Joker Spoiler/Theories Thread

[AnamorphicWidescreen]

Originally Posted by BStecke

Yeah, it's kind of weird to think that not THAT long ago it was accepted to that degree. I'm a nurse and obviously we get a ton of old folks who come in for lung issues related to smoking. It's sad because a lot of people now look at it like, oh you should've known better, but back then they really didn't.

I strongly disagree with this. I'm pushing 50, and have known smoking caused lung cancer as soon as I became aware of such things. This was drummed into me starting when I was a kid/pre-teen back in the late '70's/early '80's.

Going along with this, as a kid I clearly remember looking at some old magazines from the late 1960's & the cigarette advertisements in there clearly had the warning by the surgeon general stating that smoking caused lung cancer. So, people have known about the risks of smoking for over 50 years - if not longer.

Back in the late '70's/early '80's, a friend of my family smoked like a chimney - he was about 30 years older than me. He recently died of lung cancer; this was a horrible way to go, and negatively affected not only him but his family. The secondhand smoke also probably caused his son (now an adult) to develop asthma at a young age.

So, f@$@ smokers. Even older folks now who developed lung cancer in their later years knew about the dangers, but chose to ignore them. And, not only did they pollute their own lungs & put themselves at risk, but because of second-hand smoke got a lot of other people sick as well. A-holes.

And, these days I still see younger people smoking! I was recently in Portland, Oregon (which is considered a "hipster" city - ha ha) and I felt like I was at a smoker's convention. WTF?!

Originally Posted by drush9999

Smoking was seen as an unhealthy activity for anyone athletic prior to the 2nd world war, as it reduced lung capacity etc. It causing a number of diseases and cancer came after many decades of the masses smoking, roughly during the 50s and 60s. Secondary smoke causing issues for non-smokers came along more recently 80s/90s, which is why you could smoke almost anywhere.

Agreed.

[CyberpunkCentral]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mend...ature=youtu.be

[postmodel]

i hope this makes sense...

If Bruce and Fleck are half brothers and that's supposed to drive Fleck's obsession with Bruce, then what would drive his obsession with Batman? If Fleck as Joker learns about this vigilante going around taking out bad guys at what point would he connect the dots that Bruce and Batman are the same? Is he a petty criminal now being thwarted by Batman? If he ever makes that connection, would he purposely avoid Bruce and now focus on Batman? I only bring this up because I remember seeing a lot of "that would explain his obsession with Batman!" comments on social media that just didn't sit well with me. IMO, it explains nothing. Only if he finds out who Batman is will he then see Batman as an object of obsession.

Not to keep going in circles, but I feel like it would undercut the Batman/Joker coupling if Joker knows he's Bruce Wayne from the start. In turn, Batman/Bruce would also be aware of who Joker/Fleck is. No real mystery for either party.

Anyway, these are just the ramblings of a man who is not a fan of the Joker and Batman having the same father.