However
was there not a photo or something in her possessions where Thomas had written overleaf she has a lovely smile? Or something of the sort. Could be wrong! Send a friendly note for a psycho woman.
Film Joker (2019)
- Thread starter Ahsan_6386
- Start date
Sure she didn't intentionally harm him, but she was hardly nice to him - they only had a casual encounter on the elevator. Up until that point in her apartment he had imagined a host of intimate moments with her which he probably thought were real, then from his perspective - her sudden rejection & denial of him could spark anger. In the same way the big clown guy 'gave him the gun' (that could've been part of Jokers imagination), only to deny it when it came time for accountability.
yeah I didn't believe it until I saw the TW initials on the back of the photograph.
In reality, nothing probably happened between them, but there's just enough there to make you question whether it could've. And being able to silence people in a city like Gotham doesn't seem too far fetched, especially if you're a billionaire.
In reality, nothing probably happened between them, but there's just enough there to make you question whether it could've. And being able to silence people in a city like Gotham doesn't seem too far fetched, especially if you're a billionaire.
Oh yes. But the kanon is too far built on Wayne's character i dont think it's that complicated
Never been a fan of the Batman movies, and don't know too much about the Joker. This movie however seems like something you just have to watch, according to a lot of people. I also thought that the trailer was sort of... boring, but you should never judge a movie from a trailer. So, is it worth watching?
I watched this last night and thought it was excellent. Phoenix is just incredible.
My only criticism is I wanted to see more of him as the joker.
My only criticism is I wanted to see more of him as the joker.
I thought it was fantastic. It's dark, it's grim but I was completely gripped throughout. In terms of depiction of someone's decent into total madness, I thought it did a great job.
Phoenix was excellent... completely different to Ledger because he wasn't playing the Joker, he was playing Arthur Fleck.
Phoenix was excellent... completely different to Ledger because he wasn't playing the Joker, he was playing Arthur Fleck.
My only criticism is that he wasn't intimidating enough as the Joker. His voice is just feeble and lacks that snappy charisma. I was wanting it to come out of him more (lolsies). He was a good joker just not the wrecking ball I wanted to see.
But that aside, absolutely brilliant. Now I have a superhero film to sit alongside the TDK, finally.
To be fair, he was only "The Joker" for the last bit of the film... which is the first time he ever is the Joker... so it would make sense that he would be a bit low-key to start, as he isn't yet a criminal mastermind.
One thing im annoyed at is the fact we didnt see enough of him in the traditional joker outfit. Although he did become a very cool dude as the joker.
When he became the joker i noticed he became confident, his issues seemed to go away and his laughing stopped.
Another thing i noticed is that his mum actually wasnt so nice to him. It clocked on after truth came to light but looking back, a part that hit me was the bathtub scene where she bluntly says he isnt funny and breaks his heart.
Another thing i noticed is that his mum actually wasnt so nice to him. It clocked on after truth came to light but looking back, a part that hit me was the bathtub scene where she bluntly says he isnt funny and breaks his heart.
I don't think he has the voice for it. Phoenix has always had a weak voice. Ledger's dialogues stung becuase he his voice was almost an instrument. Don't think that would change with more screen time. Same for charisma. Ledgers version was ridiculously charismatic. Those for me are drawbacks that are simply due to the two actors. But that aside he was a good joker as well. Loved the weid dance and the make up was surprising good as well.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
A film that provokes such varied reaction is definitely more worthwhile than most of the rest of the superhero blockbuster schlock that gets mass produced.
Last edited:
I believe heath ledgers joker was damn sexy in a way as it had all of those alpha male traits.
The joker of jaoquin phoenix was very very different. It was a mentally fragile dude who's capable of doing some crazy spontaneous shit. Although he doesn't come across as powerful as ledger, he is the hero for Gotham and he is a cool cool joker, especially with that cigarette. He is like a puppy dog joker that you feel sorry for and kinda understand.
The two are so different but so good in their own regard. I believe that heath ledgers joker was more mysterious and that's why he's more loved. We saw the full naked transformation of this joker so we know it's flaws and weaknesses which you can't say the same got ledger
Another part I was thinking was the Randall gun part.
Arthur, an unreliable narrator, makes us believe that Randall gave him a gun for no reason other than protecting himself because he likes him but the other guys all say he tried to buy it off of Randall.
And the boss says his colleagues are all creeped out by him. So why would Randall do that?
Maybe he tried to purchase the gun but Randall said no and that's why he hates him enough to kill him.
Arthur, an unreliable narrator, makes us believe that Randall gave him a gun for no reason other than protecting himself because he likes him but the other guys all say he tried to buy it off of Randall.
And the boss says his colleagues are all creeped out by him. So why would Randall do that?
Maybe he tried to purchase the gun but Randall said no and that's why he hates him enough to kill him.
