|
JOHN SKELETON posted:I assumed this was just a one-off because Joaquin Phoenix probably wouldn't sign off to do a bunch of sequels, but sure, if there was a sequel that somehow worked well, then retroactively in the context of a series of movies, yeah, those Bruce scenes would probably start to feel more appropriate. Nolans Batman movies sucked to me. Bale is an interesting actor but those movies only allowed him to serve as an oscillating prop toward whatever villain appeared, and those villains carried the movies. I think that was intentional, regardless, he was either screaming or quietly pretending to be the Bruce Wayne playboy. A Batman movie in this new Joker Universe could be very good if it's allowed to be actor driven, the melodrama of Batman as a character is only briefly served in Nolans (or anyone elses) Batman films. I think Ben Affleck had a more interesting Wayne character even though the rest of the movie around him was bad. Joker felt like they finally gave an interesting subtext to Batman. I want to see the Batman film that hyperfocuses on the fact he is A) privileged, and therefore incapable of feeling what those he protects feel, and B) Bitter for the fact his ideal life as a billionaire was taken from him in a problematic childhood that he tries to avoid. To answer your question, I can definitely see a Batman with his gadgets and high tech toys in this new universe, it comes down to how its presented. Batman movies spend a little time on Wayne being the conflicted and rich hero, I want to see the Batman movie that focuses as entirely on Bruce Wayne as this did on Joker. But, that depends on casting, because Joker is elevated entirely by how good Joaquin Pheonix is. So, side note, who do you think would pull of Batman in a series like this? I honestly thought of Adam Driver, because I'm corny and think he plays a way better conflicted character than Star Wars deserves.
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 12:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
JOHN SKELETON posted:Huh, interesting that many people felt that scene worked. In the group I watched it with, we all sort of agreed that scene was awkward in the wrong way. Maybe I'll feel different on a rewatch. I felt the same way as well. That guy had been shown to treat Arthur pretty decent at the start and it seemed like he was there as he actually did sort of want to check out how he was doing (he was the one holding the bottle of booze after all). Where as the other guy who gave Arthur the gun to get him fired, it was pretty obviously he was just there as he knew the cops suspect that he had given/sold the gun to Arthur, so was just there as he very much suspected Arthur killed the three on the subway, and rather then go to the cops, wanted to see if he could get Arthur to... um not mention that or at least skip details to make him less culpable. So after the dick character was killed, I was just totally with the other guy. He was just there to do the decent thing, and then suddenly all this goes down. So when he couldn't reach the chain, I was thinking back to how they pretty deliberately showed Arthur chaining the door after the two walked in, not sure if that was intentionally as he knew he wanted to kill both of them, or not. And from the start it had also shown the dwarf guy been pretty well ridiculed by the other clowns as well, and you know possible not living the greatest life. So this chain thing was just sort of reflecting how sometimes life just be an utter bastard sometimes in the most trivial and stupid ways. While there was some other stuff wasn't too keen on in the movie, I did think this scene worked really well. Pretty sure I breathed a literally sigh of relief when the guy made it out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 13:08
|
|
|
I do think it's interesting that this was set in the 80s, next Batman is supposed to be in the 90s, next Wonder Woman is also in the 80s. The DC movies aren't supposed to be a cinematic universe like Marvel but I wonder if there is something going on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 13:45
|
|
|
just another posted:That's a real society opinion, bucko. Hey it's his society, we're just living in a. Anyway, hearing about this movie just makes me really want an official Antifa Joker vs. Fascist Batman. Like, Batman would basically represent the Pinkertons protecting the interests of the upper classes from people like the Joker. And Joker would be completely non-violent, like he'd go out of his way to not actually hurt people and would just be a dick pulling boners all the time and chortling at the Batman. And Batman would be old and kinda paunchy and have a Punisher logo on his Batsuit even though that's a different comic universe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 13:59
|
|
|
King Vidiot posted:Hey it's his society, we're just living in a. Would Batman post minions memes on his facebook?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 14:02
|
|
|
the movie would be better if it was about class struggle/divide/uprising than as an origin Joker story
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 14:43
|
|
