-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
JOKER |OT| Viviamo in una società |SPOILERS|
- Thread starter Cpt-GargameL
- Start date
Just saw it.
I'm surprised at how little it surprised me. It was pretty much what I suspected after reading some reviews and seeing the trailers. I'm not talking about plot twist or elements, but I wasn't surprised with the tone, it's clumsy themes and message and well, not even Joaquin's acting, since it's all pretty much in the trailer.
The music and Joaquin's acting were the best part of the movie, along with its tie ins to the rest of the Batman universe, but even that seemed unnecessary.
I honesty don't get how it's been praised as much by some, except that it maybe exceeded the expectations of reviewers who think very little of comic book movies, and ironically it also exceeded the expectations of a lot of reviewers who are comic book fans but always talk about how they want a comic book movie "for adults" because they feel insecure about liking comic book films.
I'm surprised at how little it surprised me. It was pretty much what I suspected after reading some reviews and seeing the trailers. I'm not talking about plot twist or elements, but I wasn't surprised with the tone, it's clumsy themes and message and well, not even Joaquin's acting, since it's all pretty much in the trailer.
The music and Joaquin's acting were the best part of the movie, along with its tie ins to the rest of the Batman universe, but even that seemed unnecessary.
I honesty don't get how it's been praised as much by some, except that it maybe exceeded the expectations of reviewers who think very little of comic book movies, and ironically it also exceeded the expectations of a lot of reviewers who are comic book fans but always talk about how they want a comic book movie "for adults" because they feel insecure about liking comic book films.
Just saw it with my Girlfriend. As someone who is into comic book movies, I really liked it. I thought some of the overall political themes and the way they tied into the plot were a little clumsy, but as a piece looking at a man descending into his own madness, I thought it was really good. My Girlfriend, who isn't crazy about comic book movies, also really enjoyed, which I thought it might be a little bit depressing for her, but she thought it was pretty thought provoking. It's definitely in my top ten comic book films.
I think the movie was average work elevated by Joaquin Phoenix and themes of mental illness that resonate with me a lot. There were some direction choices that were pretty strange (the first few scenes, back to back, didn't flow very well and sometimes scene transitions felt unnatural, I don't think the hallucination stuff was done very well). I think Joker himself's characterization was good, but it should have been more than that given that it's a character study. The climax hits really damn hard and does everything it needed to do. As a whole it's a movie that I'm more positive about than not but I also see a good amount of missed potential in it. I think that there exists a universe where this movie actually IS a Scorsese film and it's an Actual Masterpiece.
I agree too that it's difficult to classify this as bad, because it has some great nuggets. But it's too competent for my liking, because it's not incompetent enough for its terrible justification of the Joker's crimes to be missed by most.
The mental health issues also were very iffy for me. It does get some text right, but by the movie's end, it basically is telling us that mass killers are just mentally ill people running amok, and that's a terrible message.
Honestly, I thought the movie was really predictable.
I hoped for more than "world just bullies Arthur to a point where he breaks" but it was just that. I also hated the talk show scene because it literally makes Joaquim say "we live in a society"
I hoped for more than "world just bullies Arthur to a point where he breaks" but it was just that. I also hated the talk show scene because it literally makes Joaquim say "we live in a society"
Also, is it just mandated by DC that everytime Thomas and Martha Wayne are shot, you HAVE to include her pearl necklace breaking?
I'm really glad everyone here is so interested in discussing Joker. I really enjoyed the film and shared my spoiler talk already, so to add to the conversation, I'd like to share this great interview with Phoenix about the process of making Joker. He's such a humble guy and you can see how much of a method actor he really is with the weight loss transformation and research.
I couldn't disagree more. Joaquin Phoenix would be just what Warner and DC need for a good Batman movie with a great joker. I would love to see Phoenix star in another couple of movies as the joker.
A lot of people in my theater laughed hysterically at the part when Gary was trying to get out of the apartment. I really wasn't a fan of that part.
I felt it was almost a parody of an arthouse movie. Sad clowns misunderstood by society, sad violins, period piece, lots of smoking. Just the meta of it being played straight was amusing to me.
