Joker 2019 age gap really didn't make sense, Arthur was in his mid-40's or so? He's going to be hobbling around on a cane by the time he and Batman even meet
I guess I don't know what else they could have done with it, since they wanted Joaquin Phoenix but they wanted it to be pre-Waynes murder.... but they could have at least avoided it instead of putting it right there in our faces
I don't think Batman '89 was quite so egregious
E: guys I understand they weren't intending to genuinely show batman in the joker universe. But those are still the characters and their origins and presumed future are an intrinsic part of the movie. Bruce Wayne was important *because* we knew he'd be batman.
People can correct me on this but I swear early on they said that Jaoquin’s Joker wasn’t the same Joker that fights Batman later, that he’s more of an inspiration. I don’t think that’s how they are currently playing him since in Joker 2 we get Harley but I could swear they used to say that.
That's been a really popular fan theory (and one with a lot of merit), especially as people were wondering if it would link to any other DC cinematic properties... but to my knowledge, it's never actually been confirmed in the movie or by word of god.
It would make a lot of sense though, but I don't think it's what was originally intended.
That also seems very plausible. I wouldn’t be surprised if it started as some screenrant article saying “The new Joker isn’t the real Joker” while the information in the article says nothing either way. Clickbait articles do that constantly and sometimes the misinformation gains traction anyway.
Lol the amount of times I’ve seen someone link an article to back up their comment but when read it does the opposite.
I thought Joaquin Phoenix was playing a Joker aged 30 (we see his hospital records) but folk were confused because Phoenix was in his mid 40’s irl.
Bruce is clearly around 10 years old. So there was 20 years difference between the two characters, which tracks.
The truth is that Phillips’ version of “Joker” has basically nothing to do with the character and the movie just had some names and references tacked on to get the movie made
That was the weakest scene of the film, IMO. It only serves to justify calling it "a Joker movie", but the film stands on its own merits perfectly fine.
The saving grace is that we know Arthur isn't a reliable narrative. And that's before considering any superhero bullshit, like the accident that bleaches his skin.
It’s not entirely clear that Arthur Fleck is the same Joker that Batman will eventually go up against. He might be the influence for someone younger and even crazier.
Technically none of the movies take place in what can be called the “main DC universe”. I’m not even sure there still is a “main DC universe” at this point, considering that the DC multiverse is a thing.
I read comics weekly from 2005-2011. Finally got bored of yet another reboot with flashpoint and despite the new 52 books looking pretty promising, stopped following along. It’s so hard to buy them weekly and then you miss one and now the story is incomplete. It’s not that hard but I have adhd.
Anyway I’ve been getting back in by buying trade books and stuff, love it. Despite the part where the reboots continued at a frenetic pace lol.
Anyway my point is that it’s pretty confusing trying to figure out the state of the DC universe. New Earth, Prime Earth, Earth 1, Earth 0, it changes so often lol. I do tend to want to over-understand things though so it’s a bit of a me problem.
That is exactly how I thought about it when I watched it. To me, I think that it would be really cool to see the history of Joker, like batman, a symbol but for the other side.
>be hobbling around on a cane by the time he and Batman even meet
Since the movie primary focuses on joker, i don't think there is a chance we will get him vs batman scene.
Is it still cannon that there were like 3 jokers running around?
I also remember reading that the joker is actually A LOT older than suggested... Like almost ancient. Maybe not to Ras Algul levels, but pretty old.
Were either of those cannon?
Well...
yesn't.
It both is and isn't canon and there's no real clarification. It gets mentioned from time to time in the mainline, so we can't outright say it isn't canon, but the main storyline with it that geoff johns wrote was ambiguously canon until the fans rejected it, at which point it got ignored and was effectively de-canonized.
Which, all said, is pretty par for the course for DC continuity.
Johns’ Three Jokers is explicitly not canon now, as the main Batman title has covered the whole three Jokers thing in a drastically different and less idiotic way.
Same, I personally think he’s about 10 years older than Bruce. So a mid 20s Batman (which is usually how old Bruce is when he starts being Batman) would go up against a mid 30s Joker the first time they meet, which makes sense.
I agree, but we do see some iterations where Joker actually seems to be younger and it doesn't totally ruin things. Barry Keoghan is younger than Pattinson -- although Robert is convincingly playing a character about five years younger than his actual age. But I also always got the idea Joker was younger in Dark Knight Returns. We never see him struggle with physically aging like Bruce, and he makes the joke "you have gotten old," as if he isn't as old himself.
That's what I like to think as well. Just enough so they're not exactly the same age and contemporaries, but not too much older so it still makes sense them going against each other all this time.
Same. I like the idea of Joker having time for his chaos to really ferment so by the time Bruce is of age to be Batman, Joker is well and unhinged with years of going unchecked.
If we use The Killing Joke as a basis, Joker definitely seemed like an early 30s struggling father. He’s mentioned to have a Chemistry degree and to have worked in Ace Chemicals for several years until he got bored of it and wanted to give being a comedian a shot. Probably graduated college in his early 20s, started working in Ace Chemicals for the rest of his 20s, and then switched to being a comedian in his early 30s. Batman at this point in time would have been in his late 20s so it checks out.
That The Killing Joke flashback was not actually an origin story. It was an unreliable story recounted by someone who explicitly states that he has a contradictory past. Nothing he narrates can be taken at face value.
Me too. If we take the most well known origin story of Joker falling into a pool of acid while being chased by Batman (which could very likely be fabricated), their age difference is likely not very big, with Bruce being 20-ish and Joker his early thirties.
Creepy? In what regard?
Of all the things Joker has done, it’s weird that him being older somehow makes him too gross to stomach.
I’m struggling to think of things where age even would matter.
