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

Garry17

A film which charts an adults mental disorders caused by child abuse, featuring a song by a convicted child abuser and paedo in possibly it's most iconic scene????
It's a dark film but I don't think there was any need to be that dark

silverharp

Garry17 wrote: »

A film which charts an adults mental disorders caused by child abuse, featuring a song by a convicted child abuser and paedo in possibly it's most iconic scene????
It's a dark film but I don't think there was any need to be that dark

its one of those songs that is bigger than the artist, when i saw the movie i couldnt remember who it was.

Garry17

silverharp wrote: »

its one of those songs that is bigger than the artist, when i saw the movie i couldnt remember who it was.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/25/media/joker-r-rated-box-office-record/index.html

I'd agree about the song being bigger than the artist, but in this case where are the royalties going... Artist, Record Co, Charity???

mooseknunkle

Garry17 wrote: »

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/25/media/joker-r-rated-box-office-record/index.html

I'd agree about the song being bigger than the artist, but in this case where are the royalties going... Artist, Record Co, Charity???

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/oct/15/gary-glitter-joker-royalties

Garry17

mooseknunkle wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/oct/15/gary-glitter-joker-royalties

Good stuff

Conall Cernach

silverharp wrote: »

its one of those songs that is bigger than the artist, when i saw the movie i couldnt remember who it was.

I recognised the artist and thought at the time that it was meant to remind us that Joker isn't cool.

kerplun k

Feel like I’m late to the party but finally got around to watching this last night. I knew from the opening 15 minutes that I wasn’t going to enjoy this.

I can’t decide what best describes the film, unoriginal, cliche, tedious, shallow, but the films biggest flaw... It simply wasn’t entertaining, the only emotions it evoked in me was an urge to get up and walk out of the theatre.

Honestly, it felt like a waste of time and money.

Before it’s release I expressed two major concerns

1.) Todd Phillips,

2.) Jokers association with mental health and Mommy issues.

and boy was I right.

The film is about as shallow as Hangovers 2 and 3. It’s not his worst film, but If you look at Phillips track record, this film fits right into the middle of the pack somewhere between Old School and School for Scoundrels.

While there’s a lot not too like here, the film does have some positives, first off, it looks fantastic, but then again, it I want to watch something that looks good with nothing under the surface I could always stick on an episode of The Cardashians.

The other thing the film has going for it is Joaquin Phoenix, he gives everything to the role, but it’s just a shame that Phillips has nothing worthwhile to say.

It’s not saying much, but the films best part is it’s final 15 minutes... not only because the film is almost over, but also, the film finally has something to say. I wouldn’t say it finds its voice exactly, but it does have something worthwhile to say about our empty obsession with celebrity culture, in a world were we cheer on the joke novelty act on XFactor, or our cruel response to a Star Wars fan trailer reaction, but even that was a little too on the nose.

Some other bits...

I’m not sure if the unreliable narrator thing was supposed to be that obvious, but watching the Fight Club style reveal made me think It wasn’t intentional, either way it was about at subtle as a flying brick.

As a character, Arthur Fleck is bumbling buffoon, he lucks out time and time again, which puts him in that end position where he can start a revolution. I mean, are we to believe this is a man that can rival the worlds greatest detective. Heck, Paul Blart could take this guy down.

No denying it, Joaquin Phoenix. The man can dance.

Okay. So I’ve read the “this isn’t the joker” theory and that’s just horsesh*t, if true, that’s just a cheap cop out. If that’s the case, call this film Gotham.

If I could compare this joker to any other character it would be Ralph from The Simpsons. The episode where the Simpsons chant Ralphs name at the end springs to mind. Neither have any idea what they are doing.

TLDR, I didn’t enjoy it. I wouldn’t say I hated it, I just found it extremely shallow and a waste of time

Oh, one last thing

Dear Hollywood

Three things I never want to see on the big screen again.

1.) Peter Parker being bitten by a radioactive spider

2.) Uncie Ben dying

3.) Watching Thomas and Martha Wayne getting shot with pearls flying all over the place.

