|
There’s a lot of hot takes but the one I will outright disagree with is “this movie needed a sense of humor.” It was nice to watch a comic book movie that didn’t have a single loving quip for once
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:29 |
|
|
It certainly had dark humor, but it was nice to see a movie take itself seriously enough to keep the tension. The apartment scenes were more frightening than any jumpscares could be.Tart Kitty posted:The Joker we see on the talk show feels like the Joker present in most Batman media, except... I'm not sure where it comes from. Vir fucked around with this message at 02:04 on Oct 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 02:02
|
|
|
We saw this in our local theater and sat next to a guy who laughed during inappropriate scenes. Definitely had a weird laugh, too. Really added something to the movie, lemme tell ya.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Was it Joaquin Phoenix?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 02:27
|
|
|
Saw it last night, and overall it was good. Not "Movie Of The Year" quality but "probably worth checking out, and if you hate it that makes sense to me too" However, there are a few things that irk me. I think they deviated from the character a bit too much and humanised him almost to the point of generic. The general idea behind The Joker is that he was a nice, totally generic guy who was a gently caress up. Couldn't do anything right but the sort of guy you'd always have a beer with, but then he'd insist on paying for your beer even though you knew he absolutely couldn't afford it because he just got fired. Again. Then he has a monumentally hosed up, traumatic day which turned him into the most nihilistic motherfucker on the planet. Everything is meaningless, everybody is a piece of poo poo and while you may find him grotesque, terrifying and abhorrent, given the right circumstances anybody could become as evil as him. He then spends the rest of his life proving this nihilistic point with his crazy hosed up schemes. He was never really in it for money, or revenge or power (though he did enjoy power) it was to prove that laws and morals are bullshit ideas that we hide behind, justify our existence with and lie about and that we're all as hosed up as him. These are the things that make The Joker special and unique and engaging. What we needed to see from this movie is to sympathise with the character as Arthur, then be terrified of him as Joker who has out-smarted and out-evilled the entire world. In this film, you wouldn't want to have a beer with Arthur because motherfucker is CREEPY. He started off the movie insane. This means the fall-from-grace for the Joker isn't a good guy who goes crazy and evil, we've got a good, albeit crazy guy, turning evil. So we don't really get the full fall-from-grace which makes the character engaging. That fall-from-grace is vital to the character because he's trying to get all of society to fall from grace to realise what they really are. On top of that, the poo poo that happened to him didn't happen on ONE bad day. I feel like that again reduces the impact. One of the reasons why Joker schemes often involved shock tactics was because he would be trying to shock people into insanity\evil. So to lose that "one day" element kinda reduces the character a bit. Secondly, the Joker is pretty much the only character who can out-smart anybody. He behaves like a giggling jackass, but in reality he's about 10 steps ahead of you (which is why he's giggling and laughing so much because he's having an excellent time and you're doing the exact thing he wanted you to do). In this film, he's mostly passive. Most things happen TO him and the things that happen as a RESULT of him, weren't planned. When he killed those guys on the train, he didn't mean to become a symbol of class. He was just acting in self-defence. He didn't mean to do such a bad job of comedy he'd end up on that TV show. My friend felt that he went onto the TV show to kill De Niro. As in that was his whole plan. That's a pretty Joker plan, except I read it as that Joker was going to kill HIMSELF on air, and it wasn't until De Niro provoked him that he impulsively changed his plan. I felt they spent too long making the character sympathetic and there wasn't enough malevolence in the character. There was a TONNE of malevolence in the performance, but the story kinda watered it down. The movie was good, but if you took away the clown makeup, we don't have much of a Joker character here. We've got a well acted, well shot depiction of social retribution, but not so much the fall-from-grace, evil, one-step-ahead nihilistic motherfucker that The Joker is meant to be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 02:37
|
|
|
H13 posted:
Your friend was wrong and you were correct his intentions to die on live TV were really really blatant. He even was gonna crack his "I hope my death will make more cents than my life" joke, but yeah, he changed his mind in the decisive moment. After all, like he said, he had nothing to lose. This is an early Joker, and we can all pretend he still doesn't what the hell, neither has the mind to make elaborated plans. He didn't even go full theatrical as the character usually does.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 02:55
