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

rtron

So if Sophie wasn't killed and the deleted scene was her watching joker on TV - then him killing Murray was real?

tigger123

rtron wrote: »

So if Sophie wasn't killed and the deleted scene was her watching joker on TV - then him killing Murray was real?

What would make you think killing Murray wasn't real?

tigger123

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Some people have a theory that the whole thing is made up and that he's actually recounting the fake story to the therapist he kills at the end but I very highly doubt it.

I didn't see any evidence for that at all.

People have been superimposing things on to this film that just aren't there.

El Duda

tigger123 wrote: »

I didn't see any evidence for that at all.

People have been superimposing things on to this film that just aren't there.

I've seen it twice and there's one very strong hint that pretty much the entire film is just in his head.

Fysh

El Duda wrote: »

I've seen it twice and there's one very strong hint that pretty much the entire film is just in his head.

What is it?

I initially interpreted the scene of him climbing into the fridge as being a suicide attempt, so was a bit surprised that we didn't get anything more about that.

pixelburp

I still think the Fridge Scene is meaningless, and just Phoenix improvising some "be in existential crisis and eccentric". If Phoenix dancing in the bathroom was off the cuff, then stands to reason it wasn't isolated; look how crazy he is, climbing into a fridge! Arthur had the gun at that point IIRC, so wasn't like he didn't have an easier suicide option (which he did seem to play with).

johnny_ultimate

Think the question is less ‘was it all in his head?’ and more ‘is it more interesting if it’s all in his head?’. Personally I don’t think that revelation - if it was, say, overtly revealed at the end somehow ala the Sophie flashbacks - would add anything of substance to the film. Would just make the whole thing more nebulous but without adding to the overall meaning or themes.

Ambiguity in a film can be a valuable tool, but this is otherwise pretty blunt and straightforward in its intentions (I don’t even mean that in a bad way - just that it’s a pretty linear, clear narrative) so again not sure what an ‘all in his head’ twist adds to proceedings.

MrStuffins

Joker just became one of the Top 50 Highest Grossing Movies of All Time and is closing in on $1bn in Box Office receipts.

It's currently 44th. What's 43rd on the list? The Dark Knight!

ErnestBorgnine

MrStuffins wrote: »

Joker just became one of the Top 50 Highest Grossing Movies of All Time and is closing in on $1bn in Box Office receipts.

It's currently 44th. What's 43rd on the list? The Dark Knight!

Also read somewhere it's the most profitable Comic book film of all time now.

BDI

Great film. One of them films where you are blown away by it. No real hidden meanings in it. It’s all straightforward.
Best film this year, havnt seen Tarantino one yet. Best superhero/marvel type film I can remember, best version of the joker in my opinion. Him on the train near the end looked epic.

Can’t see why anybody didn’t give it a good review.

Brief_Lives

Just out of the cinema... Wow..
phoenix is the best actor out there today... How does he do it...

OU812

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.

The White Wolf wrote: »

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.

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Nope, it's exactly the same situation. The film belongs to the studio, not the director so whatever version they have gone with is The Cut. The Snyder cut is just that - his cut but it's not The Cut. It's not canon. I'm not saying fans don't have a right to be annoyed but going on and on about it when the studio has made their (bad) choice is just pointless.

Superman II: The Donner Cut is a vastly superior version of the movie. not entirely what the director intended but much more like it than the dross the Lester directed theatrical version was.

It's not canon but it's the fan favourite version.

Ultimately though, the studio owns the film & the version they decide to put out is the bible version.

Drumpot

OU812 wrote: »

Superman II: The Donner Cut is a vastly superior version of the movie. not entirely what the director intended but much more like it than the dross the Lester directed theatrical version was.

It's not canon but it's the fan favourite version.

Ultimately though, the studio owns the film & the version they decide to put out is the bible version.

Brando and the sacrifice superman makes to get his power back is so much more powerful and dramatic in the Donner cut.

Would love to see a Snyder cut of JL to be fair, can’t be worse then the abomination that was squated out.

Raconteuse

Finally got around to this. Fantastic imo.

Reminded me of Requiem For a Dream (the TV show fantasies) as well as the much discussed Scorsese 70s era works.

Gorgeously shot. Gotham has a bleak beauty to it.

Phoenix broke my heart - his depiction of a sad, innocent, childlike man, who goes over the edge, is almost too much to bear at times.

Exceeded my expectations.

