〈 Chapter１〉 "The Man Who Laughs ( 1928 )" as the prototype of the Joker
〈 a 〉 If you are familiar with American comic books, you may know that the character of Joker is derived from the appearance of Gwynplaine, played by Conrad Veidt ( 1893～1943 ), the main character in Paul Reni's film “The Man Who Laughs ( 1928 )".
〈 b 〉 The details are that it was the character that Bob Kane ( 1915～1998 ) and Bill Finger ( 1914～1974 ) created as the spinoff when they were conceiving Batman ( Batman appeared in 1939 and the Joker followed in 1940 ), and that Bob Kane was inspired by Gwynplaine, played by Conard Veidt in "The Man Who Laughs". However, co-creator Jerry Robinson ( 1922～2011 ) claims that the Joker comes from a Joker playing card that he brought to them.
In the end, the story of the Joker's origin was never resolved during their lifetimes, but if we compare Gwynplaine's and the Joker's faces, it seems reasonable to say that Bob Kane's story is the most plausible, and Jerry Robinson's story was merely the inspiration for the Joker's name.
In addition, The cover of an American comic book depicting Batman meeting the Joker, published by DC COMICS in 2005, features the Joker drawn by Doug Mahnke and is titled "Batman : The Man Who Laughs".
〈 c 〉 Even though it was made nearly 100 years ago, Paul Reni ( 1885～1929 )'s silent film "The Man Who Laughs ( 1928 )" is the excellent work that can still be enjoyed today.
The synopsis is as follows :
In 17th century England, King James II is persuaded by the evil jester Barkilphedro to execute his political rival, Lord Clancharlie, with the Iron Maiden. Then, the King has surgeon Hardquanonne carve the smile on the face of Lord Cranchley's young son, Gwynplain. An abandoned Gwynplaine struggles through the snowstorm to rescue a baby girl whose mother has frozen to death. Wandering through the snow with the baby in his arms, Gwynplaine is taken in by Ursus and his pet wolf, Homo. The baby girl, Dea, is blind. From there, Gwynplane and Dea have grown to love each other.
Gwynplain then becomes "the laughing man” of the spectacle and continues the journey with Ursus and Dare. But he is deeply ashamed of the scars carved on his face and believes he is unworthy of Dea's love. Gwynplain and Dea are separated by the machinations of those around them, but come together again in the end ( However, in Victor Hugo's "The Man Laughs" / "L'Homme qui rit" in French, on which this film is based, dea dies in this last scene of reunion ).
〈 Chapter２ 〉 "The Man Who Laughs" as the love story, not the evil story
〈 a 〉 If you read the synopsis above, you'll notice that the assumption that Gwynplain, the Joker's prototype in this film, would take revenge for the scars on his face was nothing more than the selfish and subjective one. Yes, this film was built from the beginning with the aim of being the love story, not the evil story.
〈 b 〉 The usual view is that Gwynplain would act out of revenge, but in this film Gwynplain acts out of love for Dea. Gwynplain is supposed to be the prototype of Joker, but he lives the different life than the Joker, whose motive is revenge on society. This is the important difference. This would mean that Bob kane and his fellows, who created the Joker, came up with the evil character from only his appearance, without any consideration of Gwynplain's way of life.
〈 Chapter３ 〉 Todd Phillips' "Joker 1 and 2", which are probably inspired by Paul Reni's "The Man Who Laughs"
〈 a 〉 The story mentioned above may have reminded some of you of a certain recent movie. Yes, Todd Phillips' "Joker 1 and 2". For example, the sad birth story in Joker 1, which makes it seem as if Arthur is Thomas Wayne's child, is unlike anything in the Batman series up to that point, but it is similar to Gwynplain's tragic circumstances story in "The Man Who Laughs".
〈 b 〉 And then there is the setting itself, which makes the couple of the Joker and Harlequin the main subject of Joker 2. Of course, it is the known fact that the Joker and Harlequin were a couple, but the question is why Todd decided to make them a couple in Joker 2 so abruptly. Joker 1 was the story that was only possible because Arthur was socially lonely, so where on earth does the idea of staging a couple come from, even if it was the attempt to change Joker 2 into the different story ?
〈 c 〉 Although this is only speculation, Todd checked out Gwynplain in “The Man Who Laughs” as a prototype for the Joker in creating the Joker's story, and along with that, he found Dea, the prototype for Harlequin, the Joker's lover character.
Todd must have understood that this film is the love story. This is why it is possible to portray the love in this film as the illusion that is fragile and crumbles in modern society. The impossible love. In Joker 2, there is no Dea who loves Gwynplain with all her heart. Instead, there is Harlequin who has abandoned Arthur.
〈 d 〉 Arthur would think……, "if I take off the Joker's mask, no one will love me. I am loved because I am a joker who kills people. If I have to kill someone to be loved, I will be a person who keeps killing people forever. Is there any meaning in being loved to that extent ? No, such love is meaningless. It is only exhausting. I don't want to be loved that much……."
And so Arthur chose to return to his true self. And in the end, he found himself in the position to be killed by the new Joker.
〈 Chapter４ 〉 The meaning of Arthur's death
〈 a 〉 Finally, let us consider the significance of Arthur's death. This is because Arthur's death at the end of the film was meant to discourage the audience from believing that he was not the real Joker. Some audiences wonder, “If he is not the real Joker, then what the hell have we been watching all this time ?
〈 b 〉 Needless to say, Todd is not trying to show the mediocre here that the real joker is elsewhere. First of all, it means that the Joker is not embodied by the specific person, but has become the activator of violence that allows anonymous anyone to kill people. So even if Arthur dies, a new and different joker will appear.
〈 c 〉 The second is that Joker 2 is the metafictionalized version of the success of Joker 1, as has already been pointed out in several reviews. This metafictionalization means that the story has been reworked into the story that greatly betrays the audience's expectations, that is, the story that destroys the audience's Enjoyment by equalizing the abandonment of becoming the Joker with Arthur's death.
〈 d 〉 Todd's destruction of the audience's enjoyment was due to his fear that the commercial success of "Joker 1" would lead to the audience unconsciously identifying with the evil that is the Joker. It is precisely this unconscious identification with the Joker by people that is the motive of another person who kills Arthur at the end of the film.
〈 e 〉 This shows that Todd had the social psychoanalytic insight into the origins of the evil called the Joker in this work. He does not portray the Joker as the entertaining character in DC Comics, but as the real Evil that emerges from the masses at the bottom of society.
Todd understands that the hatred swirling at the bottom of society repeatedly gives birth to evil agents like the Joker. That is why he directs Arthur back from the Joker. Abandoning evil. Awakening from the nightmare. But at the same time, it means Arthur returns to the reality where he is of no use to society. The outcome is nothing other than his own death.
〈 f 〉 To sum up the above, some criticisms, such as Joker 2 ruining Joker 1, are completely off the mark. Joker 2 reveals the essence of Joker 1 more intensely. Todd has metaphysically depicted the horrifying reality that the emergence of Evil is nothing more than the symbolic act of the people themselves.
〈 END 〉