I felt it was executed pretty well. Acting was good, cinematography was good. Although I think the direction they went was a bit of mistake. The problem is the Joker is a hyper exaggerated character which works as a super-villain, it comes across very differently when you try to play it realistically and use mental illness as the cause. Basically it hits a number of bad mental illness tropes about people snapping and becoming serial murders. That's going to sail over a lot of heads because this is still not a well represented topic and it really just plays to well known stereotyping. I don't want to fault things because they aren't "woke" enough and they certainly tried within the bounds they were given but I imagine this film will not age well as a result.
I felt it was executed pretty well. Acting was good, cinematography was good. Although I think the direction they went was a bit of mistake. The problem is the Joker is a hyper exaggerated character which works as a super-villain, it comes across very differently when you try to play it realistically and use mental illness as the cause. Basically it hits a number of bad mental illness tropes about people snapping and becoming serial murders. That's going to sail over a lot of heads because this is still not a well represented topic and it really just plays to well known stereotyping. I don't want to fault things because they aren't "woke" enough and they certainly tried within the bounds they were given but I imagine this film will not age well as a result.
I don't see how they could. If they make this the backstory for the new Batman, then if they want a new Joker, then can make him inspired by this one.
That and, the way the movie ends, it's possible most of this movie didn't actually happen.
Yeah, I was of the few people not amused by the jokes thrown at him. A real shame since he could have been an interesting supporting character.
One of the problems I think the movie has, and I think it kind of exacerbates some of the criticism of the movie and the "incel" thing, is that the movie's line between real and fantasy is kind of all over the place. There's a clear distinction, for example, when Fleck is fantasizing about being on the Murray Franklin show, but then the "romance" stuff with Dumond is played straight (even if it is obviously not real, which is kind of annoying that the movie then goes out of its way to showcase that it was all in his head by having the scenes play out with her not being there near the end). As a result, the delineation between fantasy and reality isn't really consistent in the movie, so what is condemning the Joker and what is sympathizing him is kind of up in the air. Like, are we to doubt that maybe the kids in the beginning who stole the sign and beat him maybe didn't do it because as his boss says why would someone steal his sign? Are the Wall Street subway murders in self defense or something concocted in his mind? The ending, with the gleeful bloody walk in slow motion and the madcap running through the halls (along with the cursive THE END playfully filling the screen) give a subjectiveness to it all. This is probably my biggest frustration with the movie because I don't think it is intentional to be ambiguous (like the backstory of his parents, etc) but just sloppy.
Separately, I wonder if someone could make an argument that all the wholesale ripping off of Taxi Driver is on purpose within the movie as a way of having the Joker self-identify with that movie or something.
And, to maybe be a bit of a contrarian, I loved the song choice for when he's getting in the elevator and dancing down the stairs. If that was supposed to be a serious or ominous moment, then they screwed it up royally, but I want to think it's a joke and I thought it was funny and laughed when it happened.
Separately, I wonder if someone could make an argument that all the wholesale ripping off of Taxi Driver is on purpose within the movie as a way of having the Joker self-identify with that movie or something.
And, to maybe be a bit of a contrarian, I loved the song choice for when he's getting in the elevator and dancing down the stairs. If that was supposed to be a serious or ominous moment, then they screwed it up royally, but I want to think it's a joke and I thought it was funny and laughed when it happened.
I had a discussion with someone earlier and we were discussing how the film is ambiguous in a multitude of ways. I want to think it's intentional as a way of playing up the unreliable narrator trope. For example did Arthur buy a gun somewhere or did the clown colleague give it to him as presented in the movie? Reason being that it was weird how the guy just backstabbed him like that. Was the uncontrollable laughter thing something he actually could control and not purely a neurological thing? It's hard because the film generally presents and reveals his delusions in a very obvious manner such as with the girlfriend but there's so many other instances in the background that I have to feel like it was intentional to an extent.
9/10 or even 10/10 movie for me. Grim, gritty, extremely realistically dark take on how disturbing mental illness can be for those who experience it and those around them.