Thanks

cdgalwegian

kerplun k wrote: »

Feel like I’m late to the party but finally got around to watching this last night. I knew from the opening 15 minutes that I wasn’t going to enjoy this.

I can’t decide what best describes the film, unoriginal, cliche, tedious, shallow, but the films biggest flaw... It simply wasn’t entertaining, the only emotions it evoked in me was an urge to get up and walk out of the theatre.

Honestly, it felt like a waste of time and money.

Before it’s release I expressed two major concerns

1.) Todd Phillips,

2.) Jokers association with mental health and Mommy issues.

and boy was I right.

The film is about as shallow as Hangovers 2 and 3. It’s not his worst film, but If you look at Phillips track record, this film fits right into the middle of the pack somewhere between Old School and School for Scoundrels.

While there’s a lot not too like here, the film does have some positives, first off, it looks fantastic, but then again, it I want to watch something that looks good with nothing under the surface I could always stick on an episode of The Cardashians.

The other thing the film has going for it is Joaquin Phoenix, he gives everything to the role, but it’s just a shame that Phillips has nothing worthwhile to say.

It’s not saying much, but the films best part is it’s final 15 minutes... not only because the film is almost over, but also, the film finally has something to say. I wouldn’t say it finds its voice exactly, but it does have something worthwhile to say about our empty obsession with celebrity culture, in a world were we cheer on the joke novelty act on XFactor, or our cruel response to a Star Wars fan trailer reaction, but even that was a little too on the nose.

Some other bits...

I’m not sure if the unreliable narrator thing was supposed to be that obvious, but watching the Fight Club style reveal made me think It wasn’t intentional, either way it was about at subtle as a flying brick.

As a character, Arthur Fleck is bumbling buffoon, he lucks out time and time again, which puts him in that end position where he can start a revolution. I mean, are we to believe this is a man that can rival the worlds greatest detective. Heck, Paul Blart could take this guy down.

No denying it, Joaquin Phoenix. The man can dance.

Okay. So I’ve read the “this isn’t the joker” theory and that’s just horsesh*t, if true, that’s just a cheap cop out. If that’s the case, call this film Gotham.

If I could compare this joker to any other character it would be Ralph from The Simpsons. The episode where the Simpsons chant Ralphs name at the end springs to mind. Neither have any idea what they are doing.

TLDR, I didn’t enjoy it. I wouldn’t say I hated it, I just found it extremely shallow and a waste of time

Oh, one last thing

Dear Hollywood

Three things I never want to see on the big screen again.

1.) Peter Parker being bitten by a radioactive spider

2.) Uncie Ben dying

3.) Watching Thomas and Martha Wayne getting shot with pearls flying all over the place.

Thanks

I couldn't fail to disagree with you more.
If this is viewed from a postmodern perspective, which I take this film from, it's all about perspective, including how one could, and should, respond to the world throwing things at you. Postmodern film often uses a fractured viewpoint, very often using non-linear structure, but here it's the unreliable narrator.
Here's an analogy useful for Joker; Fleck's story is a jigsaw, but one that can be put together differently, giving a slightly different picture every time. The picture itself though, can be simple or complicated, boring or entralling, as well as other scales. Locking it down as one thing though is not to recognise the way it was structured, regardless of how, for example, pretty or ugly the picture is taken to be.
I think Joker is closer to Shutter Island than Fight Club, in that the world we are witnessing increasingly comes from inside Fleck's head, but it is always unobvious from what point (except if you take it from that fridge scene, where for me, from then on it's from his head alone- hermetically sealed (literally in Joker's case)- as it is in Shutter Island).
Regarding being shallow, I don't think this film is trying to say anything. In fact, it clearly backs away from adopting any positions on anything much. This is also another postmodern technique; of blending the real from the ersatz, and high art from low art and superficiality. Also, this is a mosaic of a film- due to a fractured mind; to add in ethical stances might have detracted from this (though it may also have been outside of Philip's range). Regardless, even though once the picture is formed, and a simple one emerges, reducing it to it's simple elements disregards the way it was simply but cleverly structured, making it highly entertaining with its discombobulations.

p.s. for an Irish release, I think it should have been called 'For Fleck's sake".:P

kerplun k

cdgalwegian wrote: »

The picture itself though, can be simple or complicated, boring or entralling, as well as other scales. Locking it down as one thing though is not to recognise the way it was structured, regardless of how, for example, pretty or ugly the picture is taken to be.

