The Joker movie - starring Joaquin Phoenix (MOD: May contain Spoilers)

sydthebeat

The name Arthur fleck is the one given to joker in the Killing joke comic of 1988.
I think this movie draws the most of its inspiration from that.

El Duda

Phillips and Phoenix have said all along that they didn't take any inspiration from Comic Books.

sydthebeat

sydthebeat wrote: »

The name Arthur fleck is the one given to joker in the Killing joke comic of 1988.
I think this movie draws the most of its inspiration from that.

I'm wrong in this actually I think.
I though batman referred to joker as Arthur in the closing scene of the movie but I'm not sure now

The White Wolf

El Duda wrote: »

Phillips and Phoenix have said all along that they didn't take any inspiration from Comic Books.

They can say that but the character is a failed comedian, unreliable narrator and psychotic narcissist. That's the Joker straight out of the comic books; for them to deny it just questions why they bothered at all outside of the commercial perks that comes with the character.

I think they're just bull****ting anyway and being deliberately obtuse.

homerun_homer

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Don't forget that they had started harassing a woman on the train first. Arthur started laughing at them so they turned on him and then the woman left. I think it's safe to assume the woman was found by the police and told them what happened. It's then not a big jump to assume her story reached the public, so the public would then see it as 3 drunk sleazeball rich guys were harassing people on a train and just harassed the wrong guy and therefore got what they deserved.

This was reasonable and obvious to me, so complaining that the girlfriend reveal was belaboured but the civil unrest and lead up to the riots was not seems a bit inconsistent.

Again, does this justify murder and for the general population to cheer for those murders? This is a film trying to be more grounded in reality so I'm treating this as such instead of just saying "but in the world of the film it makes sense." I've already noted the harassment of the woman in my initial post on the film. Sure they are assholes, and probably would have wanted to do more than just harass the woman and throw a few chips at her. My issue with this aspect of the film is to accept that the rioters cheer the murders on. My previous comment below, the one word I missed in describing them in that post was "wealthy".

homerun_homer wrote: »

People don't cheer for killers like they do in the film when Joker kills the subway three. That's extreme. To pull this off they needed to give some more justification and reasoning, even if it can never be fully justified. Are we to presume that Joker supporters read in the paper that the guys threw some chips at a woman, were being creeps and leering at her as justifiable reason to cheer a killer and heighten riots against all the rich?

Picky owner

Could you bring your 14 year old to it,know it's 16s

tylercheribini

Picky owner wrote: »

Could you bring your 14 year old to it,know it's 16s

Id hazard a guess he or she has already seen far worse violence in other movies/tv/internet.

minikin

No, you shouldn't.
It's an adult film about a deranged murderer, why would you want to bring a kid to that?
Time for adults to start re-behaving like adults.

Id hazard a guess he or she has already seen far worse violence in other movies/tv/internet.

Would you bring your kid to a porno on that basis?

Tazzimus

minikin wrote: »

No, you shouldn't.
It's an adult film about a deranged murderer, why would you want to bring a kid to that?

I'm sure a lot of us watched worse at the same or younger age.

I'd say don't bring the 14 year old as they just might not like it, it's not even remotely comic book/superhero like, bar the names of some of the characters.

tylercheribini

minikin wrote: »

No, you shouldn't.
It's an adult film about a deranged murderer, why would you want to bring a kid to that?
Time for adults to start re-behaving like adults.


Would you bring your kid to a porno on that basis?

Didnt mention porn anywhere in my comment, yeah coa that would be the exact same thing going to one with your teenager(not kid.)

Cianos

I definitely wouldn't bring a 14yr old to it

minikin

tylercheribini wrote: »

Didnt mention porn anywhere in my comment, yeah coa that would be the exact same thing going to one with your teenager(not kid.)

It's a logical extension (not the 'exact same thing') of your statement... as they also may have seen stuff of that nature at that age too... it does not make it ok to encourage or condone watching either as a kid.
(legally you're a kid [not an adult] until you're 18 in Ireland... doesn't matter what label some people put on it in order to feel better about ignoring their parental responsibilities)

Having said that, it is a great film* with an incredible performance, get them a vhs for their 16th birthday.
*Went back and watched King of Comedy as a result, Joker had some brilliant visual references to it.

sydthebeat

its not an "adult" movie... its 16s rated

tylercheribini

minikin wrote: »

It's a logical extension (not the 'exact same thing') of your statement... as they also may have seen stuff of that nature at that age too... it does not make it ok to encourage or condone watching either as a kid.
(legally you're a kid [not an adult] until you're 18... doesn't matter what label you put on it)

If we are both assuming said teenager has already seen the worst the world has to offer then what potential harm can Joker possibly do to his/hers already warped mind?

minikin

sydthebeat wrote: »

its not an "adult" movie... its 16s rated

It's certainly not a kids film.

jackboy

homerun_homer wrote: »

My issue with this aspect of the film is to accept that the rioters cheer the murders on.