Will offer up more thoughts when I'm not too tired, but Arthur Fleck becoming the Joker isn't the first time we've seen him in his pre-Joker phase. The Telltale Batman games depict a very similar, albeit slightly more progressed in his mental illness pre-Joker character in "John Doe" (an obvious alias).
You get to see his human side and traits, which are all parallel to the Arthur Fleck we see in this movie - desire to make people laugh, unstable but genuine personality, and well-meaning but with a hint of underlying darkness to everything he does. John Doe is less tragic than Arthur Fleck, and a lot more comic book-esque, but the general premise is the same and I was reminded a lot of the Telltale games while watching this film.
The tension in this movie was insane - 2 hours felt like 3 with how suspenseful some of the scenes were.
Will offer up more thoughts when I'm not too tired, but Arthur Fleck becoming the Joker isn't the first time we've seen him in his pre-Joker phase. The Telltale Batman games depict a very similar, albeit slightly more progressed in his mental illness pre-Joker character in "John Doe" (an obvious alias).
You get to see his human side and traits, which are all parallel to the Arthur Fleck we see in this movie - desire to make people laugh, unstable but genuine personality, and well-meaning but with a hint of underlying darkness to everything he does. John Doe is less tragic than Arthur Fleck, and a lot more comic book-esque, but the general premise is the same and I was reminded a lot of the Telltale games while watching this film.
The tension in this movie was insane - 2 hours felt like 3 with how suspenseful some of the scenes were.
Just coming out of the cinema. I loved it completely and Pheoenix acting is really powerful. I do think He should be a contender for the Oscars.
One thing a loved is the music score. Gives the movie a lot of feeling. Amazing soundtrack.
One thing a loved is the music score. Gives the movie a lot of feeling. Amazing soundtrack.
Last edited:
I feel that Arthur is a product of many, many things.
- Arthur is a product of poverty. He lives in a city where unemployment is at an all-time high. Due to a garbage strike, poverty-stricken neighborhoods are being buried/covered in literal garbage. Every morning he's walking through streets that smell like garbage.
- Arthur is a product of the government. The government cut funding and access to Arthur's mental health services and medication. This made Arthur's environment and situation rapidly worse. Arthur comes to the realization that the government does not care about people like him. In fact, his social worker bluntly tells him exactly that.
- Arthur is a product of his unrealistic dreams and unattainable goals. His dreams of being a comedian...and failing. His dreams of one day becoming famous on television and meeting his idol Murray Franklin...a man who mocks him. His dreams of spreading joy and laughter... to a world that bullies him. Arthur eventually does achieve his dreams of becoming famous -- as a serial killer who becomes a bit of a folk hero.
- Arthur is a product of abuse and bullying. Abused as a child by his mother, abandoned by his father. Constantly bullied as an adult over a condition that he can't control.
- Arthur is a product of poverty. He lives in a city where unemployment is at an all-time high. Due to a garbage strike, poverty-stricken neighborhoods are being buried/covered in literal garbage. Every morning he's walking through streets that smell like garbage.
- Arthur is a product of the government. The government cut funding and access to Arthur's mental health services and medication. This made Arthur's environment and situation rapidly worse. Arthur comes to the realization that the government does not care about people like him. In fact, his social worker bluntly tells him exactly that.
- Arthur is a product of his unrealistic dreams and unattainable goals. His dreams of being a comedian...and failing. His dreams of one day becoming famous on television and meeting his idol Murray Franklin...a man who mocks him. His dreams of spreading joy and laughter... to a world that bullies him. Arthur eventually does achieve his dreams of becoming famous -- as a serial killer who becomes a bit of a folk hero.
- Arthur is a product of abuse and bullying. Abused as a child by his mother, abandoned by his father. Constantly bullied as an adult over a condition that he can't control.