|
|
|
I think to summarise my gripes. This wasn't so much of a Joker, fall-from-grace into nihilistic, evil genius character as it was watching a mentally ill guy doing bad stuff because he got dealt a bad hand. AKA: They kinda turned the Joker into somebody who fits the profile of most typical spree shooters. Which is topical and all, but doesn't quite fit that "Joker" niche.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 03:20
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 03:29
|
|
|
H13 posted:I think to summarise my gripes. Yeah, they really were just aping Taxi Driver in this regard in particular. They worked backwards, customized the character a bit, but hit the same thematic beats in a more cynical and juvenile way. Joker isn't Arthur. Really, you can't do a character study of the Joker, because anyone in the process of going crazy is ultimately pathetic upon close inspection. He has to be completely indecipherable and too far gone to study. WB was desperate when they green-lit this and they continue to lack any clear vision as to what their cinematic universe is going to be, so why not give it a shot?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
We should thank whoever was the 1% that disliked it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 03:59
|
|
|
It’s 58 on metacritic
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 04:36
|
|
|
Quickly, someone like it so much so it gets up to %420
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 04:58
|
|
|
I found this movie... kind of boring, I guess? I kept wondering when things were really going to go places, and then it just... stopped.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 05:57
|
|
|
H13 posted:I think to summarise my gripes. I mostly agree with your analysis, but I also really liked that. I think it was a generic "society" and "mental illness" story, but I liked that because it was trying to be just grounded enough to seem realistic in the most extreme circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 06:16
|
|
|
Here's the full lyrics to "Send In the Clowns": Isn't it rich? Are we a pair? Me here at last on the ground, You in mid-air, Where are the clowns? Isn't it bliss? Don't you approve? One who keeps tearing around, One who can't move, Where are the clowns? There ought to be clowns? Just when I'd stopped opening doors, Finally knowing the one that I wanted was yours Making my entrance again with my usual flair Sure of my lines No one is there Don't you love farce? My fault, I fear I thought that you'd want what I want Sorry, my dear! But where are the clowns Send in the clowns Don't bother, they're here Isn't it rich? Isn't it queer? Losing my timing this late in my career But where are the clowns? There ought to be clowns Well, maybe next year
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 06:44
|
|
|
Did he kill Zazie Beats? I like how they left it kind of ambiguous so maybe we're supposed to decide for ourselves. I don't think he did it, but I'm honestly not sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 07:38
|
|
|
T3hRen3gade posted:Did he kill Zazie Beats? I like how they left it kind of ambiguous so maybe we're supposed to decide for ourselves. I don't think he did it, but I'm honestly not sure. Pretty sure. There’s sirens in the next scene. Seconding that the humour in this was very present albeit very dark. The tall guy, short guy scene in particular was hilarious, just grim as gently caress. My cinema wasn’t into it at all, which makes it even funnier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 10:18
|
|
|
well why not posted:Pretty sure. There’s sirens in the next scene.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 11:00
|
|
|
It's a tricky one because it would be a *really* good film if people didn't go into it expecting batman. The film it looks most like isn't taxi driver but requiem for a dream, the diet pill subplot. I watched it last night and enjoyed it at the time, it lead to a really good conversation after and I actually like it even more today having read a couple of reviews that missed the mark. The reason being, some of the reviews rightly bring up that a lot of the plot feels cheesy and forced. Which is totally valid if you grant that it's actually happening. I'm not convinced that basically any of it is. It's the story of his schitzophrenia medication wearing off. Every now and then some part of the plot is shown explicitly to be fantasy. The girlfriend, in particular, you're watching thinking she's the most unbelievable character ever. The entire TV show plot is like that. It looks exactly like the TV show in requiem for a dream. There's no indication at all that there is even a camera in the comedy club, let alone that his 'clip' got shown on tv in 1950 or whatever the gently caress. We already get an explicit indication that the TV set is Arthur's fantasy. We know for sure his first appearance on the show is imaginary. The entire clown vigilante thing is entirely ambiguous how much is real and how much is a megalomaniacal delusion. We also know that riots and unrest are likely to start as a result of the garbage collection crisis. We also 'know' Thomas Wayne wasn't shot by a dude in a clown mask. The film is shot entirely from Arthur's perspective. Every moment of every scene. I mean, where does he even get those fancy joker clothes? It just skirts the 'it was all a dream' cliche by having occasional moments where something happens incompatible with the fantasy and it shatters. We watch the delusion of him having a girlfriend fade away when it no longer holds up. I think it's a lot better than a lot of people are giving it credit for itt and it'll grow on people, even without a second viewing. jiggerypokery fucked around with this message at 12:27 on Oct 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 12:20
