hood gang, with Red Hood One being a true criminal mastermind, not a decoy, leading several Red Hoods. This could explain how there could be more than 3 Jokers if Bruce only had 1 encounter with RH.
Bruce points out a level of sadism under his smile that’s different from the others. I can see where’s he coming from. To me, that smile just looks fake compared to the Clown, who looks genuinely happy. Just my thoughts.
"Joker The Immortal"
Next up we have the climax taking place in the Monarch Theatre, the cinema Bruce watched Mark of Zorro in with parents that fateful night.
Sound familiar?
We’ve had similar Joker confrontations happen in both Arkham City and recently in Joker War.
Jw’s wasn’t quite a climax as it took place in the middle of the arc, and there’s also a horde of zombies that Bruce sees as Jokers (and so fights them blindfolded). Funny similarities there but I doubt any of this is intentional. 3 Jokers was written long ago and Jason Fabok and James Tynion IV both support the idea that Joker War was made without any knowledge or consideration of 3 Jokers.
However, I’d like to talk more about Arkham City.
This was also the big ending of the game. I still remember playing it for the first time. Here, the Joker died after accidentally preventing Bruce from curing him. This was after it was revealed that he was still poisoned and that there was a second healthy Joker which was Clayface in disguise.
Hmmm. Sounds familiar.
Does this live up to those two?
IMO? Absolutely. Jason Fabok and Brad Anderson make this a fiery climactic battle while Geoff Johns does, IMO, a great job tying up what he’s set up since #1 (get to that in a bit).
The Joker’s death in AC was of course more impactful than the Criminal’s, but his and the Comedian’s plan here was great and the twist is just as good. I’ll get to that in a bit.
Lastly, Geoff Johns apparently has advised on Origins and Knight’s stories. Knight of course has the weakest, but IMO the character arcs in Origins makes it the best. The way there were “multiple Jokers” in Knight and City might have inspired him to make this. Also, both City and Knight has at least one line from thugs talking about there being or possibly being Three Jokers.
This could be a whole post on its own so better go back to the book.
The Criminal Joker reveals he wants to turn Joe Chill into the new Joker.
As I’ve said before, Jason Fabok points to Jack Nicholson’s Joker as an inspiration for him, who killed the Waynes and not Chill. Because of that, Michael Keaton’s Batman then aimed to kill him for revenge.
This confirms he did not hire Chill (who is not a hired killer).
Now, why would the Criminal want to do that….
This book made clear from the very first pages and in interviews with GJ and JF that the main theme is about scars. Physical and emotional.
This in fact the whole purpose of the scars montage with Bruce.
He’s had many, many scars from his rogues gallery, but we see that the Joker has caused them the most.
But no matter what, the scar caused by Joe Chill will always be deeper than the others.
More than Penguin, Bane, Scarecrow, Riddler, Catwoman…
More than the Joker
Well, from the Joker(s)’ point of view, that’s just not right.
To the Criminal, this meant he had to fix the Joker. To make a new one that’ll far surpass him, his other two “apprentices”, and mean more to Batman than ever. Someone “far younger and more powerful” maybe (more on the Sith Lords later)?
He’s old and tired. He can’t even laugh without crying over the pain. He wants the Joker reborn better than ever, mattering more to Batman than ever, so he could finally rest.
In my last post, I pointed this out as the motivation for the Joker and recalled how Jeremiah Valeska (Proto-Joker 2) from Gotham had a similar gripe with it.
“I want to be the star of the show!”
So what did HE do to try and fix that?
Reenact the Wayne murders with Jim Gordon and Leslie Thompkins, complete with Crime Alley, pearls and Bruce being there to see it of course!
Now, both plans have flaws.
All Jeremiah is doing with this rehash would be to remind Bruce of that original trauma anyway. Even if Selina wasn’t there to stop him, this probably won’t make him mean more to Bruce than Joe Chi- err- Matches Malone (see: Gotham).
Unlike the Jokers in this book, Jeremiah failed to realize that Bruce will never be more broken from what he can do over than what Chill/Malone did.
The Criminal would be pulling a Batman ’89, as Bruce would know the Joker’s identity. Something the Comedian doesn’t want.
Which leads me to the twist on what the Comedian’s plan was, and to me it was genius and out of the box. Far surpassing Jeremiah and the Criminal.