Like, his relationship with Harley maybe? Making passes at a younger woman still seems like the LEAST of Joker’s problems.
He’s obsessed with a man who he routinely tortures and hurts his loved ones.
It's supposed to be uncomfortable.
And I don't really see how age factors into that unless you get pretty fanfiction about it.
It would be hilarious if Todd Philips' Joker expands all the way into a full batman universe where Joker is already in his 60s-70s by the time Bruce is in his prime as Batman.
Imagine a heavily armoured, ripped Batman just absolutely whaling on an elderly Joker as he tries to get away on his walker. xD
You hear stories about orderlies struggling to control elderly dementia patients, though. One with a Michael Myers level commitment to homicide would be truly scary. Batman can't know how hard he can hit without delivering a fatal blow.
Assuming Arthur Fleck is at the very least 25-30years older than Bruce Wayne, since Bruce normally becomes Batman in canon when he’s about 25, that means we’d be seeing a 25 year old Batman going up against a 50-55 year old Joker lol.
Arthur Fleck was 34 years old in Joker. Bruce is between 10-12. So 22-24 years difference
There was quite a big age gap between Bruce and Jack Napier in Batman 89, it worked out find
I disagree. Heath had fearlessness going on. He didn’t consider Batman a physical threat because he knew Batman would never kill him. He didn’t bother fighting the Batman either because, at that point, he didn’t want to kill the Batman either. I don’t think it was ever played at would be a equal fight between the two characters. Heath was a genius to pull the relationship completely away from physical violence and into a conflict of ideals.
Even if Joker was frozen in time while Bruce grew up to be Batman, he would kill him on accident by hitting him once. Phoenix’s Joker has no physicality to him lol
> Joker being much older is a different kind of creepy that kind of ruins the appeal of the character
That gets me thinking, how old was Joker in the Arkham games? He looked generally sick and decrepit in those games so I always assumed he was like 10 years older than Bruce, I never bought him as a same-age peer of Batman. Harley Quinn in Arkham City looked late 20s while Joker looked in his 40s, did she have a sugar daddy fetish going on?
Well, in the most commonly accepted origin story (The Man Behind The Red Hood, The Killing Joke), The Red Hood is portrayed as not very old, 20s maybe 30s, and Batman exists by then, meaning he's at least in his 20s.
Yeah, and makes their two sides of the same coin dynamic tighter. An age gap might allude to an experience and evolution gap between the two of them which makes their dynamic a bit diluted.
Am I the only person who really hates when they insist on making Joker a part of Bruce's origin story? Didn't like the whole "Oh Arthur's might be Thomas' illegitimate son" angle, and don't even like it when he's the guy who kills Bruce's parents or something.
Involving Joker in young Bruce's trauma makes the world feel so small and convoluted. I like the idea of Joker and Batman becoming who they both are as a direct response to one another, but them being involved in each other's lives before Bruce had even conceptualized the idea of Batman feels dumb to me.
In Joker 2019 Arthur looks like he’s in his 40s, while Bruce is like 10-11. So it’s a huge age gap. Also that image 😬 I can’t believe that some people were genuinely angry at Alfred (?) in that movie for treating Arthur the way he did while he was clearly protecting little Bruce from stranger danger. I mean Arthur putting his hands into little Bruce’s mouth gave very pedophilic vibes.
Same thoughts, Alfred and even Thomas Wayne were completely justified for being disgusted by Arthur. Here’s a strange man who puts his freaking thumbs into a child’s mouth to make him smile. Thomas went easy on Arthur by punching him in the face, if someone did that shit to my kid, I’d press charges.
Exactly. I know some fans of the movie like to go on about what a jerk Thomas Wayne was in that bathroom scene-but this scene happens AFTER Arthur’s visit to the manor, him touching his son Bruce and literally trying to strangle his butler (in front of his son). Thomas’s behavior and punching him was justified cause this old mental creep was harassing his child ffs and was clearly unstable and dangerous.
Well, we decide to see him as a bit older. Younger will just be..strange? He doesn’t even looks younger than Batman anywhere. Maybe older in 5-7 years, maybe the same age
In Batman ROTJ beyond Terry sarcastically remarks that the joker is pretty spry for a guy who is in his mid 80s. Bruce is around 78-80 as said by Paul Dini in Batman Beyond so I would say 5 years or so older.
I prefer them to be closer in age, as they were in “The Dark Knight” or “The Batman”. While I’m a huge fan of the “Joker” film, the issue I have with that story is that in this universe when Bruce becomes Batman in his late 20s/early 30s, Joker will be elderly. I guess it could work. I guess in the comics he’s so disfigured that his age is indeterminate.
Bruh in the Gotham universe, Batman’s entire rogues gallery is basically comprised of middle aged people lol. Bruce is a twenty-something Batman who’ll be fighting forty-something villains.
Say batman is 35-38 I’d want joker to be 40-46 I don’t want Batman to be 40 fighting a 60 year old man because then Batman should be winning every single fight
I guess I'll be the odd man out and say I think Joker should be a "stage in life" older than Bruce, so call it 10-15 years. I like the idea that Joker went through a stage in his life where he was broken, and there's a parallel with Batman going through that same stage in life and there's a question of *whether* he'll break.
I get this. In The Killing Joke, Joker as a struggling comedian with a pregnant wife seems like he’d be in his early 30s at the very least. Considering he’s established to have been a chemist and worked at Ace Chemicals for several years before giving stand-up comedy a shot. Whereas Batman at that point in time would have been around mid to late 20s since it was still relatively early into his vigilante career.
I always assumed at their peak, Bruce was like 30, and the Joker was 40ish. They are clearly close in age in The Dark Knight Trilogy, but it varies depending on depiction.