Screw Attack

Saw it last week, I thought it was awful. Not the artsy psychological drama that people were touting. A very safe, conventional comic book movie. Phoenix does his best with a very limited script, but it's nothing complex or interesting as the role suggested. The moment the film lost all credibility is when he went to Arkham and found out that the events were literal, and they even put in a lame explanation of his love acquaintance, as if the audience is so dumb, they need to be told what they already knew. Overall, an unimpressive piece of work.

pixelburp

The the absolute surprise of nobody, a sequel is coming:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/joker-sequel-works-as-todd-phillips-eyes-more-dc-origin-movies-1256255

This passing line is interesting though; I had wondered if this was a success, would WB chase Todd Phillips to helm more DC projects...

Sources tell The Hollywood Reporter he proposed an outsized idea — the rights to develop a portfolio of DC characters' origin stories.

Phillips is unlikely to starve either :eek:

The unexpected bounty also is generating a huge payday for Phillips, 48. Sources say the director will earn close to $100 million when the dust has settled (he deferred his upfront salary in exchange for a bigger slice of the adjusted gross). In fact, the deal is similar to one he struck with Warners before the first Hangover movie, which went on to earn a surprise $467.5 million worldwide in 2009 off a $35 million budget (the trilogy took in $1.42 billion).

Drumpot

pixelburp wrote: »

The the absolute surprise of nobody, a sequel is coming:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/joker-sequel-works-as-todd-phillips-eyes-more-dc-origin-movies-1256255

This passing line is interesting though; I had wondered if this was a success, would WB chase Todd Phillips to helm more DC projects...




Phillips is unlikely to starve either :eek:

And some people think Phillips is a joke :pac:. . Looks to be quite astute and confident in his own work

OU812

I’d be very interested in a portfolio of DC characters' origin stories. done in his style

pixelburp

Drumpot wrote: »

And some people think Phillips is a joke :pac:. . Looks to be quite astute and confident in his own work

It can be two things Honestly, there's not a lot of complexity in this situation, it was always a pretty straightforward equation: cheap movie that pitches itself as adult entertainment, makes a huge profit margin. Who knew!

Culchie_85

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/joker-sequel-works-as-todd-phillips-eyes-more-dc-origin-movies-1256255

I guess it was inevitable given the box office business it has done...

rossie1977

OU812 wrote: »

Superman II: The Donner Cut is a vastly superior version of the movie. not entirely what the director intended but much more like it than the dross the Lester directed theatrical version was.

It's not canon but it's the fan favourite version.

Ultimately though, the studio owns the film & the version they decide to put out is the bible version.

You thought same ending in the two Donner Superman movies was right move?

Actually discussing Donner Cut with a friend last week and he hated it and Lester's Superman 2 is one of his favourite movies ever so it's not for everyone

Wombatman

pixelburp wrote: »

The the absolute surprise of nobody, a sequel is coming:

Any sequel will surely require some Batman?

El Duda

Booooooooo!

El Duda

No need.
No f--king need.

pixelburp

El Duda wrote: »

No need.
No f--king need.

Well that's probably the main point of contention really; does it need a sequel? Yeah, I don't think so either. Like it or loath it, Joker was a self-contained beast that told its story and got off the stage. Difficult too in figuring out where this story could go, given Arthur didn't seem the criminal genius type.

Wombatman wrote: »

Any sequel will surely require some Batman?

I hope not: an abiding thought throughout Joker was that this was not a world that could realistically contain a vigilante rich-guy beating up criminals while dressed as a bat. The script positively went out of its way to make its world as dingy and grungy as possible.

20Wheel

Saw it a week back. Good film, no negativity towards the film itself. I liked the strong realism (well, as real as you can make a comic back story), the 70s/80s NY taxi driver vibe, the storyline of opposing social forces and growing conflict, it was excellently produced and acted.

But as someone above pointed out all the **** about the film as if its breaking new ground is annoying.
This is not the first anti-hero or criminally insane character, or psych thriller. Fleck is very Travis Bickle in some ways, brooding, isolated, gradually losing touch.

If there was a film/character that broke new ground on criminal psychology it would be manhunter/silence of the lambs, Lecter and pals.
Joker doesn't go quite as deep fleck is not an abnormal man, he was a nice guy who just had a crap deal and eventually snaps.

A bit like the great red dragon in a loose way. Or again, Bickle.

OU812

rossie1977 wrote: »

You thought same ending in the two Donner Superman movies was right move?

Actually discussing Donner Cut with a friend last week and he hated it and Lester's Superman 2 is one of his favourite movies ever so it's not for everyone

Donner cut is the better of the two versions. The jester version is a farce by comparisons

ricero

Still of the suspicion that this will somehow tie in with R Pats new batman film and universe.