|
|
|
jiggerypokery posted:
Yeah there is, the cameras pipe a feed to the backstage area. You see Arthur watching other comics on it before his set.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 12:43
|
|
|
my bad
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 13:31
|
|
|
Liquid Dinosaur posted:So how will this universe's batman reflect that the film he saw prior to his parents' murder wasn't Zorro or The Mask of Zorro, but rather Zorro, The Gay Blade? What if they were going to see Blowout?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 13:40
|
|
|
I had read mixed reviews going from one extreme of masterpiece to another of complete shallowness with like no middle so I wasn't sure what to expect. But I liked it overall. I don't get the impression that the movie actually thinks it's all that deep even with the music and direction. I think it's a very straight forward character study just a mostly serious one. It could have used a little more dark humour maybe but I didn't mind. Phoenix was brilliant as one would expect. As a little stand alone alternate universe Joker, I think this works. I thought it was kind of funny but a little weird choice how after he is dancing on the steps all triumphantly as Joker, the detectives come and he immediately runs away. Maybe the could have had him walking a bit after or do another scene before the chase. Just felt oddly jarring. But it's clearly intentional. I'm not sure I liked the ending too much, I think it could have ended sooner. Kind of just kept extending a tad more and didn't really know when to end. Phoenix's performance also makes me curious to see him in more of a full traditional Joker role where he could really sell the confident style, mastermind Joker. The glimpses of it here (not mastermind but confident) are really well done.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 16:07
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 16:57
|
|
|
Blast Fantasto posted:There’s a lot of hot takes but the one I will outright disagree with is “this movie needed a sense of humor.” My audience laughed a number of times. None of them were quips. Specifically the little person trying to leave the room
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
well why not posted:Pretty sure. There’s sirens in the next scene. For the record, I'm not saying we needed Marvel style quips all over the place. I'm saying we needed more scenes like this one, which was the best part of the movie by a mile.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 17:06
|
|
|
The only really outré thing in this I feel was the implication that Arthur possibly had pedophilic tendencies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 18:44
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:The only really outré thing in this I feel was the implication that Arthur possibly had pedophilic tendencies. The Gary Glitter song?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 18:52
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:The only really outré thing in this I feel was the implication that Arthur possibly had pedophilic tendencies. Uh? What how when?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
Necrothatcher posted:The Gary Glitter song? That, plus all the interactions he initiates are with children, in his mind he has a childlike affect that others appreciate, in the report they allude to but don't outright say he was sexually abused (his mother was battered, he was 'abused'), he doesn't even pretend to understand adult sexual innuendo, he specifically fantasises about a woman his age as a guardian angel. The creepy encounter with Bruce is as close as they get to it. More directly, it just seems like he's developmentally arrested, and his undeveloped sexuality is part of that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 19:00
|
|
|
They shouldn't have had the very final scene. how the gently caress does he get locked up when all of Gotham was rising up to riot and busted him out? Was that a delusion?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:They shouldn't have had the very final scene. how the gently caress does he get locked up when all of Gotham was rising up to riot and busted him out? Was that a delusion? There will definitely be a camp that argues the vast majority of what we saw was a delusion. Early on in the movie Arthur mentions that he’s been institutionalized and we see a brief flashback of him smashing his head against the window in an asylum that resembles the Arkham we see in the movie. I don’t agree with this but it could be argued that he never left asylum and the movie is all a delusion. You could argue that Phillips is going for something akin to the fantasy interpretations of the Taxi Driver ending where everything we see after a given point is his fantasy of how he wishes things would go - he takes over his favorite show, inspires a movement, receives adulation from the masses, dramatically escapes capture, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 19:18