The REAL Goobusters posted:the movie would be better if it was about class struggle/divide/uprising than as an origin Joker story I mean, it still is? The Joker in the film exists as sort of a personified catharsis, an expression of all the violent resentment of the people crushed by the economic system of Gotham who lash out in violence because that's the only path that makes sense to them. Within the film, he basically is a face on the idea of revolution - violent, spontaneous, muddled, and inevitable. Much like the violent uprisings were probably going to happen sooner or later, like how Thomas and Martha Wayne are always going to die, as long as the society continues on the path it has set itself on, someone was going to become the Joker sooner or later - if not Arthur, some other downtrodden and broken person would have erupted into violence.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 14:59
|
|
|
My favorite part of this movie is Murray Franklin’s super rats/super cats joke
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
Joker takes aim at centrist libs from a left-wing viewpoint, no wonder the media is all in a tizzy about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 16:49
|
|
|
Unironic post, for once: regarding all the Batman stuff, it seems most likely to me that this movie's a secret DCEU movie (given all the explicit BvS connections) and they're riffing on the whole "multiple choice past" thing with the Joker to the extent that different actors are literally portraying different incarnations of the same person. Phoenix Joker is Leto Joker is whoever-else-they-dig-up Joker is etc, and which one they use depends 100% on the needs, tone and aesthetic of the movie. We might literally see two different Joker actors portraying a character that's supposed to be the same person in the same movie, if someone decides to go crazy enough with it. If they go in this direction I'm going to lose my loving poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
Wasn’t this supposed to be the first movie under some new independent-of-the-DCEU series? DC Black or something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 18:02
|
|
|
ZeeBoi posted:Wasn’t this supposed to be the first movie under some new independent-of-the-DCEU series? DC Black or something? Something like that, they didn’t put the usual DC title card up front. I actually don’t think there was any DC title card? The DCEU is fundamentally dead too, Aquaman and Wonder Woman are essentially movies independent of a shared universe going forward. Which is really funny to me that Joe Manganiello was probably jacked up to be playing Deathstroke in an end credits scene that now goes nowhere
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
Question regarding Thomas Wayne: Why did he go see a movie with his family during a riot with no security detail when he's a mayoral candidate? I think we got some bad writing here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 19:21
|
|
|
Chuka Umana posted:Question regarding Thomas Wayne: Why did he go see a movie with his family during a riot with no security detail when he's a mayoral candidate? To be fair I think the riot is supposed to have started while they were in the movie?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 19:24
|
|
|
Yeah, it was initially just going to be a localized demonstration, but then the cop shot that guy and it escalated from there. I don't think it even fully became a riot until right before the Joker went on TV
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
Also it's kind of in character for him to not give a poo poo what's going on on the streets. He doesn't seem concerned about his personal safety in any other scene.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 19:41
|
|
|
Necrothatcher posted:Joker takes aim at centrist libs from a left-wing viewpoint, no wonder the media is all in a tizzy about it. I get the feeling this movie's a Rorschach test and everyone's gonna see the riots in a particular way based on their alignment
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 20:01
|
|
|
Necrothatcher posted:Also it's kind of in character for him to not give a poo poo what's going on on the streets. He doesn't seem concerned about his personal safety in any other scene. He had zero guards at his mansion, just his butler which I supposed was a young Alfred. I love that Thomas Wayne wasn't a portrayed as a good rich philanthropist, but that he was probably a very corrupt rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
Blast Fantasto posted:Something like that, they didn’t put the usual DC title card up front. I actually don’t think there was any DC title card?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
After watching super rats chew on the faces of his fallen parents, Bruck Wayne becomes... Super Cat Man!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
Necrothatcher posted:There is nobody watching this movie who hasn't seen a Batman movie or heard of Bruce Wayne. Please, there are morons in every audience. There were a few people a few seats over in my screening who expected batman to show up for some reason? They got hushed down because someone in that group had to explain to others in that group who Bruce/Thomas Wayne was.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