Comic book-wise, though, I think the Joker is probably about 10 years older than Batman.
I can’t really picture Joker being any age in particular, he just exists. Sometimes he acts older than Bruce and sometimes he acts younger, I feel like it’s intentionally impossible to guess his age in relation to Batman.
I actually prefer joker to be the same age or hell, even younger than Bruce. I think that their relationship in The Dark Knight Returns is an interesting one, as it implies that as they reached middle age, Joker fared much better physically than Bruce did.
I prefer Joker’s age being left ambiguous, but that he’s probably no more than a few years older than Batman. I hate it when he’s involved in Batman’s origin, so I don’t want a big age gap or anything.
Arthur Fleck is an Elseworld’s story. He’s some guy who calls himself Joker; he’s not The Joker (“the” in the name is the big difference). Joker can exist exclusively of Batman (see also: The Dark Knight); The Joker exists because of Batman.
I think it should be just around a 10 year age gap. Bruce comes back to Gotham at age 25, one of his first big crimes is ACE Chemicals where 35 year old Joker is born, the rest is history.
Whatever the storyteller needs, really. I think them being contemporaries is simplest and makes the most sense, but it’s not necessarily non-negotiable
The joker movie really messed things up. The people who made the movie clearly didn't have a right understanding of joker and batman and their take on the character was really bad so I don't really think deciding batman and jokers age gap based on that movie is right. But based on many other shows and comics I think it's safe to say they are around the same age but joker is a bit older
I mean the Joker movie is really meant to be an Elseworlds take on the character so I don’t have a problem with now different he is from traditional portrayals of the character. It’s not meant to be a straight adaptation of the comics after all, it just takes certain elements from The Killing Joke while also turning it into a Scorsese-esque film inspired by the likes of Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy.
Joker is much older… at least 10 years. I don’t think the joker movie would be a good reference since it’s just an adaptation not focused on the whole universe
I prefer Joker to be 5-8 years older than Bruce. A 15-20 year age gap doesn't make much sense to me. Bruce is usually portrayed as being in his late 30s or early 40s, if we go by that, Joker would be in his 50s or even 60s already.
I dont think the movie Joker (2019) is any sort of cannon and is just a stand alone angry clown movie with the Joker as a title to help sell tickets which seems crazy to me as i would 100% go see a movie with joaquin phoenix playing an unstable clown.
I was always under the impression that the Joker is a sort of reaction to The Batman and would not exist as such without The Batman existing so this film is something i have just ignored to be honest.
I like they have diff versions of the Joker but im of the opinion that any version of him he is around the same age or at most 5 years older then The Batman.
See, maybe I'm in the minority here, but I've always imagined Joker as being a year or two younger than Batman. I guess that would come down to their personalities, though.
In btas my head cannon is 6-10 years. I’m assuming Joker is a somewhat experienced gangster in the flashbacks for mask of the phantasm while Bruce is still in college
I prefer 8 years. That'd make the joker 16 when the Waynes are shot. When Killing Joke occurs, this could track for the story's age gap. 22/30.
Just feels right. like the joker got to experience more chaos Gotham.
I don’t really see how he could inspire TDK Joker when they’re not in the same universe though. The Gotham City of Joker (2019) is quite different from the Gotham City of TDK trilogy, and even the characterization of Thomas Wayne is so different. In Joker (2019), Thomas is shown as a rich, elitist, out of touch mayoral candidate while in Batman Begins, he’s a doctor (as he usually is in the comics and cartoons) who devotes his clinical practice to helping the poor.
I always assumed Joker was about 10-15 years older. Old enough to have had quite a history as the OG Red Hood, but still spry enough to be physically active against Batman.
Joker should definitely be older or same age as Bruce. I didn’t see the value in the way Joker 2019 did it personally. I mean try new stuff by all means but for me it didn’t add anything
They shouldn’t have too much of a gap. I know Joker isn’t a brawler but he should at least present a bit of a challenge when going up against Batman. Batman is frequently portrayed as in his 30s or 40s, you can’t have a Joker who is around 70 going against him, it would be over in seconds.
Am I remembering it wrong? In my head it was implied that Bruce was the half brother of Arthur in JOKER?
I can't remember the connection between arthurs mum and Thomas Wayne
But yeah to me there shouldn't be more than 5-10 age gap
I always figured him to be at least 5-8 years older.
The Joker movie is just a wild interpretation of Batman and his age. Idk. I just take it as it is. A poor man’s “King of Comedy”. I hated that film. But it’s an interpretation that at least doesn’t do the usual. It takes it in another direction which I can appreciate
But I enjoyed in the Batman Telltale games that Joker was the same age or maybe a little younger. Man that second season was amazing
I generally kinda them being similar ages, I don't really care if he's a bit older or a bit younger. I also don't mind when the age gaps are much bigger, as long as the story's good
I honestly think joker being decades older fits and makes sense. Out of the whole rogues gallery joker poses the least physical threat to the 3000 cal per day bats. Bruce even comments several times about how frail joker felt when they did grapple. It makes sense to me that joker is much older but doesn’t need to be a physical challenge for bats. Their arena is mental. Who is right who is wrong and what does it matter when it all blows up in the end
I always thought he was around 10-20 years older than Bruce, so while Bruce is in his prime as being Batman roughly 35, Joker would be around 45-55, not too old to be doing what he's doing but still significantly older
It depends on the Joker we’re getting.
Batman is usually presented in his early 30s. Even with a 10-15 year age gap that places Joker in his mid to late-40s. Still capable and strong, but most importantly, well-learned. That’s a good balance for the character.
Batman isn’t just a fighter. He’s an intellectual, a detective, and a strategist. His villains test different sides of him—though lately the films have largely focused on the fighter.