He didn’t rehash or steal that trauma.
He took it out of the equation entirely.
He. Healed. It.
“It wasn’t the Joker that was broken. It was the Batman”
-more on that quote later
After the Criminal failed to turn his new potential successor, he planned to kill him and Batman instead, only for the Comedian to shoot him dead.
The Comedian was playing him all along in a plan to become the last remaining, definitive Joker and become the worst source of suffering Batman has ever had. Something foreshadowed last issue when the Criminal confirmed that it was his suggestion to reveal their secret.
And in the end?
It worked.
And it would only not work if Bruce didn’t have forgiveness in his heart.
It was checkmate.
BRIEF DETOUR
An evil master (cough Darth Sidious/Emperor Palpatine) failing to turn a prospective apprentice/successor (cough Mark Hamill cough), then deciding to kill said person only to be betrayed and killed by his current apprentice who tended to plan behind his back (cough Vader)? His other apprentice (The Clown and Dooku) being killed by another younger, edgier prospective apprentice (Jason/Anakin) before this?
Sorry I just had to bring that up lol. I haven’t watched Mandalorian S2’s premiere yet to not get distracted from this or my IRL responsibilities which also delayed this.
But seriously, the Criminal emphasizing the rule of threes (which is actually a real thing) last issue did remind me of the rule of two. His search for a successor and his traitorous relationship with his protégés here really, really made me see them like Sith Lords lol.
DETOUR ENDS HERE
u/Hmz_786 and I discussed before about how the Comedian could have been planning to betray the Criminal and the others all along. Maybe even seeing the Clown’s death coming. It seems that may be the case after all. Which I will delve into more later.
Besides Jack Napier from Batman ’89 and Jeremiah Valeska from Gotham, one Joker that I got reminded of in this was John Doe from Telltale’s Batman and Batman: Enemy Within. His last lines to Bruce in the Villain ending (there are 2 versions depending on your choice of dialogue to him) evoke the themes of this story or parallel what the Comedian says here.
(“Sure we’ve had some good times”) “I hope you’ll look at that scar and remember those good times”
(“I wish we never met”) “I’ll be the knife on your side until the end of time”
Back to Bruce and Joe Chill.
Definitely the best part of the issue and this story, is Bruce forgiving Joe Chill and healing his greatest scar. I’ve seen people say this has been done before. That’s true, but never exactly like this, not quite to this extent.
He didn’t forgive him in his mind as an old man after witnessing a new gang of criminals act far worse than him. He didn’t just spare him and leave him to die by either suicide or murder by his fellow criminals or to just rot in poverty.
This Joe Chill was truly remorseful, dying of cancer and wasn’t active as a criminal anymore.
Bruce stayed by his side and held his hand as he passed.
This is the most positive closure Bruce has ever had with Joe Chill, ever IMO.
“Forgiveness is Freedom”
So, the Comedian Joker won.
He healed Bruce’s greatest scar.
He killed the Criminal and became the last Joker.
But most of all, the ambiguity behind who the Joker is remains.
Or does it?
One thing I brought up in my last post is that the Comedian hates memory and remembering the past.
Since he is the Endgame Joker after all, that means he likes to tell his false origins as supernatural, demonic or nightmare fuel stories that prey on his victims (the back up stories).
Which in retrospect, fits with the idea that he doesn’t want people to know about his tragic past. He wants people to think he’s chaos incarnate, but he’s not.
Which is why in Death of the Family, he panicked and fell when Bruce claimed he knew his real name, which would prove he was human.
Then in Darkseid War, Bruce got the Mobius Chair.
He asked it two questions. One rhetorical for a test, and the other we assumed wasn’t. He asked who killed his parents and then asked what was the Joker’s real name, only to learn the premise of this very story. There were Three Jokers.
Here we learn that Bruce DID know the Joker’s name all this time. This means that it was also a test (which Jason Fabok has confirmed on Twitter to multiple people).
Let’s go back to The Killing Joke
The Joker attempted to drive Jim Gordon insane to prove his absurd, nihilistic thesis that life is a joke and anyone can see that just like he did by going through “One Bad Day”. Which in turn is to prove to Batman that they are alike and that he should be insane just like him.
Thing is…
…
He failed.