First off, if I recall correctly it's only Randall who claimed Arthur tried to buy the gun off him. So it's one's word against the other. There wasn't a plethora of accusers.
Secondly, he is an unreliable narrator in the sense that he imagines dialogues that didn't happen, not that he forgets whole sequences that have happened. Not a giant leap, I know, but If Randall didn't give him the weapon then where did he get it from? It's not like he can walk into a shop a get one in his state, he's not allowed one. And if there was this sequence of him acquiring the gun from somewhere else, did he completely forget about that?
It's far more plausible to suggest that Randall, being creeped out by Arthur but unafraid due to his size, saw the incident at the hospital as a chance to both get the creep fired and deflect the suggestion that it might have been his gun. It's Ockham's razor.
Secondly, he is an unreliable narrator in the sense that he imagines dialogues that didn't happen, not that he forgets whole sequences that have happened. Not a giant leap, I know, but If Randall didn't give him the weapon then where did he get it from? It's not like he can walk into a shop a get one in his state, he's not allowed one. And if there was this sequence of him acquiring the gun from somewhere else, did he completely forget about that?
It's far more plausible to suggest that Randall, being creeped out by Arthur but unafraid due to his size, saw the incident at the hospital as a chance to both get the creep fired and deflect the suggestion that it might have been his gun. It's Ockham's razor.
he could have just taken the gun out of his locker and his mind invented the conversation between the two
Yep, I alluded to the gun conversation not actually place earlier too. I don't see why Randall would come and visit him afterwards because he & Gary both seemed to be concerned that Arthur wasn't doing okay.
I think we should stop comparing the various adaptations or versions of Joker. Every single take on the character has been different in some way. There is no set criteria on how Joker as a character should be presented. So I don’t get all these complaints/criticisms about Pheonix’s Joker - he doesn’t have the voice for it, he’s too old, he is not charismatic enough, he doesn’t give off the supervillain vibe, he doesn’t look like a criminal mastermind etc etc. All of that is irrelevant because this is an independent version of the Joker. No one (at least not to my knowledge) is claiming that this is the guy who becomes Heath Ledger’s Joker. This is an independent universe and has nothing to do with the other joker adaptations. I think when people say that this joker doesn’t have the voice/looks/charisma, they are just comparing this joker to the TDK joker because for most of us, that is ‘The Joker’, but the truth Is, there is no version if Joker you can call as the original joker. In comics and in the movies, Joker is a dynamic character who keeps changing.
Last edited:
Best film I’ve seen in a long time. Would love to see this version of the Joker in a future film, may or may not happen. Find the comparisons and criticisms weird as well. Take it for its own thing. He’s also a far more believable character in this film than any other. I believe a lot of introverts and people with mental health issues will be able to relate to that portrayal and maybe think of things in a different light after watching.
I agree with you except for the point about being a criminal mastermind. Because all adaptation of the Joker, film, comic or cartoon that is what he is. He is a highly intelligent villain who outsmarts Batman, so I think the failure in this case to show him as being intelligent or any type of genius or ability to outwit in anyway is a slight failing. Only a small one mind but still a failing.
Its a big leap for this adaptation of the Joker to go on to become an advisory who could outwit or outsmart Batman in any type of form of Joker it could go on to be
That creates way too many questions.
How did he steal it without damaging the locker? If he managed it, wouldn't Randall have noticed and confronted him about it, on the back of having previously been asked for the gun by Arthur? And if he didn’t, wouldn’t he have at least checked and mentioned that his gun is missing after the hospital event when the boss asked around about Arthur and the gun? He wouldn't have lied to protect Arthur, because the best protection he could have offered without also incriminating himself would have been to mention nothing of a gun. And he didn't do that. He would have also mentioned it to the cops that came asking after the murders, to remove his own liability in case it was that gun that was used.
Hence I mentioned Ockham's Razor. The most likely event is that after his beat-down, Randall either momentarily took pity on him or he gave it to him to get to offload it (gun could have been "hot", used in an incident) or both. But after the hospital event he mostly didn't want this coming back to him, while his empathy didn't extend enough to protect Arthur from the consequences of his own actions (bringing a gun to a children's hospital).
Obviously all of that is theory.
How did he steal it without damaging the locker? If he managed it, wouldn't Randall have noticed and confronted him about it, on the back of having previously been asked for the gun by Arthur? And if he didn’t, wouldn’t he have at least checked and mentioned that his gun is missing after the hospital event when the boss asked around about Arthur and the gun? He wouldn't have lied to protect Arthur, because the best protection he could have offered without also incriminating himself would have been to mention nothing of a gun. And he didn't do that. He would have also mentioned it to the cops that came asking after the murders, to remove his own liability in case it was that gun that was used.
