Anna Daniels
Assuming that The Batman does get at least one follow-up picture, it seems silly to think that the Joker won’t get involved at some point. There’s one thing, however, that we know for sure: that it won’t be the version portrayed by Joaquin Phoenix in last year’s billion-dollar hit Joker.
We know this for more than one reason, not the least of which is that Joker‘s director, Todd Phillips, shot any speculation on the matter full of holes long before the flick was even released. Asked about the possibility of Phoenix’s Arthur Fleck having a run-in with Pattinson’s Caped Crusader at some point, Phillips flatly stated, “No, definitely not… There will be many more Jokers, I’m sure, in the future” (via Variety).
Since then, we’ve gotten photos from the set of The Batman which strongly indicate that the picture is set no earlier than the mid-’00s. Considering that Joker was set in 1981, this would mean that Arthur Fleck would be just a bit too old to take on the young, sprightly Batman who will be featured in Reeves’ movies.
For that matter, the 56-year old Depp is probably a bit long in the tooth to be considered for the role (to say nothing of fan-favorite choice Willem Dafoe, who is even older). No, the next actor to step into the Joker’s clown shoes is likely to be much closer in age to the 33-year old Pattinson — even if, as another recent rumor suggests, he won’t be squaring off against Batman at all.
Written by: Looper