Jim wasn’t driven mad. Bruce wasn’t convinced and instead tried giving a counteroffer of rehabilitation. But the Joker refuses because he thinks A) He’s too far gone and B) He doesn’t trust that Bruce will keep the light on and commit to doing it.
The Joker did not prove his point and yet couldn’t accept an alternative hypothesis. If this was an official social experiment for research, he’d get an F (and then get kicked out and thrown in jail for unethical human testing without consent).
And really the flashbacks themselves prove it.
The flashbacks take more than one day. He was a struggling comedian in poverty and at times vented this on his wife.
No, that is not an invention of this book. That panel is directly adapted from TKJ.
We don’t see more from this scene in 3 Jokers, so it’s left ambiguous whether they reconciled or not the way we see in TKJ, but I think the latter works still. Even after apologizing the comedian still vented and ranted about his life. He made it clear he wants to get out of there, but he didn’t try more comedy gigs or getting his old job back at ACE.
No, instead he gave in to crime. Not too different from Joe Chill.
Note, there is an unspecified time gap between that scene and his meetings with the criminals.
He’s had 2 in fact.
He had to find them first, possibly introduced to them by the Criminal (more on that later) and then have that first meeting planning the heist and setting him up as a decoy Red Hood. From dialogue, their next meeting will be “next Friday” right before the heist. At least a week has passed then.
“One bad week” doesn’t quite have the same ring to it.
But that’s not the point.
He gave into crime even before the accident and he relied on that to save his family.
What would Jeannie think if she heard about him being willing to associate with criminals?
How would he act toward her in that 1 week where he still hasn’t fixed his life?
Whatever the case, we don’t learn his name
but we do learn that Jeannie lived.
Whatever happened in that lost week, she eventually couldn’t take it anymore and got help from cops to escape. She and her son (who IMO btw has to be 15-20 years old, or at least older than Damian) are alive in Alaska. Which is why Bruce wasn’t looking at missing Comedian files earlier, and instead looked at his globe.
This does feel like a very similar situation to the psychiatrist who tried curing the Joker in Killer Smile, only to end up driving his wife and son away and nearly killing them in the Joker’s plot to make him like him.
We then learn why Bruce can’t reveal his name, and possibly why he can’t kill the Joker.
If he reveals the Joker’s name, people will find his family and they wouldn’t be safe. The Joker would find them too.
As for the latter, if Bruce kills the Joker, he would be taking a father away from his son (more on the son of the Joker in the bonus segment!)
So in the end, Bruce had the last laugh.
He knows the Joker isn’t the devil. He was a man once. He had a wife who he loved before turning to insanity. The Joker failed in keeping the ambiguity behind himself, a week after Bruce fought the Joker (the Criminal?). He failed a long time ago.
And now,
Both refuse to reveal the identity of the other.
Now, a lot of people think this book is painting the Joker as someone who was always bad and that this ruins TKJ. I kind of already talked about that in the previous segment, but here I’d like to bring back an old post I made discussing the conflicting views of the Joker:
From IGN
Alan Moore of course argued for the Joker being a dark reflection of Batman. Both born from tragedy.
but
Frank Miller argued the Joker was pure evil. Satanic even. Evil incarnate. Not insane. Evil.
“I am chaos. I am the devil. I am everything to you and nothing. It wasn’t the Joker who was broken. It was the Batman.”
Putting that quote in that context, it looks like Miller’s version is what’s coming here.
But I don’t think so.
As I’ve pointed out, the Comedian is a liar that takes credit from the other Jokers and pretended he was an immortal supernatural boogieman in Endgame.
This is how he wants to be seen, because he’s afraid of the truth.
In reality, he’s the only one of the Jokers who has a desire outside of Batman and apparently the only one with One Bad Day. The Clown said he loved to take credit, he teased him about being a failed comedian and the Criminal called him out for wasting time with fantasies. They were the ones pushing him down. It was the Criminal trying to get him to focus on what matters.
He almost comes off as the bullied co-worker that gets reminded every time about where he came from and he HATES that. This was his revenge. By killing them and taking credit for all their work. He became the Joker who mattered. Not Chill, the Clown or the Criminal.