Hence I mentioned Ockham's Razor. The most likely event is that after his beat-down, Randall either momentarily took pity on him or he gave it to him to get to offload it (gun could have been "hot", used in an incident) or both. But after the hospital event he mostly didn't want this coming back to him, while his empathy didn't extend enough to protect Arthur from the consequences of his own actions (bringing a gun to a children's hospital).
Obviously all of that is theory.
No, not really. I think the one thing that has remained constant in almost all adaptations of the Joker is that he is crazy and hence unpredictable. I remember playing Batman the Telltale Series in which Joker is portrayed as a crazy, unpredictable guy who wanted to be friends with Batman, to be accepted by Batman. Only the Ledger Joker was this smart criminal mastermind and maybe the Mark Hamill version of animated Joker. IIRC the Jack Nicholson Joker was more of a trickster/crazy dude. Now, I haven’t read all the joker comics but from what I’ve seen on YouTube, in the 60s, Joker was portrayed more as a prankster .
Ive shared this video before but I’ll post it once more because for me it sums up the Joker character and it’s various adaptations very well.
Think this sums it up very well : Joker is not just an evil man, he’s an idea, an embodiment of his beliefs, that cannot be bullied, reasoned or negotiated with which is what makes him so dangerous
Last edited:
Entertainingly, it had the same opening weekend that Justice League got.
Good review from Kermode there as well, even if I'm less enthusiastic.
I don't think comparing different versions is something that needs to stop. He's one of the most iconic and fascinating fictional.villains to ever have existed in pop culture. And hence there is an existing impression/impression/preference for who Joker can/should/would be. And yes, I prefer Ledger's Joker as the stronger and more fascinating one. No doubt about it. I can appreciate both, and I do - Phoenix's Joker was great, and their uniqueness and respective personalities, and still prefer one as the better, superior and ultimately more iconic Joker. And that's Ledgers.
At the same time, as I've said before, I absolute loved this film and Phoenix's work with the character. That doesn't invalidate me from pointing out his evident weaknesses compared to the other who blew everyone away with his portrayal. And having defender this portrayal against the mastermind point, I now do now that there is a case to made there. He was a bit simple for who I and many want Joker to be or feel he is.
Anyhoo, like I said brilliant brilliant film. But we can discuss it and the pros and cons of the film and the actors/characters. Everyone and everything has drawbacks.
I now think this is a pretty fair point. They could have had a set piece showing clever scheming mind at play and a little less of him being a dunce.
Still, can't wait to it again.
They don't even have to show him being smart. They just have to hint at it. Have the councillor he sees say he is a genius but the meds are slowing him down etc. Then it would explain any sudden jump in scheming as we knew he went off his meds
I think genius would be a bit much. Having the confidence to explore the depth of his scheming mind would probably more experience but maybe something where he surprises others (and maybe himself too) with the way he pulls things off.
It’s.... decent. Rising to pretty good at parts in the second half, but Jay Bauman describing it as “Baby’s first Taxi Driver” is about as succinct and on point a review as possible.
The first hour is a fascinating study of how excellent acting, cinematography and score (best part of the film hands down btw) can make even a pretty hackneyed script where every character pretty much explains the state of the world, the protagonist and the thesis of the film to you at every imaginable turn, into something that can plausibly - if you squint - resemble a Scorsese masterclass... if Scorsese had the subtly of a cat on fire.
The fact this thread already has people complaining he’s not cool or smart enough to be “the Joker” means maybe even that was an admirable over-shoot from Philips? Though I can somewhat understand it, ‘cos there is literally no need for this to be a Batman related property (though I liked little Bruce Wayne sliding down a tree house pole as the silliest comic book Easter Egg imaginable in this kind of movie!)
7 is about fair. It’s an interesting experiment of sorts.
The first hour is a fascinating study of how excellent acting, cinematography and score (best part of the film hands down btw) can make even a pretty hackneyed script where every character pretty much explains the state of the world, the protagonist and the thesis of the film to you at every imaginable turn, into something that can plausibly - if you squint - resemble a Scorsese masterclass... if Scorsese had the subtly of a cat on fire.
The first line of the film is “Is it me, or is it getting crazier out there?”
Zazie Beets’ first line is “this building is getting worse”
Thomas Wayne goes on television and calls the poor “clowns”
All the rich people are watching Modern Times for some reason (THEMES!!!)
At the end of the film The Joker literally looks down the camera lense and explains why he’s doing what he is!...
It is genuinely one of the least subtle films I’ve ever seen in my entire life.
Todd Philips is not Paul Schrader
Zazie Beets’ first line is “this building is getting worse”
Thomas Wayne goes on television and calls the poor “clowns”
All the rich people are watching Modern Times for some reason (THEMES!!!)
At the end of the film The Joker literally looks down the camera lense and explains why he’s doing what he is!...
It is genuinely one of the least subtle films I’ve ever seen in my entire life.
