The Joker in the JL show

[BeyondGotham]

Not sure if this was brought up before, but can we actaully watch the Joker like we used to, after seeing what he did in ROTJ? just a thought to see what others felt.

[James Harvey]

I think that'll be another event that is conveniently ignored for the show - which I actually don't mind. Besides, if it does take place in continuity, then the whole fiasco has to happen AFTER ROTJ, since the Joker died in it.

[BWDK]

I always knew of what the Joker was capable of so I don't watch him in any other way than I used to.

[kid_flash]

I think I remember reading a quote from Bruce Timm, in which he said the Joker is alive because JL takes place BEFORE ROTJ.

[Joker85]

I always assumed that ROTJ was an Elseworld story and didn't actually occur in normal continuity. But like others have said, we all know that Joker is a ruthless killer. So why would it bother you??

[Tim Drake]

I know Dini once said that BB is one of many possible futures. So the fact that Joker is alive makes no difference. ROTJ and JL aren't even supposed to be in the same continuity. Btw they aren't really ignoring too much from the old series. Aquaman has a new look but they're going to explain it. I'm hoping that Season 2 or 3 has an explanation to why Kyle Rayner is gone. Probably not though. I know Timm already said that they pretended that the epsiode didn't happen.

[optimal321]

Originally posted by kid_flash
I think I remember reading a quote from Bruce Timm, in which he said the Joker is alive because JL takes place BEFORE ROTJ.

Exactly. So it's apparent that Timm believes what happened in ROTJ happened in the same continuity, just a little bit later. Maybe after Bats quits the JL and returns to Gotham?

[James Harvey]

If so, then what about the fact that Robin is the same age, as is Batirl? And Batman retains his TNBA look on ROTJ? Is his new look only for wheneevr he goes on JL adventures? I think ROTJ isn't the future, but a possible one, and the flashback was just an explanation for what happened in that timeline.

[Mr. Obsession]

The one thing that bothered me about the RotJ flashback (besides the fact it was just disturbing) was the Tim's size was never constant. Sometimes he was about his height from TNBA at other times it looked as if he had shrunk about a foot. All of this could have simply been avoided if they had made Tim a little older. But right now I'd say the theory that they're treating BB & RotJ as a possible future is the most likely answer.

One of these days someone’s going to have to make a guide that shows all the continuities that have been created for the animated DC universe.

Heck, I'll just do it now --

continuity #1: BTAS, TNBSA

continuity #2: BTAS, TNBSA, BB

continuity #3: BTAS, TNBSA (parts ignored), JL

continuity #4: BTAS, TNBSA (parts ignored), JL (parts ignored), BB

continuity #5: the animated comics

[Toddman]

I've always thought of Batman's design starting in BTAS going on to TNBA and finally Justice League to be a subjective thing. Think of it as different artists drawing the same character in different comics. If Artist A makes Batman's cape and ears quite a bit shorter in BATMAN as compared to Artist B in DETECTIVE COMICS the same month, does that mean that Batman is wearing a different costume in each issue? Or if Artist C draws Superman bigger and younger looking in this month's SUPERMAN while Artist D renders him leaner and older in ACTION CIMICS at the same time, does that imply that the Man of Steel is rapidly aging and losing weight? Another example would be if in an upcoming episode of JL, the writers included a flashback sequence to the events in the BTAS episode "Joker's Favor." I doubt if we would see the old style of animation that was used for that series. The characters would probably be sporting their new JL look. And even though Bruce Timm is the primary character designer for all of these characters, his style should be open to change and progression.

However, I also think it would have been just fine if Timm and company had made Robin appear a little older in the RoTJ flashback. I guess they just wanted to keep the size and appearance of the Robin costume in the glass case consistant with what Tim Drake was wearing in the flashback.

Toddman

[Knight]

Originally posted by Toddman
I've always thought of Batman's design starting in BTAS going on to TNBA and finally Justice League to be a subjective thing. Think of it as different artists drawing the same character in different comics. If Artist A makes Batman's cape and ears quite a bit shorter in BATMAN as compared to Artist B in DETECTIVE COMICS the same month, does that mean that Batman is wearing a different costume in each issue? Or if Artist C draws Superman bigger and younger looking in this month's SUPERMAN while Artist D renders him leaner and older in ACTION CIMICS at the same time, does that imply that the Man of Steel is rapidly aging and losing weight? Another example would be if in an upcoming episode of JL, the writers included a flashback sequence to the events in the BTAS episode "Joker's Favor." I doubt if we would see the old style of animation that was used for that series. The characters would probably be sporting their new JL look. And even though Bruce Timm is the primary character designer for all of these characters, his style should be open to change and progression.