“Says the failed Comedian” “There is no her. There is no one else but the Batman”
Clearly, he still loved his wife. Despite him venting to her, she and their unborn son were still the reason for him going insane. Even now he secretly fantasizes them being with them.
Another thing to take note of is that, in both the Killing Joke and Three Jokers,
He NEVER reveals this specific origin to others
It’s always flashbacks and fantasies. When he does tell false origins, it’s always to paint him as this bigger force of chaos. A façade to hide his real past that the other Jokers see right through and belittle him for. With them dead, no one else knows now…except Bruce.
Speaking of which, this makes him more like Batman.
Because the way he wants to be seen by others,
is just like how Batman wants to be seen by criminals
Pretending to be a supernatural force of nature to strike fear is now common among the two victims of trauma. He failed to prove anyone can be like him in TKJ, so he decided to embrace the idea that no one can be like him.
In many ways this also relates to the Joker movie, where Arthur pretended, he killed those people for no reason other than them being awful. Hiding his pain by embracing evil. Of course there’s also the fact that, it hurts when he laughs and likely cannot control it.
I discussed that in the last post, but it’s based on a real condition: Pseudobulbar Affect.
The Criminal’s age makes it, so he cries almost every time. But from what he asked Jason, and the Comedian in Doomsday Clock, I’m betting all the Jokers have this trait to varying effect.
Finally, before moving on, one of the most important things to take note, is that the book spent a lot of time blurring the line between Jokers and victims.
Jokers and Victims
The jokerized Red Hood/Comedian lookalaike at the beginning of the story, the horde of Jokers at the pool, and of course, Jason himself. Being the Joker in this story seems to be about taking your pain and trauma, then inflicting that onto others. Which is again, the exact opposite of Batman, which all about taking that pain, using it to do good and making sure no one else has to face it alone.
In the end, can the Comedian be redeemed?
Maybe. Maybe not. But if even Joe Chill can, maybe one day the Joker can too. Or not
This again reminds me of Telltale Joker (voiced by Anthony Ingruber). One path lets him become a vigilante modeling himself after Batman, but in the end, he just couldn’t change his fate even with Bruce’s help, and he will become a villain anyway unless you offer your friendship to him.
“I really wanted to be a hero you know. But…I-I just can’t!”
I honestly did think we could’ve gotten a redemption for the Joker. I even had a theory (never published) about how Bruce’s new yellow oval having a flashlight as a reference to the titular Killing Joke and him not turning it off. But since this book does want to be canon somehow, it’s stuck from fixing that status quo even if they wanted to.
In the meantime, we have White Knight by Sean Gordon Murphy for those who want it.
This is definitely something the book, and the Comedian specifically, want to keep ambiguous. But just to theorize, let’s list down the points for and against them.
Case for the Criminal
He states to Jason that he was the first Joker, and that he ran Gotham before Batman.
Bruce confirms he reminds him the most of their earliest confrontations. That briefing scene and the scars montage include flashbacks that clearly feature him as the first.
Why would the Comedian only show up WAY later if he was the original?
IRL he literally is the original Joker.
He is the oldest and his laughing condition has been the worst. He wishes to retire after this.
The captions place as him as number 1.
He’s the only one to not claim to be the “real” Joker, as to him the Joker is an idea. Meaning he’s the only one willing to create new Jokers in the first place. The others don’t want to share the spotlight as both the Clown and Comedian claim to be the definitive Jokers.
The Criminal acts like a boss and strict mentor to the Jokers, specifically the Comedian.
The Comedian, from the first pages he’s introduced to the ending, is a liar.
Case for the Comedian
He is the Joker who Bruce identified the past of a week after their first encounter.
He “has a good eye for talent” meaning he probably did find the others.
His normal-ish life before this and desire to hide it means he has the most to gain by making new Jokers. They hide his identity and teach him various skills. The Criminal can teach him marksmanship and planning. The Clown can teach him to be more creative and actually be funny. Meanwhile he was an ex-chemical engineer who worked at Ace so he has the means.
As you can see, I favor the Criminal, with three times the points as the Comedian’s 3.
However, if ever this becomes fully canon and referenced, there is a 90% chance the others will be retconned into being fake Jokers made for this story and there is an explanation for it.
BUT
What’s the THIRD option?