Last edited:
Part of the reason why I don't want to say it's intentional is because there's a logic in the movie, albeit not consistent, when something is explicitly is and isn't a fantasy, and when they decide to pull the rug out and explain it. If it's all just unreliable narrator shenanigans, then any inconsistency can be explained away with it. "Why was someone filming a random comedy routine in a small club when video cameras were not ubiquitous?" Well, unreliable narrator! "Why would a recycled prop like a clock on a wall have the same time in different scenes?" Unreliable narrator! So even if that was the case, which I don't think it is, then it's just a shield against almost virtually any criticism when it goes to basic plotting.
But then that goes back to why make some stuff intentionally obvious as to being unreliable narrator stuff. Why explain the fake romance thing as fake, yet have his first use of the gun be during a pretend encounter with a woman on a dance floor, and his first sexual gratification be after killing the Wall Street dudes? And especially when we have the scene of him in her apartment where she's scared and asking him to leave (which just ends and I understand some stuff may have been cut or altered but the entire storyline is kind of just abandoned).
Like, did he buy a gun or not, or is his laugh uncontrollable or not aren't that big of "what ifs" for me because they don't play into the thematic elements all that much; hell, him being given a gun by a friend kind of doesn't make sense at all with how everyone treats him plot-wise or thematically. It's the other things, the downtrodden "was he really beaten by those kids" or the "was the subway murders self-defense" and "what was with the sexual gratification and violence thing" being more of a thing for me.
Joker going to Wayne Manor and meeting young Bruce Wayne isn't as important as some of the other foundational things in the story that could be up in the air because "well, unreliable narrator!" shrugging. And I think it does hurt the movie overall by not being consistent or logical in that separation. If the movie was as clear as those moments I mentioned and the ending, I think it would improve. But as it stands, I don't know how you cannot just watch it and shrug, go "I dunno," and walk away.
If the movie isn't engaging with itself consistently, I kind of don't want to bother with it either, which is why I said in my first post that it's just ok with a nice coat of paint on it. Phoenix is fine, because he almost always is, but it is a bit of a recycled performance from something like The Master, and the set direction and costuming are good; production is great, everything else is fine.
I think what Warner/DC needs is to keep on making movies like this. Bring in talent with interesting takes on their characters. One and done. Stop trying to connect everything. Marvel/Disney are long gone, Warner/DC will never catch them.
They could've done without the Batman tie ins then--even though I did like them. There was more Batman stuff in this movie than there were traces of Spider-Man in Venom. Which I found hilarious since Venom is part of a cinematic universe that will eventually have a Spider-Man and this is a stand alone film.
Couldn't have said it better myself. my wife and I were discussing it and it sparked some interesting conversation, but the what's real/what's fake aspect was just not well done. why spell some stuff out and leave some ambiguous? Showing how the GF wasn't real in a flashback was also disappointing like you have to dumb down the plot for a simple audience. And the ending soliloquy was waaay to "on the head" it felt almost out of place in certain parts.
overall Heath is still my best joker and his classic lime of an "unstoppable force running into an immovable object "(Joker vs batman) almost brings a tear to my eye thinking of the brilliant stories that could've been told with his performance. I did get some flashes of brilliance in the acting, But disagree with the master piece talk, it's just too inconsistent and amazing in parts. the sum though just comes across as "pretty good".
Last edited:
I didn't think the film was bad but it certainly felt like a diet Taxi Driver that was far less subtle about the protagonist suffering from mental illness and packaged somewhat of a hamstrung attempt to humanize Joker.
It works in some areas but is incredible cringe inducing in others. The film does a fantastic job of crawling under your skin. The juxtaposition with Joker's laugh was done well in quite a few scenes--especially the ones where Arthur was clearly in duress.
My theater cheered for everything. I thought it was weird. They cheered when he went up and kissed his neighbor even though there was no way and fuck that was real and I'm surprised that twist got as many people as it did. The moment they pulled the, "you're off your meds" I knew fuckery would follow closely. The cheering is odd to me--like, this guy finds it easier to become a mass murderer than asking out his neighbor and just having her say no and move on with it.
I think it's weird they felt the need to stroke Batman fans with another orgin story nod. Could've been cut from the film and it wouldn't make much difference. The entire scene with him interacting with Bruce was silly lol. Thomas Wayne was assassinated in this film--I'm not talking about his murder but the his character. Him and Uncle Ben getting straight done up in these movies.
