'Joker' Movie: Alec Baldwin to Play Bruce Wayne's Father

Baldwin is the latest high-profile actor to join the project, which is scheduled to begin shooting in two weeks. Robert De Niro, Deadpool 2 breakout Zazie Beetz and Glow actor Marc Maron are already on the call sheet.

Phoenix is set to portray the DC Comics villain in a film that is more moderately budgeted and darker than the studio’s other DC-based movies that make up its shared universe. The project is also described as more of a dark character study than a crime thriller, with Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy as the tonal watchwords.

Baldwin has been tapped for the role of Thomas Wayne, who in Batman lore is the father of Bruce Wayne, the future caped crusader.

But this being a movie project that will veer off-center from the traditional Batman canon, sources say the script paints Thomas Wayne as a cheesy and tanned businessman who is more in the mold of a 1980s Donald Trump.

“Well, the murder of Bruce Wayne’s parents was a defining factor in his decision to become the Bat Man, so as long as the scene is in there, it will be worth watching.

And we can pretend it is real!”

That’d be almost as good as that movie where Tom Cruise got killed about 40 times.

None of the Spider-Men have been bookish nerds with glasses.

In the first one he had the glasses until he got the spider powers, and then he didn't need them. In the first two versions, he was certainly a top student in ability, though the second one gave him more "gear" than the comic version could have afforded. At some point the job as a photographer will become as anachronistic as Clark Kent taking a job with the Daily Planet so he can have access to the teletype. I do not approve of the more recent de-aging of Aunt May.

Ben was dead, murdered. She was old. She's in NYC, and NOT in the nice part. Her son is brilliant but not always aware. She has good reason to be a drudge and a worry wart. The first series got her in the spirit. The second one seemed to portray her as a wise, sanguine Dutch or Scandinavian woman, the one in Civil Wars was purposefully very attractive and youthful, able to pass as Peter's older sister.

Even someone like me who only has a passing acquaintance with Silver Age Marvel knows better.

I was unfamiliar with the comic version of Thor, and relied on my knowledge of Norse mythology (which the movie totally messed up, especially regarding Loki).

Thanks for the info.

Superman well done would have been enough to get people to notice the picture

Christopher Reeves wasn't that much of a draw. That Brando was in the picture was a plus. I believe the Brando story got the movie publicity on 60 Minutes and the nightly news back when people still watched the big three networks.

What Marvel has gotten right, and Warner has gotten wrong from the beginning is that Marvel puts its comic books on the screen. Warner makes crappy modern movies using its comic book characters as licensed properties.

Warner owns DC. The film rights to Marvel characters and stories are spread out over three studios, and Marvel Studios (part of Disney) puts out an awful lot of movies (Sony and Universal are the other two companies with rights to some characters).

What that means is you get all kinds of Marvel movies all the time to the point where it's hard to care about any film or franchise. Even the better movies, like the Iron Man series, get buried under the output.

You may get tired of Warner's DC superhero movies, but I've really gotten sick of the cookie cutter Marvel flicks.

But then I always was DC, and never cared for Marvel.

I was always DC as well (unless you count Golden Age Fawcett, hence my screen name). I almost cried when Warner bought out DC and made a woman who didn’t read comic books the publisher (I was about 10).

Warner does own DC, though various rights (e.g. the Adam West Batman) had been sold off before Warner bought it. I recall there were some complications with Wonder Woman, as well. Even before Warner bought DC, the company was pretty stupid with licensing Superman and the others. For instance, when they negotiated the ‘66 Broadway play, they insisted on separate fees for EACH DC character.

I only watch the Marvel flicks because my kids want to see them. It is BECAUSE I wasn’t a Marvel reader that I can watch them dispassionately. When I found out that Superman was having relations out of wedlock in Man of Steel (or one of the others), I could not watch it, nor could I let my children watch it. The Marvel flicks tend to stay away from that garbage.

Even back in the ‘80s, Warner was peddling crap like the Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.

Is it that hard to take an old Weisinger-era script, or a Bronze age Cary Bates story, dress it up, and make a movie out of it? And good grief, Lex Luthor (and Dr. Sivana) are evil scientists. They are NOT greedy businessmen!

I did have my children watch the 1940s Green Hornet serials so they get some exposure to the “classics”. Unfortunately, the recent Green Hornet movie, as well as Green Lantern, seemed to be making fun of the characters, and not in a good way. At least they kept the Black Beauty as a mid-60s Imperial. That was the coolest of the Superhero cars.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.