|
|
|
It was all a dream interpretations are lazy as gently caress (also boring). I mean, sure this movie opens itself up to it more than most, but they go out of their way to depict the delusion of the relationship so why wouldn't they do the same if the entirety of the film was one? This film isn't some puzzlebox to be 'solved', it's got a totally straightforward narrative that arguably over-explains what's happening.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 19:25
|
|
|
Necrothatcher posted:It was all a dream interpretations are lazy as gently caress (also boring). I want to underline that I agree it was all a dream interpretations are lame and not personally what I subscribe too, just saying that those interpretations are out there. Personally I think it’s more interesting to me if the explicit delusions we’re shown (which are very explicit) are the only ones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:They shouldn't have had the very final scene. how the gently caress does he get locked up when all of Gotham was rising up to riot and busted him out? Was that a delusion? I got the feeling that everything in the police car onwards could be a fantasy. Like the trend i spotted throughout the film was that almost everything good that happened to Arthur turned out to be a fantasy. The only 'real' good thing that turned out to be real was him getting invited onto the TV show, but then that too turned out to be a sham. It's almost like the theme is that there's not a single good thing that happens to him in the film. This could carry on into the ending, where he's fantasising that he's responsible for the anarchy in the streets, rescued and then praised by the rioters who then murder the Waynes turning Bruce into an orphan like he is. All, pretty much good things that fly in the face of the trend of the film. His fantasy about the Wayne's being murdered would then be the joke that the doctor 'wouldn't get' at the end (hence the flashback to it). Edit: Actually, now that i think about it Isn't the scene in the alleyway the only scene in the film where Arthur isn't physically present in some capacity? That should reinforce that the Wayne's getting killed is his fantasy Kin fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Oct 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
About the end scene: a lot of people have theorized that it takes place some time into the future. The hospital looks much more modern and shiny compared to earlier in the film when it was all grungy and cast in a yellow light. Arthur also has some grey stubble.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
Good movie, truly uncomfortable in all the right ways. I agree that the take of "it's all in his head" is pretty shallow and boring. I do think there are more to it than the obvious fantasies though. One has to consider that virtually the entire movie is shown from his perspective. The one thing that isn't is the Wayne murders, (which smells of executive fiddling anyway) so the events are shown in a light that will confirm and underline Arthur's point of view: he WANTS the whole world against him, because that will "justify" his violent retorts. One thing I'm certain of: the subway murders went down differently in reality. The whole thing was very contrived, including the fact that the three men were harassing a woman. While he didn't explicitly try and stop them, it melds quite well with the whole "heroic white knight" concept that I feel a lot of loners want to imagine themselves as. I'm sure the murders happened, since the rest of the movie revolves around them; but I'm fairly certain that the actual events was quite different. My friend brought up the possibility that he didn't do it at all; he just heard it on the news and his brain filled in the rest. Visually, there was a lot of sudden "flashes" of darkness during that scene, like, complete darkness. I feel that's significant, somehow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
How much money did Gary Glitter get from this movie?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 21:00
|
|
Chuka Umana posted:How much money did Gary Glitter get from this movie? Probably not enough to make up for going to prison again
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 21:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:29 |
|
|
I think it’s all real and the “fantasy / drea idea is a bit pointless. The stuff happens to Arthur in that it’s true to him. Its inconsequential if it’s occurred to others or not because he’s reacting to it and it’s his story. I think the final scene is from when he was locked up as a flashback. It doesn’t really matter when it takes place though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 21:13
|
|