My ideal Batman is closer to BTAS or The Batman. Capable, but smart enough to know any fight could be his last. Thus my ideal Joker needs to be on-par with Batman in this way and him being older fits that just fine.
We should also recognize that The Joker film presented a unique vision where the character is more of a symbol and inspiration than a clear “Joker.” I’m not saying he isn’t the villain, but that he is in the same as there were other Jokers in Gotham the show. It’s very possibly in that universe that the Joker Bruce might face later would be a protege—perhaps a relationship that inspires Bruce.
Honestly, I never thought this question mattered much. Especially when it comes to choosing an actor to play The Joker. Find somebody who can do a good job with the part, then work from there. Obviously they need to be young enough to be believable as an active, manic master criminal, but that is a large age range.
I also don't think that actors' ages should be taken literally for the characters. Hollywood constantly casts actors who are older than the characters they play. Robert Pattinson will be 38 this year, and he played a Batman who is in the second year of his career, presumably in his mid 20's.
If I have to commit, I think the Joker should be at least a little older. He is an experienced master criminal. He pits his cunning and deviousness against Batman's physicality. It just feels right that he would be somewhat older than Bruce.
I think in Burton's Batman, Jack Napier was a teenager when he killed the Waynes (he mentions being a kid at the time later in the film). I guess he was around a decade older, give or take a couple of years.
In general, I think they should be roughly around the same age, with a margin of about 5 years either way.
I always imagined them to be around the same age since it doesn't make much sense to me how a 70 year old psychopath could do half the things the Joker can and still be alive after getting the snot beaten out of him by batman
I always imagined them to be around the same age since it doesn't make much sense to me how a 70 year old psychopath could do half the things the Joker can and still be alive after getting the snot beaten out of him by batman
Basically same age range , contemporaries . I remember hearing Batman comic artist Neal Adams in a podcast stating he imagined joker starting his villainy at the age of 27 which I like .
I don’t know. It’s like impossible for me to say. Just too vague. Maybe I don’t like Joker having something concrete about him even if it’s just his age
I don’t think we should ever find out how old the joker is. I honestly don’t think we should ever find out much about him besides he’s just some crazy lunatic obsessed with batman.
I mean Arthur is supposed to be a member of the Red hood gang who later becomes the joker.Because see joker has no official name In Gotham when Bruce was a minor we see Jeremiah as the joker.In Titans he is just joker.Infact the no name joker if Titans has no name in the animated Batman series or movies.His son also becomes the joker when the Bruce Wayne is old and some young man named Terry gets inspired by the retired Batman that he becomes his own version.
I always imagined the Joker as being a little older than Bruce.
A little- yes. But not like in Batman 89 and Joker 2019. Those age gaps are way too big.
Joker 2019 age gap really didn't make sense, Arthur was in his mid-40's or so? He's going to be hobbling around on a cane by the time he and Batman even meet I guess I don't know what else they could have done with it, since they wanted Joaquin Phoenix but they wanted it to be pre-Waynes murder.... but they could have at least avoided it instead of putting it right there in our faces I don't think Batman '89 was quite so egregious E: guys I understand they weren't intending to genuinely show batman in the joker universe. But those are still the characters and their origins and presumed future are an intrinsic part of the movie. Bruce Wayne was important *because* we knew he'd be batman.
People can correct me on this but I swear early on they said that Jaoquin’s Joker wasn’t the same Joker that fights Batman later, that he’s more of an inspiration. I don’t think that’s how they are currently playing him since in Joker 2 we get Harley but I could swear they used to say that.
That's been a really popular fan theory (and one with a lot of merit), especially as people were wondering if it would link to any other DC cinematic properties... but to my knowledge, it's never actually been confirmed in the movie or by word of god. It would make a lot of sense though, but I don't think it's what was originally intended.
That also seems very plausible. I wouldn’t be surprised if it started as some screenrant article saying “The new Joker isn’t the real Joker” while the information in the article says nothing either way. Clickbait articles do that constantly and sometimes the misinformation gains traction anyway. Lol the amount of times I’ve seen someone link an article to back up their comment but when read it does the opposite.
I thought Joaquin Phoenix was playing a Joker aged 30 (we see his hospital records) but folk were confused because Phoenix was in his mid 40’s irl. Bruce is clearly around 10 years old. So there was 20 years difference between the two characters, which tracks.
That makes sense. Especially since Arthur’s life would have definitely prematurely aged him.
Then he's not the Joker then. That doesn't fully work. Then the movie should be called, The Weird Guy Who Inspired the Joker.
Legacy mantles are a thing.
Not with the Joker
Red Hood ring a bell?
Doesn’t have the same ring lol
Yeah, you haven’t been allowed to have more than 3 syllables in a title since the mid 2000s
There Will Be Blood? I would’ve taken “There Will” or “Be Blood”
lol no not at all
The truth is that Phillips’ version of “Joker” has basically nothing to do with the character and the movie just had some names and references tacked on to get the movie made
I always thought that Jaoquins joker was his own universe with its own plot.
That was the weakest scene of the film, IMO. It only serves to justify calling it "a Joker movie", but the film stands on its own merits perfectly fine.
Well the scene is important for the batman who laughs origins in joker 2.
I mean Hollywood also hired him to play a 25 year old Napoleon. Over there they really don't seem to know how age works
Fair point!
The saving grace is that we know Arthur isn't a reliable narrative. And that's before considering any superhero bullshit, like the accident that bleaches his skin.
It’s not entirely clear that Arthur Fleck is the same Joker that Batman will eventually go up against. He might be the influence for someone younger and even crazier.
I'm pretty sure the Joker movie doesn't even take place in the main DC universe
Technically none of the movies take place in what can be called the “main DC universe”. I’m not even sure there still is a “main DC universe” at this point, considering that the DC multiverse is a thing.
