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

micks_address

i checked out of the thread a while back till i seen the movie but i assume anyone interested has seen the Jimmy Kimmel clip on you tube? Talk about an ambush... doubt he'll be appearing on that show any again any time soon..

micks_address

assistplease wrote: »

You've been had.

ok that makes sense as it was way to awkward to be real

micks_address

micks_address wrote: »

ok that makes sense as it was way to awkward to be real

or maybe not would be in keeping with the film

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/vb5yqa/joaquin-phoenix-outtake-cursing-at-cinematographer-is-fake-jimmy-kimmel

Tazzimus

micks_address wrote: »

i checked out of the thread a while back till i seen the movie but i assume anyone interested has seen the Jimmy Kimmel clip on you tube? Talk about an ambush... doubt he'll be appearing on that show any again any time soon..

Did you actually believe that was real?

micks_address

Tazzimus wrote: »

Did you actually believe that was real?

Actually couldn't believe it to be honest... but pretty easy way to cover up if it was a disgruntled set person sent it in... oh lets brush it under the carpet by saying it was a stunt

Tazzimus

micks_address wrote: »

Actually couldn't believe it to be honest... but pretty easy way to cover up if it was a disgruntled set person sent it in... oh lets brush it under the carpet by saying it was a stunt

Everything on those shows is pre-screened. Joaquin was in on it.

kerplun k

That outtake was actually directed by Casey Affleck

I believed that Kimmel interview was real. So it was staged?

mrsdewinter

Deleted User wrote: »

I believed that Kimmel interview was real. So it was staged?

Was it staged? If it was a joke, it fell very flat. It became very uncomfortable viewing...

Outlaw Pete

Well, very uncomfortable viewing is one of Joaquin's specialities:

mrsdewinter

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Well, very uncomfortable viewing is one of Joaquin's specialities:

From my reading of the provenance of that clip, in that instance 1 of the parties was not in on the joke (Letterman), which is not what is being implied by contributors here.

Have Phoenix & Kimmel said that it was a set-up?

ShaneODub

Saw this last week. I liked all the similarities with Taxi Driver, King of Comedy etc. I think it suffered a bit because we knew where he was heading before the film even started. I wonder if they could have wrote it in such a way that we didn't find out that this was the Joker, or the Gotham universe, until the final scenes. That would have been a good reveal.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Did that thing in the cinema watching this last night where you bray with laughter and nobody else does:

The bit where he says

”What do you think?”, throws away his cig all cool, like, and then slams into the plate glass door and falls over. I’ve realised I love a good pratfall, especially in a film where you’re not expecting it. I’m real sophisticated, me. I’m guessing that happened during filming and they just decided to leave it in.

I thought about The King Of Comedy a lot whilst watching this, especially with Pupkin being in the film.

MrStuffins

ShaneODub wrote: »

Saw this last week. I liked all the similarities with Taxi Driver, King of Comedy etc. I think it suffered a bit because we knew where he was heading before the film even started. I wonder if they could have wrote it in such a way that we didn't find out that this was the Joker, or the Gotham universe, until the final scenes. That would have been a good reveal.

What?

El Duda

I don't think the Kimmel clip is a stunt. I think it's more likely that Kimmel is just a terrible man.

The White Wolf

This film is close to a billion now. What an amazing feat. I hope to see more mainstream films like this that are born out of an individual's vision as opposed to the increasing trend of films made by committee.

tylercheribini

The White Wolf wrote: »

This film is close to a billion now. What an amazing feat. I hope to see more mainstream films like this that are born out of an individual's vision as opposed to the increasing trend of films made by committee.

At the very least It will prove to the studio suits not everyone,in fact quite a lot are not interested in endless derivative franchise flicks.

stoneill

Reminded me of The King of Comedy, Robert De Nero in reverse role.

elefant

Did anyone else experience people at their screening laughing at what felt like really inappropriate moments? Like, there was laughter at mine as

he smothered his mother, and stabbed the guy in the head with a scissors

. Not just from one person or anything either.