What if they were all born on the same night? This was hinted at in the first issue with the 3 Red Hoods jokerized. If Zero Year is recanonized, well then that explains how there can be multiple Red Hoods.
The most skilled and experienced at being the Criminal, the Criminal took the lead and taught the other two until they were ready.
The Comedian having the most normal life, made him the easiest and first choice for Bruce to deduce.
How did they become to be?
Now that is a question that’s been in my mind for a long time.
Earlier this year I made several posts about the Three Jokers. Last year made several Doomsday Clock posts which was what got me known.
But before all that?
Almost two years ago now, this book was announced. I was curious.
Whenever I was waiting for a car, bus, commuting or whatever after class, after training or whatever on my way home, I didn’t have anything to do but use my phone. Except I didn’t have data and I grew out of mobile gaming. Usually I bring comics to read, but one day I decided to use that time to type down notes on who I thought the Three Jokers would be. For fun. Who knows maybe I’ll be close?
I used that to also read a lot of old classic Batman-Joker comics and even episodes of BTAS, Batman ’66, Brave and the Bold etc. A few months later, I realized how long it ended up and decided, what the heck, what if I make this an write up and post it on Reddit or something.
And so I posted this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/DCcomics/comments/a7odrk/my_theory_on_the_three_jokers/
It was really long and REALLY messy. Very outdated too.
I didn’t make anything like it again until the Doomsday Clock stuff, but this was the first. Then a few months ago I did more when the covers were released.
So, without prolonging this any longer, the Three Jokers, who they are and how they came to be:
The Criminal
The Criminal Joker was the original Joker. A calculating and cold criminal mastermind with a method to his madness. He challenges Batman and the police. He likes to mess with gangsters because he hates organize crime. Batman is his ultimate rival. As the oldest of the three, the pain of his laughs has grown to the extent that he cries uncontrollably when doing it. Because of this he rarely laughs and smiles now.
In the past he was a criminal who grew up on the streets of Gotham. He was a rebellious young man who injected chaos onto organized crime. He was skilled in hiding his identity and was smart enough to stay a step ahead. Bank robber, jewel thief, hitman, enforcer, con artist, gambler he’s been them all. Skilled with guns, knives, explosives, poisons and more. The world’s greatest criminal like Batman is the world’s greatest detective. Eventually he rose to the top as a mob boss. He ran Gotham before Batman came in. Due to boredom he created the Red Hood gang. He named himself the Joker after the wildcard, as he planned to rob the Monarch Playing Card company next to Ace Chemicals.
Today due to his old age, he’s the one that looks the most different from the other two and so in the decades since he’s avoided fighting Batman again out in the open. Preferring instead to mentor and boss his successors. His last known appearance was in-universe was War of Jokes and Riddles.
The Clown
The Clown Joker is the classic Joker. A theatrical but murderous prankster-thief with a creativity and charisma that surpasses the others. He only kills when it’s funny. His plans are smart but also outrageous and non-sensical. He loves using gags and trick novelties, at times weaponizing them to be lethal. He recruited Gaggy from a circus as his sideckick but later ditched them and killed his henchmen. He made the Laughing Fish. He killed Jason Todd because it was funny, and it would get to Batman. No real other reason. He doesn’t need a big point. He’d love to have this fun forever if he could.
In the past, he was likely a clown. He might’ve ran away to the join a circus once and met Gaggy there. After that he left to stay in Gotham and tried to be a clown at children’s parties and such. It didn’t work out and he joined the Red Hood Gang as the Criminal’s right hand man. But really he’s the one whose origin we have no clear knowledge on other than his title.
Today he’s the substitute Joker who does the smaller acts for fun and to throw Batman off their trail.
The Comedian
The Comedian Joker is the modern Joker. The one with the most meaning. He believes life is a joke. He’s the most sadistic and crazy Joker. His ability to evolve and change himself is due to his Super-Sanity. He thinks outside the box all the time, even as Batman tries to make a new one around him. He is the most unpredictable and dangerous. His obsession with Batman is the strongest, yet unlike the others it’s ironically not the only thing he wants. Unfortunately, he can never have the other thing, and that’s why he’s the most hateful. Love and Hate are almost the same to him.
