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

johnny_ultimate

Jack Nicholson’s a lot of fun in Batman, but it’s a silly, OTT performance in a silly, OTT film. There’s nothing particularly menacing or sinister about it - it’s a great actor having some fun above all else. The film itself is pretty flimsy in many regards, so there’s not really a whole bunch going on beneath its eye-catching surface level.

Ledger, on the other hand, created a villain that is equal parts funny, creepy and inscrutable. What particularly impressed is how it’s an actor really pushing themselves in ways none of us had really considered possible. Not that Ledger wasn’t a fine act, but to see this wild, unpredictable and captivating performance from him was startling. The tragedy of his death will always cast a massive shadow over it, but on its own terms it’s still a performance of remarkable power and depth (especially for a character with such cartoonish, absurd roots).

While Phoenix gives a strong performance here, there’s no surprise factor: we all knew he’s an actor of immense capability, and indeed the manic unpredictably associated with Joker as a character is something Phoenix had wholeheartedly channelled before in the likes of The Master, Inherent Vice, The Immigrant, You Were Never Really Here and others. He’s as good as you’d imagine here - especially the unhinged physical energy he brings to the table - but there was no doubt he’d be that good. I think that’s why the sheer surprise factor of Ledger will always stand out more for me. Also potentially that I feel The Dark Knight and indeed many of Phoenix’s previous films have more going on to support and enhance the performances than Joker ultimately does.

All IMO of course, and ultimately we’re all probably better off that we have these very different takes on the same character available to enjoy and scrutinise

Rothko

Penn wrote: »

There can be no real "Best Joker" argument, because each Joker suits the movie they were in and probably wouldn't have worked in any of the other ones. Even Leto's Joker suited the movie he was in, because he was dogsh*t and so was the movie.

It's not often that I literally lol at a post on here but you got me there.

Loughc

Penn wrote: »

Even Leto's Joker suited the movie he was in, because he was dogsh*t and so was the movie.

Can we get this quote on a movie poster....

Love it!

Agent Coulson

It was only a matter of time.

Joker 2 Reportedly Being Written By Original Movie's Director
Joker 2 will reportedly see Todd Phillips, who directed and co-wrote the original Joker movie, return to co-write the sequel for Warner Bros.

A new report says that Todd Phillips, who directed and co-wrote the original Joker movie, has been brought on officially to co-write Joker 2. The first film, which starred Joaquin Phoenix as the titular DC supervillain, earned widespread critical acclaim and won several major awards, including an Academy Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role for Phoenix. The sequel has been highly anticipated by fans since the original’s release.

Co-written by Scott Silver and director Todd Phillips, Joker put a classic Hollywood spin on the villain’s origin story, with clear homages to films like Taxi Driver in particular. The movie took place outside the core DCEU canon, which allowed for drastic differences in tone and style, as well as an R rating. Phoenix’s performance as the Joker has generally been viewed as one of the character’s best portrayals.

According to a report from THR, Phillips will return to pen the script for “the next Joker installment.” It’s unclear whether or not original co-writer Silver will also be coming back for the sequel, but Phillips' return suggests he’ll also likely be directing Joker 2. Warner Bros. has announced a large number of new, relatively independent DC film projects over the past year, and it should be interesting to see how Joker’s unique style fits into those future plans.

Though it was a major critical hit, Joker wasn’t without its controversies. The film’s sympathetic story of a man who turns to violence after feeling ostracized by society was heavily criticized for perpetuating a dangerous message that such violence is justified. In an era when mass shootings and domestic terrorism are frequently in the news, many people were understandably upset at how sympathetic the Joker - traditionally written as a psychopathic character - was portrayed.

Whether or not the sequel decides to deal with those issues remains to be seen. The original film sets up some interesting new connections between Joker and the Wayne family, and that storyline could become even more important in Joker 2. It seems unlikely the film would dive too deep into the DC comics, however, as Joker isn’t narratively connected to any other DCEU films and likely won’t be in the future either. Between Joker 2 and the Robert Pattinson-led, Matt Reeves-directed The Batman releasing in 2022, fans will have plenty of opportunities to return to the cinematic streets of Gotham City.

https://screenrant.com/joker-2-movie-writer-todd-phillips-return/

The White Wolf

Jesus Screen rant really would want you to burn your eyes out with their thinking out loud.

Looking forward to what Phillips will do and it will be interesting to see how, if at all, he responds to the first film being a "copy cat."

pixelburp

That's a shame to read, though maybe not entirely surprising. I didn't like Joker at all, but can at least respect at least the genuine, creative intent from which it sprung. Something different was tried and even if the end result was (IMO) subpar, applaud the space it was given to happen at all.

Knocking out a sequel just reminds that as artistic as the pretensions might have been, Phillips was still playing with a valuable IP geared towards franchises and sequels as a default response to success. I'd still argue Joker's success was the Barbara Streisand effect in action, so a sequel would certainly put that theory to the test.

silverharp

it was best as a one off, given that the film is kinda heavy do you really want to repeat the experience? I know this analogy doesnt make any sense but I wouldnt have wanted to see Schindler's List 2

B.A._Baracus

The White Wolf wrote: »

Jesus Screen rant really would want you to burn your eyes out with their thinking out loud.