I found it quite odd, and it was uncomfortable, but it made me reflect that I did quite enjoy the film's blurring of the lines between dark psychodrama and comedy. Moments of what would ordinarily be plain comedy, in the middle of pretty disturbing and grim scenarios. Fleck felt like a personification, as well as the protagonist, of the film: how grim does something have to get before you won't laugh at it anymore?

The White Wolf

There was no laughter after smothering the mother in mine anyway. Nothing to laugh at as that was Arthur at is absolute most bleak.

I'll admit to chuckling in shock a little bit at the stabbing in the apartment as I was expecting some kind of violence from Arthur; just not that type of literal explosion. Using Ledger's portrayal as a comparison, he got his kicks from fcuking with his prey moreso than even perhaps the violence, whereas the violence itself acts as the catharsis for Arthur. So in this case, my expectation against what we actually got led to nervous chuckling from myself.

tylercheribini

Laughter can be a nervous reaction to shock for some people.

El Duda

The second time I saw it I intentionally laughed at all the wrong moments, just like Arthur did in the comedy club.

It helped all of the other cinema goers feel at ease.

elefant

El Duda wrote: »

The second time I saw it I intentionally laughed at all the wrong moments, just like Arthur did in the comedy club.

It helped all of the other cinema goers feel at ease.

Haha! I was actually wondering if people were perhaps doing this.

I also thought about it maybe being nervous laughter. Whatever their reasons, it just made for a really surreal experience considering the content of the film and Joker's own involuntary laughter complex.

It added another layer to the film for me anyway!

cdgalwegian

El Duda wrote: »

The second time I saw it I intentionally laughed at all the wrong moments, just like Arthur did in the comedy club.

It helped all of the other cinema goers feel at ease.

That part might have been all in your mind.:p

El Duda

cdgalwegian wrote: »

That part might have been all in your mind.:p

**high pitched cackle**

cdgalwegian

I went to see this again last night. Just as good as first time. The feeling of increasing grimness was even more pronounced this time, up to the train incident, after which the tone shifts considerably; almost as if the inciting incident is at the 3/4 point, rather than the 1/4 point.
I had listened to the Empire podcast's Todd Philips interview, shortly before the rewatch, and had more or less come round to Pixelburp's 'ad lib' take on the fridge scene, but having watched it again, I think that that could be a bit of subterfuge on Philips part- the way the film progressed, the fridge theory makes total sense. As to the final scene, Philips had stressed a few times- in different words- that ambiguity was baked into most scenes, and that there was no definitive answer to what may or may not have happened in any of them; iows, this was intentionally structured from the outset, as well as by way of some ad libbing, to muddy the narrative waters. Iows, the fridge scene, the final scene, and indeed many others could be deleted, and a perfectly serviceable but more rigid story would emerge. This narrative playfulness means certain scenes could mean nothing, or everything; the film could hinge on these moments. Who knows? For the moment, the director won't say what his view is (at least about the final scene; about the fridge scene he kept silent because he wasn't asked). Whatever which way, I came away just as impressed with a second viewing, perhaps even more impressed.

The White Wolf

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I like what he said about not being a fan of deleted scenes and extended cuts. I too can't stand stand when there are competing versions of one film. That's why this #ReleaseTheSnyderCut nonsense is annoying - at the end of the day WB put out the film they wanted to. It sucked. Move forward.

Not to derail the thread but given Whedon cut a completely different film, which involved much of his reshoots, fans have a legitimate gripe. It's not a normal situation in regards to films being cut for runtime or coherency purposes.

The director was basically fired after he completed shooting.

kerplun k

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I like what he said about not being a fan of deleted scenes and extended cuts. I too can't stand stand when there are competing versions of one film. That's why this #ReleaseTheSnyderCut nonsense is annoying - at the end of the day WB put out the film they wanted to. It sucked. Move forward.

Ah here, when a film starts off as one thing and then gets rehashed into anther thing, of course we'd all be very interested in seeing the other thing, especially if its a finished product.