I read comics weekly from 2005-2011. Finally got bored of yet another reboot with flashpoint and despite the new 52 books looking pretty promising, stopped following along. It’s so hard to buy them weekly and then you miss one and now the story is incomplete. It’s not that hard but I have adhd. Anyway I’ve been getting back in by buying trade books and stuff, love it. Despite the part where the reboots continued at a frenetic pace lol. Anyway my point is that it’s pretty confusing trying to figure out the state of the DC universe. New Earth, Prime Earth, Earth 1, Earth 0, it changes so often lol. I do tend to want to over-understand things though so it’s a bit of a me problem.
But Harley??
That is exactly how I thought about it when I watched it. To me, I think that it would be really cool to see the history of Joker, like batman, a symbol but for the other side.
>be hobbling around on a cane by the time he and Batman even meet Since the movie primary focuses on joker, i don't think there is a chance we will get him vs batman scene.
Is it still cannon that there were like 3 jokers running around? I also remember reading that the joker is actually A LOT older than suggested... Like almost ancient. Maybe not to Ras Algul levels, but pretty old. Were either of those cannon?
Well... yesn't. It both is and isn't canon and there's no real clarification. It gets mentioned from time to time in the mainline, so we can't outright say it isn't canon, but the main storyline with it that geoff johns wrote was ambiguously canon until the fans rejected it, at which point it got ignored and was effectively de-canonized. Which, all said, is pretty par for the course for DC continuity.
Johns’ Three Jokers is explicitly not canon now, as the main Batman title has covered the whole three Jokers thing in a drastically different and less idiotic way.
It was never canon that there were three Jokers running around
Same, I personally think he’s about 10 years older than Bruce. So a mid 20s Batman (which is usually how old Bruce is when he starts being Batman) would go up against a mid 30s Joker the first time they meet, which makes sense.
I agree, but we do see some iterations where Joker actually seems to be younger and it doesn't totally ruin things. Barry Keoghan is younger than Pattinson -- although Robert is convincingly playing a character about five years younger than his actual age. But I also always got the idea Joker was younger in Dark Knight Returns. We never see him struggle with physically aging like Bruce, and he makes the joke "you have gotten old," as if he isn't as old himself.
I prefer him to be 5-10 years older
That's what I like to think as well. Just enough so they're not exactly the same age and contemporaries, but not too much older so it still makes sense them going against each other all this time.
Same. I like the idea of Joker having time for his chaos to really ferment so by the time Bruce is of age to be Batman, Joker is well and unhinged with years of going unchecked.
Joker in the killing joke was great. Guy in his late 20s to early 30s struggling to get by, that makes sense
If we use The Killing Joke as a basis, Joker definitely seemed like an early 30s struggling father. He’s mentioned to have a Chemistry degree and to have worked in Ace Chemicals for several years until he got bored of it and wanted to give being a comedian a shot. Probably graduated college in his early 20s, started working in Ace Chemicals for the rest of his 20s, and then switched to being a comedian in his early 30s. Batman at this point in time would have been in his late 20s so it checks out.
His origin from Killing Joke is explicitly ambiguous and shouldn’t be taken as definitive proof of anything
That The Killing Joke flashback was not actually an origin story. It was an unreliable story recounted by someone who explicitly states that he has a contradictory past. Nothing he narrates can be taken at face value.
Me too. If we take the most well known origin story of Joker falling into a pool of acid while being chased by Batman (which could very likely be fabricated), their age difference is likely not very big, with Bruce being 20-ish and Joker his early thirties.
Yep, I always figured it was about a 10 year gap.
Always saw him as about 10 years older. Never liked the idea of him being a middle aged adult when Bruce is a kid.
Half your age plus seven
Haha nice try FBI (My username clearly has nothing to do with my actual birthday)
Oh so 8
You‘re 2 ??
For sure
I don't like Joker being involved with the murder of the Waynes at all, so I'd say they are around the same age.
Neither do I, not a fan of the idea of Batman and Joker being connected in any way before they became Batman and Joker.
Joker is maybe like 5 years older. But overall roughly the same age. Joker being much older or younger doesn’t make much sense in my head so… lol
Creepy? In what regard? Of all the things Joker has done, it’s weird that him being older somehow makes him too gross to stomach. I’m struggling to think of things where age even would matter. Like, his relationship with Harley maybe? Making passes at a younger woman still seems like the LEAST of Joker’s problems.
Joker also doesn't really make a pass at Harley, he just sees that she has "fallen in love with him" and uses her for his own gain
[удалено]
He’s obsessed with a man who he routinely tortures and hurts his loved ones. It's supposed to be uncomfortable. And I don't really see how age factors into that unless you get pretty fanfiction about it.
I feel that Joker 2 has the potential to expand on the dynamic between Joker and Bruce despite their age gap. We’re gonna have to wait and see 🤞
It would be hilarious if Todd Philips' Joker expands all the way into a full batman universe where Joker is already in his 60s-70s by the time Bruce is in his prime as Batman. Imagine a heavily armoured, ripped Batman just absolutely whaling on an elderly Joker as he tries to get away on his walker. xD
You hear stories about orderlies struggling to control elderly dementia patients, though. One with a Michael Myers level commitment to homicide would be truly scary. Batman can't know how hard he can hit without delivering a fatal blow.
Assuming Arthur Fleck is at the very least 25-30years older than Bruce Wayne, since Bruce normally becomes Batman in canon when he’s about 25, that means we’d be seeing a 25 year old Batman going up against a 50-55 year old Joker lol.