I think it is quite easy to accept and quite common in real life. Such things have happened many many times on this island. In less stable poorer parts of the world such things are widespread.

sydthebeat

minikin wrote: »

It's certainly not a kids film.

no one said that did they.... but someone did say it was an adult film

minikin

tylercheribini wrote: »

If we are both assuming said teenager has already seen the worst the world has to offer then what potential harm can Joker possibly do to his/hers already warped mind?

The difference is that they may have seen it on the sly without the parent's permission or cooperation. The question posed was: "Should I bring?"
Absolutely not, if for no other reason than the kid's tiny attention span will piss off the other cinema goers with the sound of marbles/draughts/rollerskating (or whatever the youngsters do when they're bored)

tylercheribini

Teenagers are apparently "kids" now, everday a school day. Funny how IFCO doesnt list their film classifications the same way.

tylercheribini

minikin wrote: »

The difference is that they may have seen it on the sly without the parent's permission or cooperation. The question posed was: "Should I bring?"
Absolutely not, if for no other reason than the kid's tiny attention span will piss off the other cinema goers with the sound of marbles/draughts/rollerskating (or whatever the youngsters do when they're bored)

Really depends on the teenager, I was loving Goodfellas, Casino, The Shining and The Godfather at that age.

minikin

tylercheribini wrote: »

Teenagers are apparently "kids" now, everday a school day. Funny how IFCO doesnt list their film classifications the same way.

I don't represent the IFCO. I'm a parent of a kid.
I'm old-fashioned because it's in my kids best interest for me to have old-fashioned values and duties... like protecting them from the worst the world has to offer before they're old enough to rationalise and process it.
The IFCO do a pretty good job of figuring out what's suitable for what age group.

A growing body of scientific literature documents the negative effects of exposure to violent media on children, adolescents, and adults. This work has been performed with diverse methods and samples, and the researchers have examined a broad range of both short- and long-term outcomes, consistently finding that exposure to violent video games, television, films,1 and music has been linked to increased aggression and violence.2,3 Taken together, a clear picture has emerged that exposure to violent media increases the likelihood of aggressive thoughts, emotions, and behavior.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2778277/

minikin

tylercheribini wrote: »

Really depends on the teenager, I was loving Goodfellas, Casino, The Shining and The Godfather at that age.

All great films but unsuitable for a 14 year old.
Pity that your first exposure to these films may have been wasted, like seeing your christmas presents before they're wrapped and given to you.

tylercheribini

minikin wrote: »

All great films but unsuitable for a 14 year old.
Pity that your first exposure to these films may have been wasted, like seeing your christmas presents before they're wrapped and given to you.

Yea I'm currently writing this from the prison computer lab.

“To try and fasten any responsibility on art as the cause of life seems to me to put the case the wrong way around. Art consists of reshaping life, but it does not create life, nor cause life,” - Stanley Kubrick

minikin

tylercheribini wrote: »

Yea I'm currently writing this from the prison computer lab.

No way, did Andy Dufresne get some old copies of windows 95 for the 286's in the library?

I'll leave it there, don't want to go dragging thread off topic.
[and have to get back to deleting bits of the internet I don't want my kid to see]

This film is fine for a 14 year old

Theboinkmaster

Deleted User wrote: »

This film is fine for a 14 year old

I disagree - I don't think you can make general sweeping statements like that.

Depends on the 14 year old.

minikin

minikin wrote: »

It's a logical extension (not the 'exact same thing') of your statement... as they also may have seen stuff of that nature at that age too... it does not make it ok to encourage or condone watching either as a kid.
(legally you're a kid [not an adult] until you're 18 in Ireland... doesn't matter what label some people put on it in order to feel better about ignoring their parental responsibilities)

Having said that, it is a great film with an incredible performance, get them a vhs for their 16th birthday.

Speaking of being old fashioned :P

Mark Hamill

homerun_homer wrote: »

Again, does this justify murder and for the general population to cheer for those murders? This is a film trying to be more grounded in reality so I'm treating this as such instead of just saying "but in the world of the film it makes sense."

In the context of what else has happened in the movie, yes it does. In the general population's eyes, those murders have come after years of massive social inequality and the rich treating the poor like crap. Cheering that someone finally stood up to some rich bullies, particularly 3 rich snobs who were harassing a woman, is totally believable, even if they were killed. You have to separate from the scene as we saw it and think about what information the general population would have had. The rioters weren't cheering for an insane killer, they were cheering for a brave vigilante.

sheesh

Deleted User wrote: »

This film is fine for a 14 year old

I'm older than 14 and was not right after seeing it. It is a heavy, Heavy film, Brilliantly acted and shot and edited and coloured, It goes to very dark places and not in the usual grimy movie way.

Tazzimus

tylercheribini wrote: »

Really depends on the teenager, I was loving Goodfellas, Casino, The Shining and The Godfather at that age.

I watched Nightmare on Elm street when I was about ten.
Casino and the likes way younger than I should have as well. I turned out fine, for the most part.

I think a 14 year old would be bored by this, if they didn't understand what was happening to the character throughout.