Art is subjective and the film is gonna make like a billion dollars and many people like yourself really, really liked it, but I’ll tell you what I see, and I’ll use a football quote to best describe this...

JorgeValdano wrote:

"Football is made up of subjective feeling, of suggestion - and, in that, Anfield is unbeatable. Put a **** hanging from a stick in the middle of this passionate, crazy stadium and there are people who will tell you it's a work of art. It's not: it's a **** hanging from a stick.

That pretty much sums up how I feel about this film. It has many fans who say it’s a masterpiece, it’s layered, groundbreaking, a work of art, and people keep telling me it’s a great film, but all I see is **** hanging from a stick.

Gwynplaine

Saw this today. That laugh really put me off the film. It was good, but wouldn't be in a rush to watch again.
And we had to be spoonfed that some of the stuff wasnt real.

If Pulp Fiction was made now, it would be about 7 hours long, as everything has to be explained.

micks_address

Seen tonight with my 16 year old son. Can't say I was blown away by it. I was surprised by the wayne links.. interesting tie in and certainly at the end you could understand why Bruce would hate the joker. I didnt think it a masterpiece.. I mean you got this forboding sense that he was going to turn completely crazy at some point... Like the dark Knight joker was more thoughtful and you figured he had a planned chaos..this joke is just mentally ill which is probably more like the animated movie versions in some cases.. you couldn't see fleck masterminding much..

It was a painfully slow watch at times... In a way would have been more interesting of he was a Wayne.. Thomas Wayne came across like a dick... And Alfred wasn't up to much.. I suppose I'd call it interesting if nothing else.. take away that it's the joker and you'd be wondering what all the fuss was about

Ironicname

micks_address wrote:

take away that it's the joker and you'd be wondering what all the fuss was about

Definitely... Considering it was joker. If you took batman away from any of the batman films, you'd wonder what that was about.

micks_address

Ironicname wrote: »

Definitely... Considering it was joker. If you took batman away from any of the batman films, you'd wonder what that was about.

Agree but I think the dark Knight stands on its own as an excellent film... Joker is just mainly depressing to watch..and that's ok as it's the making of the character

micks_address

micks_address wrote: »

Agree but I think the dark Knight stands on its own as an excellent film... Joker is just mainly depressing to watch..and that's ok as it's the making of the character

Also a fair few scenes designed around showing how thin he was... What value was that? Not sure what it added to the story

cdgalwegian

micks_address wrote: »

I didnt think it a masterpiece.. I mean you got this forboding sense that he was going to turn completely crazy at some point... Like the dark Knight joker was more thoughtful and you figured he had a planned chaos..this joke is just mentally ill which is probably more like the animated movie versions in some cases.. you couldn't see fleck masterminding much.

One of the interesting thing Philips plays with is whether Fleck's Joker is an origin story of The Joker, or if Joker is an inspiration for The Joker- especially if "you couldn't see fleck masterminding much".

micks_address wrote: »

I suppose I'd call it interesting if nothing else.. take away that it's the joker and you'd be wondering what all the fuss was about

So rather than " take away that it's the joker and you'd be wondering what all the fuss was about", I would wonder: Take away Gotham City as a background, would the Fleck story make more sense narratively? IOWs, Gotham as a background may be skewing (intentionally) what is actually happening to Fleck.

micks_address

Or maybe everyone is just overthinking it. Wayne called the guy who shot the three lads on the train a clown and basically implied all the homeless and poor people are clowns to those who have jobs and money..so that group of people rose up and used the clown persona to make a point.. those three guys were beating the crap out of him so he was quite justified defending himself..ok running after the other guy probably took it to the next level.