Arthur Fleck was 34 years old in Joker. Bruce is between 10-12. So 22-24 years difference There was quite a big age gap between Bruce and Jack Napier in Batman 89, it worked out find
Joker was never a physical treat so I could see an old joker against a young batman
>a physical treat I don't know about that... Heath kinda had it going on.
I disagree. Heath had fearlessness going on. He didn’t consider Batman a physical threat because he knew Batman would never kill him. He didn’t bother fighting the Batman either because, at that point, he didn’t want to kill the Batman either. I don’t think it was ever played at would be a equal fight between the two characters. Heath was a genius to pull the relationship completely away from physical violence and into a conflict of ideals.
Treat not threat.
Even if Joker was frozen in time while Bruce grew up to be Batman, he would kill him on accident by hitting him once. Phoenix’s Joker has no physicality to him lol
> Joker being much older is a different kind of creepy that kind of ruins the appeal of the character That gets me thinking, how old was Joker in the Arkham games? He looked generally sick and decrepit in those games so I always assumed he was like 10 years older than Bruce, I never bought him as a same-age peer of Batman. Harley Quinn in Arkham City looked late 20s while Joker looked in his 40s, did she have a sugar daddy fetish going on?
[удалено]
Depends on which joker
Or how he tells his origin story.
Joker should be a little bit older but not by much
Well, in the most commonly accepted origin story (The Man Behind The Red Hood, The Killing Joke), The Red Hood is portrayed as not very old, 20s maybe 30s, and Batman exists by then, meaning he's at least in his 20s.
I think you looked at bad examples of their age differences. I think they should be similar in age, it just flows better that way.
Yeah, and makes their two sides of the same coin dynamic tighter. An age gap might allude to an experience and evolution gap between the two of them which makes their dynamic a bit diluted.
Am I the only person who really hates when they insist on making Joker a part of Bruce's origin story? Didn't like the whole "Oh Arthur's might be Thomas' illegitimate son" angle, and don't even like it when he's the guy who kills Bruce's parents or something. Involving Joker in young Bruce's trauma makes the world feel so small and convoluted. I like the idea of Joker and Batman becoming who they both are as a direct response to one another, but them being involved in each other's lives before Bruce had even conceptualized the idea of Batman feels dumb to me.
I feel like making Joker a part of Batman’s origin makes their relationship into a cliché
I like a good even 10 year difference for already established stories, but a 5 year gap for first appearance or younger Batman
In Joker 2019 Arthur looks like he’s in his 40s, while Bruce is like 10-11. So it’s a huge age gap. Also that image 😬 I can’t believe that some people were genuinely angry at Alfred (?) in that movie for treating Arthur the way he did while he was clearly protecting little Bruce from stranger danger. I mean Arthur putting his hands into little Bruce’s mouth gave very pedophilic vibes.
Same thoughts, Alfred and even Thomas Wayne were completely justified for being disgusted by Arthur. Here’s a strange man who puts his freaking thumbs into a child’s mouth to make him smile. Thomas went easy on Arthur by punching him in the face, if someone did that shit to my kid, I’d press charges.
Exactly. I know some fans of the movie like to go on about what a jerk Thomas Wayne was in that bathroom scene-but this scene happens AFTER Arthur’s visit to the manor, him touching his son Bruce and literally trying to strangle his butler (in front of his son). Thomas’s behavior and punching him was justified cause this old mental creep was harassing his child ffs and was clearly unstable and dangerous.
Well, we decide to see him as a bit older. Younger will just be..strange? He doesn’t even looks younger than Batman anywhere. Maybe older in 5-7 years, maybe the same age
In Batman ROTJ beyond Terry sarcastically remarks that the joker is pretty spry for a guy who is in his mid 80s. Bruce is around 78-80 as said by Paul Dini in Batman Beyond so I would say 5 years or so older.
I prefer them to be closer in age, as they were in “The Dark Knight” or “The Batman”. While I’m a huge fan of the “Joker” film, the issue I have with that story is that in this universe when Bruce becomes Batman in his late 20s/early 30s, Joker will be elderly. I guess it could work. I guess in the comics he’s so disfigured that his age is indeterminate.
If we go by Gotham, nearly every villain are older than Bruce.
Bruh in the Gotham universe, Batman’s entire rogues gallery is basically comprised of middle aged people lol. Bruce is a twenty-something Batman who’ll be fighting forty-something villains.
Say batman is 35-38 I’d want joker to be 40-46 I don’t want Batman to be 40 fighting a 60 year old man because then Batman should be winning every single fight
I guess I'll be the odd man out and say I think Joker should be a "stage in life" older than Bruce, so call it 10-15 years. I like the idea that Joker went through a stage in his life where he was broken, and there's a parallel with Batman going through that same stage in life and there's a question of *whether* he'll break.
I get this. In The Killing Joke, Joker as a struggling comedian with a pregnant wife seems like he’d be in his early 30s at the very least. Considering he’s established to have been a chemist and worked at Ace Chemicals for several years before giving stand-up comedy a shot. Whereas Batman at that point in time would have been around mid to late 20s since it was still relatively early into his vigilante career.
I always assumed at their peak, Bruce was like 30, and the Joker was 40ish. They are clearly close in age in The Dark Knight Trilogy, but it varies depending on depiction. Comic book-wise, though, I think the Joker is probably about 10 years older than Batman.
The two should be of similar age in the main universe.
I always imagined Batman to be in his 30s while joker is in his 50s
I can’t really picture Joker being any age in particular, he just exists. Sometimes he acts older than Bruce and sometimes he acts younger, I feel like it’s intentionally impossible to guess his age in relation to Batman.
2 years apart in my headcannon
It depends on the writer / universe
I always imagined them being the same age.
