this might be a wild ride of a post but hear me out for a sec… there is nothing wrong with taking the route that the joker (or more specifically arthur fleck, since that’s where the current outrage is directed at) is written as a sympathic character and/or a victim of unpleasant circumstances.
we don’t know yet for certain if the joker is going to be played as a sympathetic character, but it appears to be from the trailer that we are at least supposed to somewhat like and/or sympathise with arthur fleck to some degree and this is fine, honestly, it’s totally fine I promise you.
firstly, a fictional character does not need to be wholesome and good to be liked, enjoyed or sympathised with - - well written characters are more effective when they’re fully fleshed out and are flawed and complex in nature. that’s not to say wholly evil or wholly good characters are lacking, I’m just saying that often great storytelling comes from contradictory and complex character development. the story is in the character, and for that you need more than simply evil or simply good acts to tell it.
this covered, joker - - despite people clinging on to his CHAOTIC EVIL alignment in order to make a point of him being badly written or a bad character - - he can be interpreted in all kinds of ways that make him a very good vessel for character study. he has not only an extensive comic and film history to pull from, but so many colourful variations and interpretations. the joker can be written to all kinds of extremes, so attaching yourself to ONE version of this character is limiting.
arthur fleck won’t even be the first time he’s been written as a sympathetic character. the most recent to date being telltales version of the joker (john doe) who for most joker fans he was an incredibly refreshing version of the joker to explore. he wasn’t blameless or innocent and telltale didn’t hide this fact- - which I think will likely be the same to say for arthur fleck - - but he also wasn’t the basic crazy evil people like to constantly remind joker fans that he is.
that said, the joker is a villain. the joker has, in the many years of his existence in comics, committed heinous acts of violence and evil. but as happens in the comic book world, so have almost all comic book characters, INCLUDING the heroes. he is a villain and antagonists exist to create problems, issues, tradegies for our heroes. without them, we don’t get heroes, so it’s fine for him to have done villainous things. only, we don’t have to cling to them. characters change and grow and get rewritten or remolded by different writers with different visions and opinions on them. the joker should be no exception. arthur fleck is no exception.
joker fans who have read joker extensively have already seen the crippling simpler evil versions of joker, as well as the more developed, weirdly tragic or sympathetic versions of the joker too.
arthur fleck can exist anywhere within this spectrum. a good character doesn’t have to be an entirely good character morally. to suggest that the joker can only exist as a evil villain is limiting what the joker actually is. he can be anything from a struggling performer/trickster to an ultra violent supervillain - - and he can also be both at the same time too.
It’s a very convenient and common thing in life to choose to see bad people, criminals, murderers and all of the wicked people of the world and think that they are just that. wicked. evil. that they don’t have families or sympathies or issues or likeable personality traits – that they’re human too. but this is the case. even the most heinous and cruel people in life have lived and been more than their heinous and cruel acts. it’s scary to think about which is why we prefer to catagorise these people as soullessly evil with no redeeming or sympathetic qualities whatsoever. its not to say we have to forgive them, or like them or agree with them or accept them, but there is simply truth in the fact they are still more than a mindless empty avatar for evil only, as uncomfortable as that is. now, we don’t have to debate this fully since the joker is fictional and we can enjoy fictional characters but the point remains, there is clever storytelling to be had to delve into character study and fully explore a character that can be both complex and uncomfortable, sympathetic but unforgiven.
liking this interpretation (or any other version for that matter) does not reflect upon the intelligence or moral standing of the fans who are excited for it. the direction they want to go with the joker in this movie is fine - - and it’s perfectly fine also to be excited for and enjoy it too.