It's interesting because Nolan uses Batman as a symbol in his movies and plays heavy to that..

I'm not sure why joker has ever been a mastermind..he's organized chaos maybe?

No doubt its done really well at the box office though. I'm curious how they blend it into The Batman , there's no way they won't in some fashion even if it's only a cut to arkum asylum at the end.

cdgalwegian wrote: »

One of the interesting thing Philips plays with is whether Fleck's Joker is an origin story of The Joker, or if Joker is an inspiration for The Joker- especially if "you couldn't see fleck masterminding much".



So rather than " take away that it's the joker and you'd be wondering what all the fuss was about", I would wonder: Take away Gotham City as a background, would the Fleck story make more sense narratively? IOWs, Gotham as a background may be skewing (intentionally) what is actually happening to Fleck.

cdgalwegian

kerplun k wrote: »

It has many fans who say it’s a masterpiece, it’s layered, groundbreaking, a work of art, and people keep telling me it’s a great film, but all I see is **** hanging from a stick.

That's surreal: I think the piece of art you refer to is called "This is not ****". Not sure though; that's the Treachery of Images for ya.

peteeeed

Fixed

https://twitter.com/_bands_fc/status/1188943048467800065?s=21

Addle

It’s not as good.

Homelander

Addle wrote: »

It’s not as good.

Frankly it's a horrible force fit for the sake of it.

Table Top Joe

peteeeed wrote: »

Fixed

https://twitter.com/_bands_fc/status/1188943048467800065?s=21

Good Jesus that’s bad, it’s such a 90s song it feels totally out of place, it would be far more fitting in Avengers type movie.

Anyway, I thought I could go to my grave without ever seeing another comic book based movie again but the hype/trailers got me interested and all I can is wow.......extraordinary film, extraordinary performance.

My only tiny moan is the reveal that the relationship with Sophie was in his head, I had suspected this from the second she appears to be totally cool and ok with him following her, I would have preferred if there were no scenes at all showing him alone when he was originally with her tbh let alone 3 or 4 (we get it!) the fact she had no idea what his name was when he walks into her apartment should have been enough for anyone who hadn’t copped on already....

Wombatman

Superb movie. So much going on probably one reason why this thread is so long and divisive. Not a super hero movie really and the antithesis of a feel good flick.

Has much to say in, a clever way, about mental health, inequality, big media, activism and ultimately the nature of good and evil.

The "tai chi" in the bathroom after the subway killing and the dwarf locked door scenes were worth the ticket price alone.

Intelligent script writing, with some great quotes, haunting oppressive music, near perfect casting and acting. Just a stunning overall production package.

Such a thought provoking and impactful movie. Didn't necessary like how it made me feel, but it made me feel. So many animated discussions going on in the movie foyer and car park after this one. Great to see.

Did Wayne bamboozle his mother or was she a dangerous fantasist? How important is the answer to this question?

Is the movie saying, Joker is more than a character, it’s a movement, a state or mind? Did Joe Chill kill the Waynes or was it “The Joker”.

9/10.

Always Tired

The reason I have criticised the film isn't because it's not the typical superhero flick.

It's this ridiculous idea, just as the last post stated, that it's breaking new ground and is layered with important messages and social critiques. You could only think that if you are under, say, 25.

There are plenty of films that have covered the issues in this one. I'm not saying it's a bad film but people making it out to be something more than it is annoys me. It's like people who have never listened to Led Zeppelin or The Who telling you that some new band has the best drummer ever.

peteeeed

the empire podcast has a joker spoiler special with a todd philips interview

https://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/empire-podcast-joker-spoiler-special-ft-todd-phillips/

Wombatman

Always Tired wrote: »

The reason I have criticised the film isn't because it's not the typical superhero flick.

It's this ridiculous idea, just as the last post stated, that it's breaking new ground and is layered with important messages and social critiques. You could only think that if you are under, say, 25.