In the past, he was a former chemical engineer at Ace chemicals who gave up his job to achieve his dream to be a comedian. It didn’t work out. He was a poor desperate man with a pregnant wife he loved and wanted to provide for but vented his anger on due to stress. He turned to the Criminal and Clown who made him a decoy Red Hood in their gang. Before their heist, his wife left him and faked her death, which broke the man. He didn’t want to do it anymore, but he had no choice.
Today, he’s the main and only Joker left. He’s learned enough from the other two. He surpassed them in intelligence and insanity.
How they look similar?
I believe they are brothers who were separated, not at birth but early in life, taking different paths but ending up in the same place. The Criminal being the eldest at 10 years older than the youngest but looking much older due to his lifestyle pre-Joker. The Clown and the Comedian are possibly twins. That’s how the Comedian found a job with criminals so fast. That’s how they were so familiar with each other. That’s how they (somewhat) trusted each other as Jokers. That’s how Jeannie became horrified and left him. She also likely informed the police of their heist which is how security increased and Batman got there. Which is also likely how Bruce discovered the Comedian so easily. His wife was the one who tipped him and the police off.
But if ever the other two are retconned as fake later, they could always either use:
Cadmus Tech cloning (the Joker apparently used this in ROTJ according to Terry in Epilogue)
Multiverse/Metaverse side effect after the constant reboots and anti-reboots making them all matter (cough Doomsday Clock cough Death Metal cough Generations Shattered and Forged cough Prime Time Punch)
Facial surgery done on the other two
Why should there even be 3 Jokers in the first place? Super-Sanity is better.
Super-Sanity isn’t mutually exclusive IMO. At least 1 of them has one with the Comedian being Morrison and Snyder’s Joker, but considering how the Clown also changed to be more lethal I’d say he too has it.
What this adds is the ability to give ambiguity to the other two Jokers while giving one a defined origin. You see Alan Moore believed the Joker wasn’t a very good character. I believe it’s partly because he couldn’t have a real origin. TKJ didn’t invent the trope of a mysterious origin for him. That appeared in Dennis O’Neil’s Joker run and Brian Bolland himself says he didn’t originally plan on making an origin for him when he pitched the book. That was Moore’s decision and the main point of TKJ hinges on it being at least generally true. So no gangster Joker who was always evil.
With one Joker having a defined origin, we have a deeper understanding of his character and motivations while still having mystery on the others. With Super-Sanity, the Joker can have an infinite amount of personalities, motivations and fake origins but since we can never know which is real, they might as well all false. Which is what the psychiatrist concluded in Serious House on Serious Earth. “He has no real personality”.
Now if we’re going by who’s the most in depth character and best villain, then the Comedian is it. His origin gives meaning and depth to his character and motivations while making him a parallel to Bruce. His rant on the other two sums it up pretty well. He doesn’t want to give the Joker the identity like the Criminal or Tim Burton did. He was more than the Clown.
BUT
He’s not my favorite or best Joker.
u/mojothemobile said it best on a thread I saw earlier. The best Joker is the one you can laugh at as much as be scared off. A hilarious Joker that can make such vile acts seem funny. The kind of the Joker who would try and copyright fish infected by Joker venom, kill people with deadly pranks, make a Christmas special, stalk some guy who cursed at him on the road, attack Gotham with an army of bane-like Titan monsters, pull a fake Joker ga-
“Wait a minute, are you just describing Mark Hamill’s Joker?”
Yup. He had Criminal elements in Mask of the Phantasm, was the Comedian in the Killing Joke movie and maybe Return of the Joker, but in pretty much everything else (BTAS, TNBA, JL, JLU, JL action, Arkham Asylum, City and Knight (Troy Baker was more Comedian in Origins)), the definitive Joker voice played the Clown archetype.
Brave and the Bold and Batman ’66 adapted this Joker well.
Nothing beats the classics. But I understand it’s up to preference.
Sure. Like I said I almost expected Bruce to try and rehabilitate the Joker again. I did wish we had more closure with Jason and Barabra.
On how little they reveal on the 3 themselves, IMO they gave enough for me to make this so I’m grateful lol but it’s probably necessary to keep ambiguity for it to be canon.
Otherwise a great book for me overall. Is it on the same level as Long Halloween or even Killing Joke?! Maybe not. But I’d personally put this equal to or greater to Hush which has similar strengths and weaknesses. Though not sure where I’d put it compared to DOTF and Endgame, but IMO this is above Joker War for me.