Necrothatcher posted:Joker takes aim at centrist libs from a left-wing viewpoint, no wonder the media is all in a tizzy about it. it does not, Todd Phillips and the writers don't know what those words mean and dont bother engaging. Thats pure projection from discourse overdose. This movie views mental illness and class disparity pretty much the same way movies like this always did - from the point of view of a terrified Thomas Wayne, who sees everyone below him like squirming, dangerous rats, one minute from looting and killing; and ultimately the movie agrees with that view. It is all a set dressing for a Serious movie about a clown gone violent and has very little to say, unsurprisingly. Does not feel entertaining much, the direction of violent scenes feels amateurish, score and soundtrack are forced to do heavy lifting and Phoenix is wasted to deliver some tv level garbage lines so that no one feels lost or confused.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Someone mentioned it earlier, but I just wanted to confirm. Is the Wayne murder supposed to hook in to the new Batman movie in the works? Are the actors in Joker reprising their roles?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:it does not, Todd Phillips and the writers don't know what those words mean and dont bother engaging. Who cares what the writers do and don't know?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 21:13
|
|
|
Jose Oquendo posted:Someone mentioned it earlier, but I just wanted to confirm. Is the Wayne murder supposed to hook in to the new Batman movie in the works? Are the actors in Joker reprising their roles? Confirmed no to both.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
JOHN SKELETON posted:I assumed this was just a one-off because Joaquin Phoenix probably wouldn't sign off to do a bunch of sequels, but sure, if there was a sequel that somehow worked well, then retroactively in the context of a series of movies, yeah, those Bruce scenes would probably start to feel more appropriate. Batman year one is about Batman with like, basic rear end smoke grenades and a grappling hook at the end of a rope you can absolutely do low power Batman
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 21:34
|
|
|
I went in with negative expectations and was in a really mad mood and just wanted to see something on my Friday night and ended up thinking it was really good. It dragged me along from "this sucks, they're trying too hard" to "okay this is fine" to "okay this is pretty great, but not a Joker movie" to "Oh poo poo, this is the Joker!" The crowd I saw it with seemed to be in as mad of a mood as I was. They seemed sorta hostile, but seemed to like it. Not sure how many of the audience members were weirded out by the SIX cops patrolling the lobby as we went in. It's funny how the festivals loved it, the critics not so much, and regular people seem very mixed. I think Joaquin Phoenix may have been in literally every scene in the movie. And man, he really deserves an Oscar, imo. He went from pathetic loser to Joker in 2 hours. I don't think the movie would have worked without his performance. Also it's the first DC movie I've seen in the theater and also not fallen asleep during so... that's something. 1glitch0 fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Oct 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
Boy howdy is the third act just duct-taped together
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 22:30
|
|
|
Excellent film, largely thanks to Joaquin Phoenix. Only downsides were a couple of logic holes towards the end and the Batman tie in. Didn’t really need to go there for this film, I thought
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 23:25
|
|
|
'Joker' Sets New October Opening Day Record at Box Office
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 00:34
|
|
|
It was good while it lasted, Venom, the little crappy film that could.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 00:44
|
|
|
I hated this movie so much. I’ll admit that it’s beautifully shot and brilliantly acted and that I find it’s pro rich person murder message fascinating. That said, none of those things manage to save this movie from being terminally pretentious and boring. The main problem is that the Joker is an incredibly passive character for most of the movie. It’s literally just scene after scene of something bad happening to him followed by Phoenix dancing in slow motion for no drat reason while the director screams “THIS IS SO loving DEEP YOU GUYS!” from behind the camera. In most Joker origin stories the plot is moved along by the Joker committing crimes to pay for his failing comedy career which both gives him a concrete motivation, provides opportunities for action and conflict, and let’s things escalate in a natural manner. Here though they cut that idea entirely so for most of the movie he’s not actually ~doing~ anything until he decides to kill himself on TV and by that point the movie is mostly over. This movie also needed a sense of humor really badly. For a film about a comedian there is exactly one legitimately funny part in it (the scene with the dwarf at Joker’s