Looking forward to what Phillips will do and it will be interesting to see how, if at all, he responds to the first film being a "copy cat."

He'll just copy-cat another movie
The Joker Part 2: Videodrome lol.

pixelburp

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

He'll just copy-cat another movie
The Joker Part 2: Videodrome lol.

Well we had Joker: King of Comedy, so presumably Phillips' sequel will be uhhh, hmm. Joker: Kundun? :pac:

Penn

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

He'll just copy-cat another movie
The Joker Part 2: Videodrome lol.

He can just do the same as he did with Hangover 2 and just make the exact same movie again but in another country.

Joker 2: Clown Prince of Crimea

Hercule Poirot

The Killing Joke

The Phantom Pain

silverharp wrote: »

it was best as a one off, given that the film is kinda heavy do you really want to repeat the experience? I know this analogy doesnt make any sense but I wouldnt have wanted to see Schindler's List 2

I made sure to see Joker alone as I knew the subject matter was heavy and didn't want to be in a bummed out mood around people. It was the right decision - I remember my audience, who usually just walk out during the credits, sitting there in stunned silence after the ending. It was really awkward.

On the subject of the sequel... it was inevitable given how much money the original made but it's rather unnecessary. Joker works as an antagonist to Batman. The first film wasn't even about Joker; it was about Arthur. He never was Joker until the end.

Finally got around to watching this. Relentless mediocrity really but Phoenix was fantastic.

JP Liz V1

It is on RTE 1 now

fryup

watchin right now and so far its like a cross between Taxi Driver and The King of comedy 😐️

B.A._Baracus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118413591#Comment_118413591

So much so that they even cast Robert DeNiro lol.

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118418857#Comment_118418857

Scorsese considered directing it too, apparently

Gwynplaine

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/114265771#Comment_114265771

No mention on Leto? Haha. An abomination of a film, absolutely brutal. Should be erased from history. I was actually blushing watching it. Certainly a case for "less is more", he was so over the top it was just embarrassing.

fryup

i presume he killed the psychiatrist at the end hence the bloodstained footprints ?

Man Vs ManUre

I think I prefer Pheonix Joker over Ledger. The last 15mins of the dark knight scene at the abandoned building site was rubbish.

pixelburp

So it looks like the sequel has a script, and a working title... my immediate wonder is, will this inch closer to the Batman mythos at all?

https://www.instagram.com/p/CehX0rGPxQi/

speedboatchase

Todd Phillips really loves ruining his movies' legacies with unnecessary sequels.

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119172829#Comment_119172829

How can it?

Bruce is a child to the Joker's middle age in 'Joker'. By the time Bruce reaches an age where he can be doing Batman stuff the Joker will in his 60's in this situation.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119173169#Comment_119173169

Not necessarily Batman; with Joker in the clink you'd probably get short odds on the possibility of Dr. Harleen Quinzel being the new shrink in town.

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119173239#Comment_119173239

Ah ok. Sorry a "Batman mythos" without Batman just seems...pointless...to me.

In any case, I couldn't care less about this joker universe really. 'Joker' was just OK and nothing I hadn't seen before. Frankly, its success was a bit bewildering to be honest.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119173263#Comment_119173263

I still think there was a Barbara Streisand Effect going on with this, after it got scooped up in hysteria and scaremongering that it'd be a rallying cry for incels and whatnot. The press on this was insane, it was always going to get eyeballs. I don't think the final film was without merit - and I'm glad it exists as an example of a creative choice away from Generic Superhero - but not sure it was $1 billion worth either.

But at that kind of box-office, based on a comic-book character? There was always going to be something developed as a sequel. I'll keep an eye on it out of curiousity but a follow-up feels more than a little redundant.

You'd imagine Phillips will get absolutely free reign on it.

FortuneChip

Love Joker, felt it was a great movie with a captivating performance from Phoenix.

I never really had any issue viewing it as a part of, or removed from Batman lore.

It's not often you get a sequel to a psychological thriller like this, so very curious to see where it goes. He left the movie in a very different place to where he started it, and I'd wonder where they'd go with that. I guess the Harley Quinn route is the most fitting, given the title.

Spon Farmer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119173326#Comment_119173326

Could the title be referring to Bruce ?

I do like your idea of it being Harley though - it would be good if the film was mostly in the hospital shows her slowly cracking in her dealings with Joker.

FortuneChip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119173622#Comment_119173622

Just feel Harley's more logical given the age difference displayed between Bruce & Arthur.

Killing the psychatrist after claiming "You wouldn't get it" is such an inviting line for HQ to come in on, someone that has the potential to get him over the course of a sequel.

buried

Can't see the need for a sequel to this whatsoever. The only reason the first film works is the performance by Phoenix and the gradual character build up from a disturbed/abused albeit functional persona into a total psychotic chaotic murderer. A sequel would involve no character build up and basically nowhere to go, only 90 minutes of a chaotic character continuing to go cracked. Can't see Phoenix agreeing to retain the role either.