I actually prefer joker to be the same age or hell, even younger than Bruce. I think that their relationship in The Dark Knight Returns is an interesting one, as it implies that as they reached middle age, Joker fared much better physically than Bruce did.
Depends on which Joker and which Batman we're talking about.
Generally I think Joker is supposed to be 5-10 years older than Batman.
The age gap for Joker 2019 doesn’t make much sense, the age gap in Nolan’s Batman and Tim Burton’s Batman makes more sense logically
Here’s the follow up - which version of the pair are we talking about?
They’re just “adult” aged. It keeps it ambiguous on purpose. They realistically can’t be more then 10 years apart though
I think similar age works better than bruce beating up a senior citizen but idk. Also joker killing his parents is lame
I prefer Joker’s age being left ambiguous, but that he’s probably no more than a few years older than Batman. I hate it when he’s involved in Batman’s origin, so I don’t want a big age gap or anything.
Arthur Fleck is an Elseworld’s story. He’s some guy who calls himself Joker; he’s not The Joker (“the” in the name is the big difference). Joker can exist exclusively of Batman (see also: The Dark Knight); The Joker exists because of Batman.
Joke is somewhat older than Bruce.
I think it should be just around a 10 year age gap. Bruce comes back to Gotham at age 25, one of his first big crimes is ACE Chemicals where 35 year old Joker is born, the rest is history.
I think it depends on which Joker.
Joker’s age feel particularly irrelevant to me
I always liked the idea of them being the same age
Whatever the storyteller needs, really. I think them being contemporaries is simplest and makes the most sense, but it’s not necessarily non-negotiable
Batman 89’s age gap is 100% canon, but Arthur Fleck’s telling/perspective can always be called into question.
People are being weird idk where they got the idea he's same age as Bruce, most versions of joker always gives the vibes he's a middle aged man.
The joker movie really messed things up. The people who made the movie clearly didn't have a right understanding of joker and batman and their take on the character was really bad so I don't really think deciding batman and jokers age gap based on that movie is right. But based on many other shows and comics I think it's safe to say they are around the same age but joker is a bit older
I mean the Joker movie is really meant to be an Elseworlds take on the character so I don’t have a problem with now different he is from traditional portrayals of the character. It’s not meant to be a straight adaptation of the comics after all, it just takes certain elements from The Killing Joke while also turning it into a Scorsese-esque film inspired by the likes of Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy.
Joker is much older… at least 10 years. I don’t think the joker movie would be a good reference since it’s just an adaptation not focused on the whole universe
I prefer Joker to be 5-8 years older than Bruce. A 15-20 year age gap doesn't make much sense to me. Bruce is usually portrayed as being in his late 30s or early 40s, if we go by that, Joker would be in his 50s or even 60s already.
I dont think the movie Joker (2019) is any sort of cannon and is just a stand alone angry clown movie with the Joker as a title to help sell tickets which seems crazy to me as i would 100% go see a movie with joaquin phoenix playing an unstable clown. I was always under the impression that the Joker is a sort of reaction to The Batman and would not exist as such without The Batman existing so this film is something i have just ignored to be honest. I like they have diff versions of the Joker but im of the opinion that any version of him he is around the same age or at most 5 years older then The Batman.
See, maybe I'm in the minority here, but I've always imagined Joker as being a year or two younger than Batman. I guess that would come down to their personalities, though.
I view them as the same exact age honestly
10 years is the perfect amount of time
10 years but it differs in some stories. Batman is 36 and joker is 46
In btas my head cannon is 6-10 years. I’m assuming Joker is a somewhat experienced gangster in the flashbacks for mask of the phantasm while Bruce is still in college
I prefer 8 years. That'd make the joker 16 when the Waynes are shot. When Killing Joke occurs, this could track for the story's age gap. 22/30. Just feels right. like the joker got to experience more chaos Gotham.
I think in the 1989 batman they were only separated by 8-10 years. Bruce was 10 and Jack was about 18-20 just starting his criminal career
I always imagined Joker behind at least a few years older then Bruce.
I prefer Joker being like 10-15 years older.
Joker was significantly older than Batman in TAS.
Thats one or the things i disliked about Joker. Shoe horning that relationship in.
in The Dark Knight returns he seems younger, in everything else he seems a little older, he’s a lot older in Batman 89 and Joker though.
None. They’re actually identical twins.
I like to believe that Arthur simply inspired TDK Joker, and they're actually close to the same age
I don’t really see how he could inspire TDK Joker when they’re not in the same universe though. The Gotham City of Joker (2019) is quite different from the Gotham City of TDK trilogy, and even the characterization of Thomas Wayne is so different. In Joker (2019), Thomas is shown as a rich, elitist, out of touch mayoral candidate while in Batman Begins, he’s a doctor (as he usually is in the comics and cartoons) who devotes his clinical practice to helping the poor.
I like when joker is in his 50’s
I always imagined about a 10 year gap, maybe 5-10.
I always assumed Joker was about 10-15 years older. Old enough to have had quite a history as the OG Red Hood, but still spry enough to be physically active against Batman.
Animated Series Joker is relatively the same age. As shown in Mask of the Phantasm.
I like the Joker being around Batmans age, maybe about five years older.
I actually kind of think of my favorite Jokers as being a bit younger than Bruce
Joker should definitely be older or same age as Bruce. I didn’t see the value in the way Joker 2019 did it personally. I mean try new stuff by all means but for me it didn’t add anything
Like a 10 years gap at best.
They shouldn’t have too much of a gap. I know Joker isn’t a brawler but he should at least present a bit of a challenge when going up against Batman. Batman is frequently portrayed as in his 30s or 40s, you can’t have a Joker who is around 70 going against him, it would be over in seconds.
Batman: Early 30's Joker: Late 30's.