Before moving on, I’d like to add a random bit. The panel in the police car with the light shining on the Joker declaring he’ll be Batman’s pain until they die, absolutely great art. I think this was what Jason Fabok talked about when he said Brad Anderson homage the original colors of TKJ by John Higgins.
Jason, I think had the second most important part just below Batman. His arc is about realizing how close he is to becoming the Joker, and maybe realizing that he might need to find a new identity, which Bruce offers to him. But of course that can’t happen here or they can’t really be in continuity fully.
Barbara doesn’t get to do much but she does act as the heart of the trio who understands both and wants them to reconcile (but. She initially wanted to bring Jason in, but seeing him vulnerable as he was made her understand him more. In turn Jason seeing how she became this way inspires him to be better.
Relax I’m not calling for that at all. I’m not really into shipping period and I do think the book could improve without it. But their relationship and parallels are important in this story and I think it was well done.
By the way, I like the idea of Jim knowing Barbara and Barbara knowing he knows.
Harley in continuity appeared during No Man’s Land. That plus the Comedian wishing he still had Jeannie, means he likely filled that void with Harley, only to be abusive to her. She reminds him too much of Jeannie. Punchline doesn’t though.
I would like to share a theory I’ve had a long time now. In Case Study, it’s reveled that it was Harleen who made the report, concluding the Joker is sane, should be retried and executed. She changed her mind about it after meeting the Joker herself. She discovered the past of the Criminal, but by then he was semi-retired. If the Criminal found out he probably had the Comedian change her mind. The Clown of course likely avoids her since he hasn’t had a sidekick since Gaggy.
So she only worked with, and maybe met, 1 Joker.
please don’t sue me Watchtower Database, big fan
So, after all’s said and done, is this canon?
Well it can be. I’d say, in the past of the next new timeline which restores more Pre-New 52 (including Pre-Crisis) history.
I understand reception of this is more mixed than Doomsday Clock (which wasn’t universally loved either) and not everyone, maybe most people, aren’t sold with their being 3 Jokers.
But they can easily retcon that premise out for the other things or once again give multiversal, excuses. There really is a lot of potential to deal with all of this.
The son of the Joker.
Gee that sounds familiar. Maybe Geoff Johns already used this concept before?
He did! In his short story in ‘Tec 1000. There are plenty of themes of family in this. The Joker died due to the chemicals that created him and somehow his son became just like the father and died too. His last act was a gift to Batman and Gotham. He left a note, emphasizing the importance of family.
Besides that, this possible future includes Barabra and (a) Jason being married and Bruce and Selina having a daughter. Though at the end it’s implied to just be a wish by Bruce.
I recommend reading this after Three Jokers. It serves as a good extra epilogue IMO.
Well that’s it.
This was a great series for me and I’m glad to be able to do this.
Thank you so much for giving your time reading these and special thanks to the following users I’ve had discussions about this. Whether in Reddit threads, DMs, Disqus, Twitter and more. Whether short or long they’ve helped me a lot in making this, either by giving me more ideas or motivating me to keep doing this crazy thing. Thanks also to those who appreciated these so much they used their had earned coins for rewards. I’m really glad these aren’t just for nothing, thank you.
All of these include (but definitely aren’t limited to):
u/Hmz_786, u/WarWolf343, u/HelloGoodbyeOhGawd, u/xXRambo-ApocalypsexX, u/ScottishRyzo-98, Joe57039631 from Twitter, u/Tough-Part, u/Badbatmanman, u/mrwiyagi, u/NewsYouDontNeed, u/Ricky_Ticky_Tangy, u/Ozymandias2019 and many more I probably missed looking through my history, my sincerest apologies in that case.
Thanks to you all.
1. THANK YOU for acknowledging that joker’s son should be around 20. You are the first person I’ve seen to do so and it made me quite happy.
ReplyDelete2. My theory is that the joker was split into 3 separate beings with each being a manifestation of his multiple origins he had in his head with the comedian’s being the most accurate as shown by the ending of the book.
Sorry for the late reply!
DeleteThanks for reading all this, really glad you took the time and appreciated it.
Interesting theory and with all the Multiversal continuity stuff happening I think it could've happened too.