Toddman

Toddman is right on point, dont look too much into the characters designs as a way of measuring continuity. For instance the animated Joker has gone from having white eyeballs and dark eyes(BTAS) to having black eyeballs and white eyes(TNBA) back to white eyeballs ( and I think) red eyes in ROTJ all with no explanation. Just like comic characters drawn by various artist have slightly different looks whenever theres a new animated show sometimes the way the animated characters appear changes also.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Toddman
I've always thought of Batman's design starting in BTAS going on to TNBA and finally Justice League to be a subjective thing. Think of it as different artists drawing the same character in different comics.

I agree totally with this. The only character I ever thought needed an explanation for his change was The Penguin, and that less for his design than the change in his circumstances and criminal enterprise.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by DickGrayson
If so, then what about the fact that Robin is the same age, as is Batirl? And Batman retains his TNBA look on ROTJ? Is his new look only for wheneevr he goes on JL adventures? I think ROTJ isn't the future, but a possible one, and the flashback was just an explanation for what happened in that timeline.

I honestly don't understand why anytime we see the future, it has to be passed off as non-continuity and only a possible future. When BB began, there was no talk of it being an elseworlds type story or of it being an imaginary look at the future. Look at Star Trek TNG. Even though its set about 100 years after the original Star TRek, no one says it's just a possible future. It's just as "real" as the original Trek. It's the same with the Batman animated shows. Just as TNBA was in the same continuity as BTAS, so too is BB and JLA.

Joker's alive in JLA for the obvious reason that the events shown in ROTJ haven't happened yet. As for Batman retaining his TNBA look on ROTJ: that's of no consequence. The look or design of a show is just presentation. It has nothing to do with content or story. The Batman in JLA is the same Batman that we saw in BTAS and TNBA. As I've pointed out in a previous thread, Batman is drawn differently by the different artists that work on the Batman comics. But it's the same Batman, the same character, the same continuity.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by DarkAngel
When BB began, there was no talk of it being an elseworlds type story or of it being an imaginary look at the future.

Maybe I'm misremembering, but at the time of the premeire didn't Dini mention that he and the other producers weren't absolutely settled in their own mind that BB was the real future of Batman, that it might have been just a "possible" future for the character? As I recall, he didn't say that it WAS only an elseworld, but he seemed pretty cagey about it. . .

[Joker85]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus


Maybe I'm misremembering, but at the time of the premeire didn't Dini mention that he and the other producers weren't absolutely settled in their own mind that BB was the real future of Batman, that it might have been just a "possible" future for the character? As I recall, he didn't say that it WAS only an elseworld, but he seemed pretty cagey about it. . .

I agree. I remember reading an article where the events in BB were just on of the many possible futures. I could be wrong I suppose. it has been known to happen once or twice:)

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus


Maybe I'm misremembering, but at the time of the premeire didn't Dini mention that he and the other producers weren't absolutely settled in their own mind that BB was the real future of Batman, that it might have been just a "possible" future for the character? As I recall, he didn't say that it WAS only an elseworld, but he seemed pretty cagey about it. . .

I have heard that. But, in my eyes, the only reason for such "uncertainty" is due to the reaction that always comes from fans when a new Batman appears or is hinted at. There's never easy acceptance when its suggested that someone else might assume the mantle from Bruce. When being compared to the comics, fine, I can understand saying that BB is only a possibility, that it isn't official in that it's separate from comic book continuity. But BB is being done by the same team that brought us BTAS and TNBA. It's clear from what we've seen and heard on BB that we're dealing with the same Bruce Wayne, the same city, the same vision. There's no reason to say that it's separate from the others. The only reason I can see for not supporting BB as THE future is because of Terry being Batman. And as I've said in so many other threads, that doesn't seem fair. In my opinion, it cheapens ROTJ and BB by saying it's less real or official. It's simply not necessary to make that "accusation." We've all seen the episodes. They exist. They're no less real, no less deserving of respect than the other animated programs.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by DarkAngel
It's clear from what we've seen and heard on BB that we're dealing with the same Bruce Wayne, the same city, the same vision. There's no reason to say that it's separate from the others. The only reason I can see for not supporting BB as THE future is because of Terry being Batman. And as I've said in so many other threads, that doesn't seem fair.

I agree with you entirely. I was just reacting to your observation that there had been "no talk" when BB began that it was only a possible future. I also agree that such was almost certainly meant to dampen potential Batfan ire at the implication that there could be a "new" Batman.

Bottom line: I think it's an open question as to whether BB is an elseworlds or not, and a fairly unimportant one. Questions about continuity have never bothered me, and series that make a big deal about continuity and consistency have always turned me off. (Eddie Gorodetsky, in the preface to Dini's "Jingle Belle" TPB, mocked comics that create giant story arcs just to explain why the hero's costume underwent a tiny cosmetic change between two issues many years before. I say: Testify, brother!)