The Three Jokers By Geoff Johns and Jason Fabok

[QUOTE=Wrestler;5208212]That was already answered here, but ok.

That's the same reason he asked the Mobius chair who the killer of his parents was, he already knew the answer, he was just testing the chair.[/QUOTE]

The thing I don't understand though, is that he seemed surprised about there being three jokers - he knew the comedian's full name/origin but still thought he was the same as the criminal who seems to be a distinctive personality and operated before the comedian?? I personally don't think it matches up very well

[QUOTE=Jack The Tripper;5208296]The thing I don't understand though, is that he seemed surprised about there being three jokers - he knew the comedian's full name/origin but still thought he was the same as the criminal who seems to be a distinctive personality and operated before the comedian?? I personally don't think it matches up very well[/QUOTE]

Maybe the comedian was the first joker all along and did most of the bad things we all know (killed Jason, crippled Barbara, etc). He was the one who turned himself into Joker by accident (he was the one fantasizing about his family in issue #2), then he made the other two simbolyzing his phases, maybe as a simple joke. The criminal took the liberty and had the idea of making a "better" Joker, The comedian (or the "real", "main" Joker) took advantage of this and put his plan involving Joe Chill in action, utilizing the concept of 3 Jokers just to troll Batman and his family (and trolled all people mad about the other 2 jokers not being relevant hahaha).

Batman always thought there was only one joker, maybe he was right, but at some point (before Batman sitting on Mobius Chair), the Joker (Comedian) created the other two.

[QUOTE=Wrestler;5208391]Maybe the comedian was the first joker all along and did most of the bad things we all know (killed Jason, crippled Barbara, etc). He was the one who turned himself into Joker by accident (he was the one fantasizing about his family in issue #2), then he made the other two simbolyzing his phases, maybe as a simple joke. The criminal took the liberty and had the idea of making a "better" Joker, The comedian (or the "real", "main" Joker) took advantage of this and put his plan involving Joe Chill in action, utilizing the concept of 3 Jokers just to troll Batman and his family (and trolled all people mad about the other 2 jokers not being relevant hahaha).

Batman always thought there was only one joker, maybe he was right, but at some point (before Batman sitting on Mobius Chair), the Joker (Comedian) created the other two.[/QUOTE]

I don't know, that sounds like some out there ways to fill in plot holes. Even if that is the case, it should have been the objective of the miniseries to explain that and not leave glaring plot holes.

Overall I thought Three Jokers was ok. The art is beautiful and the story had a few cool moments. The stuff with Batman and Joe Chill is my favorite. Otherwise it was a big meh. Forgettable. I like or love about 75% of Johns stuff. Mostly his old work. This is more in line with Flash Rebirth and not his Green Lantern run. Oh well.

Yeah, I do like a lot of Johns' work, but his direction with Jason and Barbara was, why? Bruce and Joe Chill was fine. But this was supposed to be about the mystery of the 3 Jokers, and ultimately, only the Killing Joke Joker was an origin. Which Bruce already knew. But the other two are, well, yeah.

Comicstorian did it better than I could.

I think i'm missing something, isn't Alfred dead?

[QUOTE=failo.legendkiller;5208990]I think i'm missing something, isn't Alfred dead?[/QUOTE]

This isn't in continuity.


On another note...how can anyone think this was a good ending? The concept was good, the build up in the first two issues was decent but the conclusion was completely devoid of anything interesting.

[QUOTE=thwhtGuardian;5209040]This isn't in continuity.[/QUOTE]

It's not so simple. I think people are putting way too much stock in the Black Label imprint as an indicator of non-canonicity. Sooner or later they're going to have to account for the fact that this storyline was set up in the canon books. [I]Clearly[/I] it's at least peripheral to continuity, the problem is figuring out how that works. In my opinion it fits into that grand tradition of books that are "supposed" to happen in the DC Universe, but disregard or distort the minutia of the continuity of the ongoing titles, like Kevin Smith's Batman duology, Englehart's Dark Detective, Neal Adams' Odyssey, Deadman, Batman vs. Ra's al Ghul, etc. etc.

With all that said I do think it's impossible to know right now when this is supposed to take place. It's either several years in the past or future. In yesterday's Batgirl finale Jim supposedly still didn't know Barbara's secret. And does anyone know the last time Joe Chill was referenced as being alive in the main books?

The book was designed as it was so that wouldn’t be a problem. It’s trying to be accessible to anyone with a general knowledge of Batman.

The thing is that you can really slate it in at any point of continuity because nothing changes in the story. All the pieces are put back into place. Hell this could have happened in the early New 52 and it wouldn't have changed anything.

[QUOTE=PurpleGlovez;5209077]It's not so simple. I think people are putting way too much stock in the Black Label imprint as an indicator of non-canonicity. Sooner or later they're going to have to account for the fact that this storyline was set up in the canon books. [I]Clearly[/I] it's at least peripheral to continuity, the problem is figuring out how that works. In my opinion it fits into that grand tradition of books that are "supposed" to happen in the DC Universe, but disregard or distort the minutia of the continuity of the ongoing titles, like Kevin Smith's Batman duology, Englehart's Dark Detective, Neal Adams' Odyssey, Deadman, Batman vs. Ra's al Ghul, etc. etc.[/QUOTE]

Fabok explicitly said this wasn't in continuity and that it was entirely up to other writers whether they acknowledge or not the events of Three Jokers.

[QUOTE=Pohzee;5209123]The thing is that you can really slate it in at any point of continuity because nothing changes in the story. All the pieces are put back into place. Hell this could have happened in the early New 52 and it wouldn't have changed anything.[/QUOTE]

At least when it comes to Jason, this story can't be set in continuity anywhere but just immediately after the original Under The Red Hood arc due to how hard it regresses his character.

It sold extremely well too. DC said the first issue sold over 300K, and sales success generally drives influence. So I'm very confident that Three Jokers will be considered canon and that eventually more will be done with the story. It is just how these kind of things go. Also the story was written to be mostly free of any major continuity issues such as ignoring the Darkseid War set up in the actual Three Jokers story. So it is built more for GN sales. Plus given that it is a Joker story, who fans fork money over for and it also was positioned as a sequel to The Killing Joke, it will sell well in trade basically forever. So as more time goes on I'd guess the story's influence will grow.

Doomsday Clock also sold extremely well and I have yet to see any of it being acknowledged anywhere.

[QUOTE=Jack The Tripper;5208557]I don't know, that sounds like some out there ways to fill in plot holes. Even if that is the case, it should have been the objective of the miniseries to explain that and not leave glaring plot holes.[/QUOTE]

The objective of the miniseries was to show the plan the Comedian came up with (also explaining his motive behind it) while taking advantage of Criminal's plan. I understand people being mad about the other 2 jokers not being relevant after a waiting period of 4 years, but I think the plot twist at the end was clever (Joker using Joe Chill to get his wish while using the plan made up by the Criminal (to make a "better joker") to troll Batman, making him think it was all about it).

[QUOTE=Dark_Tzitzimine;5209152]Doomsday Clock also sold extremely well and I have yet to see any of it being acknowledged anywhere.[/QUOTE]

With the notable exception of Clark's parents being back, I agree. It's a big exception, but I haven't come by anything else, either.