FortuneChip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119175597#Comment_119175597

Todd Phillips posted an Instagram showing Phoenix reading the script, I don't think he'd potentially put his head on the barrell if there was any chance of Phoenix not returning. It would be genuinely hilarious though

"hmm, hmm, hmm" snap "nah, it's shite, I'm out"

Spon Farmer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119174666#Comment_119174666

I would absolutely love if the film is indeed about Joker and Harley - I just meant the title could be referring to Arthur and Bruce as the family members (as Arthur believed them to be) and if the film jumped forward a few years to Bruce as a troubled teenager.

Harley is more logical as you say.

I don’t remember Joker liking the psychiatrist.

Spon Farmer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119175597#Comment_119175597

The director clearly thinks he has a story and direction for the character to go in. Just that the likes of yourself and myself can’t see it.

Pheonix has already said several times he is interested in playing the role again if they can find the right story.

They fact they dropping these tidbits must mean that Phoenix is definitely onboard.

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119175597#Comment_119175597

Right.

The first film works because it's a simple riff on 'Taxi Driver' and 'The King of Comedy' set to the shape of a famous comic book character. It's the build up to who we know that's the only interesting part of the film and without that I cannot see what the sequel would offer, except another take on some other Batman villains.

I know it'll never happen in a million years, but 'Joker' should be a one and done as I think that any sequels will just dilute it.

Man Vs ManUre

I wonder if DiCaprio would have played a better Joker than Pheonix?? I wish he had done that role instead of that stupid Tarantino Hollywood film.

JP Liz V1

Lady Gaga in talks for Harley Quinn

Penn

Maybe he's going to do it like The Hangover 2 and just do the same film again but set in another country.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119199325#Comment_119199325

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119199599#Comment_119199599

It's more than that: the Hollywood Reporter is claiming the sequel may be a musical; honestly, go for it Todd Phillips. I think you're a hack but if we live in a world where a sequel to Joker gets to be a full-blown musical, maybe things aren't completely broken.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/joker-2-lady-gaga-joaquin-phoenix-todd-phillips-in-musical-1235154135/

Tony EH

If it really is a musical, I can see all the fans of the original melting their faces off in fits of rage.

Lady bleedin Gaga though...wtf?

JP Liz V1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119199643#Comment_119199643

Walk the Joker Shallow Line 😄

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119200690#Comment_119200690

It depends how true it is, and how hard Phillips fights for it. Perhaps the musical numbers will be part of various hallucination sequences, skirting the actual "musical" moniker. Given the first film hinged upon Joker imagining his girlfriend, it doesn't seem a stretch they would mutate into full-blown musical things.

The collective rage alone would make it worth it.

Lady Gaga appears to be a solid actor by all accounts, she seems to be quietly building herself a career, without too much fuss.

johnny_ultimate

Wasn't too fond of the first and I'm not convinced by Phillips' writing/directing chops... but if they are making a sequel, a complete left-field turn in terms of genre seems like an intriguing and promising way to go. They should go wild.

The White Wolf

Hopefully they do go wild and a complete about turn would be a very fitting tribute to the character.

You have to admire the balls of the direction.

Agent Coulson

WB proabably see this as a free hit after the first one made a billion at the box office.

Tell Phillips and Phoenix here is a budget of 70 million go have fun.

No matter what they make it will be a box office hit right off the bat in the first week and make a profit and if is the word of mouth spreads that it's good they could have another billion dollar movie on their hands.

MisterAnarchy

A musical , dear God, say it aint so.

Spon Farmer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119201983#Comment_119201983

It won’t be a musical.

The Hollywood Reporter has assumed it is because Lady Gaga is in talks or they overreacted to a leak that there is a musical number in the movie - which if true will talk place in Joker or Harley’s head.

johnny_ultimate

Both Variety and Hollywood Reporter have reported independently that it’s a musical (at least in its current form), so it wasn’t just a random rumour plucked out of thin air or a wild speculation based on casting.

Spon Farmer

the fact that another media outlet is reporting the the same thing doesn’t mean it it is true .it just means they poked around and some one (a wag perhaps) “confirmed”this rumour.

and as I said in the post the casting rumour is just one possible cause of the other rumour - another could be that they got hold of information about a musical number in the film and thought “musical” then they are plucking stuff out of thing air

buried

I can totally see it being a sort of musical. Given the first films penchant for aping a good few of Scorsese's classic films, stands to reason they could also imitate Scorsese's usage of various old boombastic classic rock and pop tunes to the score and incorporate those songs or even parts of them (Jumping Jack Flash, Love is Strange, Be My Baby) as some sort of sparse quick cut hallucinogenic editing technique where the characters perform certain parts of these classic songs.

pixelburp

Lady Gaga has been confirmed as a star in the Joker sequel. The news presumably released to distract from the ongoing WB, DC shítshow.