Anyway, it's a solid 7/10. I think Jo carries the fuck out of his film. His performance was incredible. Visually it was stunning to look at. Wasn't feeling a lot of the licensed music they went with. The score itself was incredible.
It works in some areas but is incredible cringe inducing in others. The film does a fantastic job of crawling under your skin. The juxtaposition with Joker's laugh was done well in quite a few scenes--especially the ones where Arthur was clearly in duress.
My theater cheered for everything. I thought it was weird. They cheered when he went up and kissed his neighbor even though there was no way and fuck that was real and I'm surprised that twist got as many people as it did. The moment they pulled the, "you're off your meds" I knew fuckery would follow closely. The cheering is odd to me--like, this guy finds it easier to become a mass murderer than asking out his neighbor and just having her say no and move on with it.
I think it's weird they felt the need to stroke Batman fans with another orgin story nod. Could've been cut from the film and it wouldn't make much difference. The entire scene with him interacting with Bruce was silly lol. Thomas Wayne was assassinated in this film--I'm not talking about his murder but the his character. Him and Uncle Ben getting straight done up in these movies.
Anyway, it's a solid 7/10. I think Jo carries the fuck out of his film. His performance was incredible. Visually it was stunning to look at. Wasn't feeling a lot of the licensed music they went with. The score itself was incredible.
I'm not saying the citizens were wrong to want change, I'm saying they made a mistake in wanting it badly enough to overlook decency and morals to the point where they'd rally behind and look up to a murderous clown. Not only a murderous clown, at that, but one that has no affiliation with, or support for any of them. The motive behind the subway murders was widely misunderstood. The media and citizens just pushed that class war angle and ran with it, however.
This depiction of Gotham and its people is obviously more cynical than other incarnations. Yes, the people had a right to feel pissed, but we're talking about a public that cheered, applauded, and started rioting for a lunatic that shot a talk show host on live TV. Scores of people donning clown masks like it's a badge of honor or something. Much like with the Joker himself, any sympathy I may have had for them initially went out the window when they were willing to give up their humanity and resort to brutality.
"Society treats its weakest members inhumanely" is not a political motive or message, it's a broad statement about society as a whole. It's general, not pointed towards a certain affiliation or class. Although it would be accurate to say that Arthur is a victim of politics (the de-funding of health care initiatives for mentally ill people like him, for example), he himself is not a political actor.
Arthur isn't interested in going after the rich, or people specifically who fall on either end of the political spectrum. Instead, he has disdain for anyone who treats the little guy with mockery, derision, or disrespect. His victims include wealthy businessmen like the trio on the subway, but also poor people like his co-worker who works as a clown the same as him. Then there are the victims of his psychosis, like Sophie, and the psychiatrist at the end of the film (although these murders are implied, not explicitly shown, I do believe they occurred). Sophie in particular is a poor single mother just trying to get by, who lives in the same building as him. The film demonstrates that wealth doesn't factor into Arthur's killings. As for Murray's execution, that was never part of his plan. As we saw, he intended to kill himself as a sick punchline to a joke, but he got angry and shot Murray instead out of pure emotion.
I found it fitting that Arthur, being the little guy in a societal sense, spares Gary, a literal little guy, from death, kissing him on the head and being grateful for him. That serves as a reflection of how he wishes society would treat people like him.
to me the score sucked big time
to much in the fucking nose.
have you seen forgething sarah marshall? where Jason segels working making the music for CSI-esque show???
thats what the score remind me of.
I personally think Joker' deserves an Oscar nomination for the music soundtrack.
Hildur Guðnadóttir is the same women who did the score for HBO's Chernobyl.
Hildur Guðnadóttir is the same women who did the score for HBO's Chernobyl.
Last edited:
The whole neighbor character would have worked better if it wasn't played by someone so astronomically beautiful to the point that no one with half a brain would believe the relationship is real. Both the relationship scenes, and the eventual plot twist of it all being made up, would have hit harder and felt truer if she didn't look like a model