apartment), the rest is incredibly dour and self-serious to the point of it being annoying. Phoenix needed to tell some God damned jokes once in a while or make some witty comebacks. Imagine if we were dealing with a character closer to Heath Ledger’s joker who could make you laugh and poo poo your pants in terror at the same time. That would have been amazing. Speaking of which I kind of didn’t buy this guy as the joker until the last 15 minutes of this movie (and even then, eeeeehhhh). The joker is sinister, intelligent and charismatic and this character is none of those things and as a result I have a very hard time buying that he’ll one day become Batman’s most dangerous enemy. Perhaps if they’d kept the crime subplot from the comics they could have shown us his cunning side, but they didn’t so here we are. I will say that I liked the last act of the movie (because there was consistent escalating conflict that came about as a result of character’s actions) and I can see the franchise doing interesting things with this character going forward but drat I hated getting there. Which is too bad because with a few changes here and there I think you could have had something pretty great. Fake edit: Oh! Also FUUUUUUCK how cringey this movie can be. I have this thing where watching people make objectively stupid decisions and then get humiliated for it really rubs me the wrong way and I swear that’s like half this movie. readingatwork fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Oct 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 00:52
|
|
|
This movie has quickly become my litmus test for people with bad tastes in movies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
Okay, I've been thinking about the movie since seeing it earlier today and I just... don't dig it. Everything about it is good on a technical level; the acting is good, the cinematography is good, Hildur Guðnadóttir's score is amazing (albeit maybe a little derivative of Carter Burwell's work on Fargo?), but it just doesn't gel on a narrative level. Despite it being a Joker "origin" story, I think it kind of does a bad job at executing that goal in that it feels like there is some significant character stuff missing in relation to how extremely different Arthur acts during the talk show at the end. It's the only time we get the full-on "Joker" Joker in the movie, but it seems to come completely out of nowhere. His inflection changes, the way he inhabits a physical space changes. He becomes sassy, sarcastic. He monologues about A Society or whatever. 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. We never see those elements bubble up in Arthur earlier in the film, even as he begins to unravel. The closest we get is the "oh I forgot to punch out" bit at the Clown HQ, but... otherwise those personality traits are completely absent. I know somebody's gonna be all "hurrrr he isn't himself until he puts on the makeup" but I call bullshit. The switch flip from awkward, halting Arthur Fleck to Catty Bitch Joker is too clean and sudden. It feels like somebody was like "oh man you better get Joker as gently caress in the last twenty minutes-or-so."
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 01:18
|
|
|
Re: Arthur's provenance, when the options are between a mentally-ill, single woman in the 50s legally adopting a child, and some rich playboy knocking up the help, I'm inclined to believe the latter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 01:21
|
|
|
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?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 01:22
|
|
|
Mordja posted:Re: Arthur's provenance, when the options are between a mentally-ill, single woman in the 50s legally adopting a child, and some rich playboy knocking up the help, I'm inclined to believe the latter. Being ambiguous about this was a mistake imo. If your message is that rich people suck having Wayne Sr. knocking up the help and then abandoning them to live in poverty crafts a much stronger narrative.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
Do you guys know what really really irked me and made me distracted during a couple of dramatic/serious moments? Not the writing, not the acting... THE CGI BLOOD. I was groaning when I noticed the extremely bright, wrong colored blood.  Unless you are the guys who did the fx for The Zodiac movie, don't try it. It looks so bad. Like, bad-bad. There was another CGI element that was also extremely noticeable, but it might be a small spoiler. And that was probably the only thing I hated in a technical level and has been annoying me since last night. 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? It was this movie, right? So the Joker is canonically set in 1981? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K22iiWlNpvg
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 01:34
|
|
|
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? Robert Pattinson's Batman gonna be Rainbow Batman.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 01:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
It's impossible to have an opinion on this movie that doesn't read like a hot take
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 01:37
|
|