There are plenty of films that have covered the issues in this one. I'm not saying it's a bad film but people making it out to be something more than it is annoys me. It's like people who have never listened to Led Zeppelin or The Who telling you that some new band has the best drummer ever.

Thanks man. I was under 25 over 25 years ago.

Did I really say it was groundbreaking? More provocative than groundbreaking methinks. Weighed alongside the dross that graces our silver screens, week in week out, this film is close to epic.

micks_address

Wombatman wrote: »

Thanks man. I was under 25 over 25 years ago.

Did I really say it was groundbreaking? More provocative than groundbreaking methinks. Weighed alongside the dross that graces our silver screens, week in week out, this film is close to epic.

Is it epic because it's depressing and a slow tortuous watch rather than the mostly pop corn hero wins movies that usually win the box office? Is being different enough to be epic? I think it's a pretty good movie.. but epic methinks not.. not that it's any great measure but will it get nominated for best film? Powerhouse performance by Phoenix for sure but I don't think he'll win an Oscar...maybe I'm wrong..

Outlaw Pete

Always Tired wrote: »

It's this ridiculous idea, just as the last post stated, that it's breaking new ground and is layered with important messages and social critiques.

You can't judge a film based on what other people are saying about it tbf.

I was aware of none of the above, given hat I had successfully avoided all talk and discussion of the film like the plague, including avoiding watching the trailers and so I was oblivious to all that crap, and thank God for it, as it would have no doubt tainted my viewing of it for sure.

Tammy!

silverharp wrote: »

its one of those songs that is bigger than the artist, when i saw the movie i couldnt remember who it was.

Before he was arrested so there wouldn't have been any controversy but I only noticed last night the song was also used in Happy Gilmore!

cdgalwegian

https://collider.com/joker-interview-joaquin-phoenix-todd-phillips/

If you take the ending to mean that Arthur and Joker made this whole origin story up, do you have any idea what landed him in lock up in the first place?

PHILLIPS: No, but I don’t want to play this game of “If we accept that.” We want people to make their own interpretations regarding the ending.

I love that there are going to be a ton of people who are saying, “Oh, this all happened.” And the other half are going to be like, “No, this is all in his imagination.” How early on did you guys realize that was a crux of the movie?

PHILLIPS: Scott and I realized in writing it. When we were writing the script, Scott Silver and I really thought there’s a fine line in this movie with delusion and reality, with his own delusions. And there’s something to the character of Arthur where he may be exaggerating to make himself a victim in certain things to make you want to feel for him. So it’s very much, and I know this term gets used a lot, but he’s very much an unreliable narrator. And he’s not your standard unreliable narrator, he’s also Joker. So it’s almost like a double unreliable narrator, because he could also be… Some of it could be a goof to him, right? So yeah, early on it was a big part of the screenplay where you’d read it and go, “Oh, okay, I’m not really sure what’s happening here.” In a fun way, I hope. Not in a frustrating way.

Are there any Easter eggs that people have not found yet?

PHILLIPS: Oh, I’m not a big “Easter egg” guy… but there are some fun things buried in the film for sure. I just don’t know that they are “Easter eggs”.

PHOENIX: I was saying to the last press, they asked me this thing about the clock and 11:11 and I said, “Paul is dead.” And he was like, “What?” I said, “Paul is dead.” He’s like, “I don’t know.” And the other guy that was like my age, was like, “It’s a Beatles reference, dude.” It’s these ****ing 22-year-old kids, they don’t know “Paul is dead.” I go, “You see what you want to see, you hear what you want to hear.” Everybody thought it said “Paul is dead” backwards and ****.

PHILLIPS: But that 11:11 is not an Easter egg to me. Everything is intentional.

TinCool

I went to see this last night. I found similarities to Aronofsky's Requiem For a Dream. The mother in that movie's slide in to madness had a similar feel, in some ways, to Flecks decent further in to mental illness. Overall, Joker is an interesting character piece movie. Can't say I enjoyed it as it's not that kind of movie, but certainly captured a sense of constant foreboding. You knew eventually he'd snap and it'd get crazy.