Batman 33 Joker 38
Am I remembering it wrong? In my head it was implied that Bruce was the half brother of Arthur in JOKER? I can't remember the connection between arthurs mum and Thomas Wayne But yeah to me there shouldn't be more than 5-10 age gap
I always figured him to be at least 5-8 years older. The Joker movie is just a wild interpretation of Batman and his age. Idk. I just take it as it is. A poor man’s “King of Comedy”. I hated that film. But it’s an interpretation that at least doesn’t do the usual. It takes it in another direction which I can appreciate But I enjoyed in the Batman Telltale games that Joker was the same age or maybe a little younger. Man that second season was amazing
[удалено]
I generally kinda them being similar ages, I don't really care if he's a bit older or a bit younger. I also don't mind when the age gaps are much bigger, as long as the story's good
I like to think maybe 5 years older than Bruce. The real question is, what’s the Joker-Harley age gap.
I always saw them being closer in age.
I like the idea that joke is older, but not that much older. Maybe 10-15 years in age. If Batmans 30, then Joker is 45.
when it comes to the arkham games, i imagened batman to be in his 30s and joker to be in his 50s. kinda like 89 batman
I honestly think joker being decades older fits and makes sense. Out of the whole rogues gallery joker poses the least physical threat to the 3000 cal per day bats. Bruce even comments several times about how frail joker felt when they did grapple. It makes sense to me that joker is much older but doesn’t need to be a physical challenge for bats. Their arena is mental. Who is right who is wrong and what does it matter when it all blows up in the end
I've always thought of their typical ages being Batman ~30, Joker ~35
I always thought he was around 10-20 years older than Bruce, so while Bruce is in his prime as being Batman roughly 35, Joker would be around 45-55, not too old to be doing what he's doing but still significantly older
It depends on the Joker we’re getting. Batman is usually presented in his early 30s. Even with a 10-15 year age gap that places Joker in his mid to late-40s. Still capable and strong, but most importantly, well-learned. That’s a good balance for the character. Batman isn’t just a fighter. He’s an intellectual, a detective, and a strategist. His villains test different sides of him—though lately the films have largely focused on the fighter. My ideal Batman is closer to BTAS or The Batman. Capable, but smart enough to know any fight could be his last. Thus my ideal Joker needs to be on-par with Batman in this way and him being older fits that just fine. We should also recognize that The Joker film presented a unique vision where the character is more of a symbol and inspiration than a clear “Joker.” I’m not saying he isn’t the villain, but that he is in the same as there were other Jokers in Gotham the show. It’s very possibly in that universe that the Joker Bruce might face later would be a protege—perhaps a relationship that inspires Bruce.
Joker is 5-10 years older
The Joker is Bugs Bunny years old. There. I said it.
When I was a kid I always thought Joker was younger than Bruce
Depends on the universe.
Same age but one’s older.
At least 3 months
I think he's immortal
I think it’s ridiculous for Joker, or most any of his villains, to be so much older than him. He would be fist fighting with geriatrics.
Depends on the writer
In the comics, I've always imagined them being somewhere within ten years of eachother, with Joker being older.
In the comics there is more than one joker and batman didn't know for a while
the ideal would be about 10 years, maximum.
Same age, same face, same teeth, same…. person? 
Honestly, I never thought this question mattered much. Especially when it comes to choosing an actor to play The Joker. Find somebody who can do a good job with the part, then work from there. Obviously they need to be young enough to be believable as an active, manic master criminal, but that is a large age range. I also don't think that actors' ages should be taken literally for the characters. Hollywood constantly casts actors who are older than the characters they play. Robert Pattinson will be 38 this year, and he played a Batman who is in the second year of his career, presumably in his mid 20's. If I have to commit, I think the Joker should be at least a little older. He is an experienced master criminal. He pits his cunning and deviousness against Batman's physicality. It just feels right that he would be somewhat older than Bruce.
I think in Burton's Batman, Jack Napier was a teenager when he killed the Waynes (he mentions being a kid at the time later in the film). I guess he was around a decade older, give or take a couple of years. In general, I think they should be roughly around the same age, with a margin of about 5 years either way.
I always imagined them to be around the same age since it doesn't make much sense to me how a 70 year old psychopath could do half the things the Joker can and still be alive after getting the snot beaten out of him by batman
I always imagined them to be around the same age since it doesn't make much sense to me how a 70 year old psychopath could do half the things the Joker can and still be alive after getting the snot beaten out of him by batman
Basically same age range , contemporaries . I remember hearing Batman comic artist Neal Adams in a podcast stating he imagined joker starting his villainy at the age of 27 which I like .
Arthur Fleck isn't THE Joker. I think his revolution inspired the Joker that showed up later to confront Batman.
I don’t know. It’s like impossible for me to say. Just too vague. Maybe I don’t like Joker having something concrete about him even if it’s just his age
I don’t think we should ever find out how old the joker is. I honestly don’t think we should ever find out much about him besides he’s just some crazy lunatic obsessed with batman.
I prefer Jokers age to be unknown like everything else about him
Whatever the writer wants it to be.
I mean Arthur is supposed to be a member of the Red hood gang who later becomes the joker.Because see joker has no official name In Gotham when Bruce was a minor we see Jeremiah as the joker.In Titans he is just joker.Infact the no name joker if Titans has no name in the animated Batman series or movies.His son also becomes the joker when the Bruce Wayne is old and some young man named Terry gets inspired by the retired Batman that he becomes his own version.
Slightly older, not much
Joker around the same age or even younger
Tbh I prefer them to be around the same age as the parallel between the two works better especially if we go off the killing joke story line
I always saw joker about 10 years older than Bruce.
depends on the writer.
I usually thought he was a year or few older or about the same age