Todd Philips is not Paul Schrader
The fact this thread already has people complaining he’s not cool or smart enough to be “the Joker” means maybe even that was an admirable over-shoot from Philips? Though I can somewhat understand it, ‘cos there is literally no need for this to be a Batman related property (though I liked little Bruce Wayne sliding down a tree house pole as the silliest comic book Easter Egg imaginable in this kind of movie!)
7 is about fair. It’s an interesting experiment of sorts.
Last edited:
Just back from seeing it. I really enjoyed it but I can see that it's not for everyone. I left feeling that it was a really good film but something was just missing for it to become a true masterpiece. As soon as I left I started to think that it didn't hammer home a few of the points I thought it might have done (and that was probably my fault for absorbing all the hype surrounding the film) but i'm starting to think now that that might have been the point; it's a horribly nihilistic film about a horribly nihilistic guy. You take from it a lot of cruelty but there's nothing era defining or revolutionary about it. It's just a very bleak origins story of a classic villain and it's a good one at that.
The Marxist undertone of rich vs poor is there but I didn't take a way any feeling that the film was 'saying' a great deal about it. As Arthur says at the end before he murders that obnoxious host, he's not political. He has nothing left and he's doing what feels good to him.
Yes, but based on a very clever criminal for instance a comic character who turned all the fish in the water to have his smile so he could trademark them and make money. Was always a smart criminal from what I gather but maybe I am missing the parts where he wasn't
Yes I've watched that youtube link before, its a very good summary
Mike looked like he was about the to punch him after that. Also that review finally made me realise just how awful Batman is in The Dark Knight. That movie would been millions time better without him, poor fecker stands out like........well a man dressed as giant bat.
I don’t think he stands out in TDK (although I personally don’t like his suit as much as in Biggins) I mean, the Joker dresses up as a nurse at one point. It’s Rises where he stands out. The one he spends most of in broad daylight, in a magical knee brace, after an old man in a cave prison bunched his broken back together again.... it’s also the one that - like this - also has a vague socialist revolution backdrop that it uses as a lazy plot mechanic to have things happen but doesn’t really explore or comment on in anyway at all.
Though it is amusing that most people thought this would have a clunky poorly nuanced coded right wing message... when it fact it has a clunky poorly nuanced left wing one.
Last edited:
It's in the nature of nihilism that, the better one writes about it, the more elusive the idea appears to those who don't simply believe in the meaningless.
Last edited:
I thought it was pretty great.
Taxi Driver crossed with Perfect Blue with with a DC face lift. Only issue for me was the lack of subtlety, but think this was intentional.. modern audiences and that.
Taxi Driver crossed with Perfect Blue with with a DC face lift. Only issue for me was the lack of subtlety, but think this was intentional.. modern audiences and that.
feck off, Wilson was capitivating in that film. How he didn't win an oscar for best supporting actor is beyond me. He was robbed!!!!
Last edited:
I liked it more than I expected after the trailer. I wasn't sure what I was going to see. It shows well how the character evolves and as someone posted, in the end it´s easy to feel some simpathy for the villain.
Perhaps I missed a little more action but I understand that it is a pre-joker.
Phoenix does it well, but actually I have never been very good to recognize when an actor's performance is sublime. 8/10
Perhaps I missed a little more action but I understand that it is a pre-joker.
Phoenix does it well, but actually I have never been very good to recognize when an actor's performance is sublime. 8/10
Thought it was magnificent. I'm just home and I'm still feeling uncomfortable - spent the entire 2 hours on edge and completely gripped.
Phoenix absolutely nailed it I thought - even without any of the Batman stuff it would have been incredible just as a character portrait. I have a close family friend with a difficult mental health issue that he struggles to balance with every day life and this performance was hauntingly on point for me.
Some of the cinematography - two or three of the scenes on the steps, the scenes on the train, in the studio and the reflections while on the bus were fantastic and the score was superb. The final riot scene is one of my favourites I can remember seeing in the cinema in recent years.
For those saying they can't see this version of the Joker becoming the criminal mastermind he's been on other adaptations, I thought his transformation of the last 30 minutes of the movie was very telling. Whether it was coming off the pills (could have been numbing his capabilities) or the confidence he seemed to garner from murdering people, he was a totally different person to the first hour and a half. He was more charasmatic and confident and I could certainly buy into the idea of him further developing into the agent of chaos from TDK.
Phoenix absolutely nailed it I thought - even without any of the Batman stuff it would have been incredible just as a character portrait. I have a close family friend with a difficult mental health issue that he struggles to balance with every day life and this performance was hauntingly on point for me.
Some of the cinematography - two or three of the scenes on the steps, the scenes on the train, in the studio and the reflections while on the bus were fantastic and the score was superb. The final riot scene is one of my favourites I can remember seeing in the cinema in recent years.
For those saying they can't see this version of the Joker becoming the criminal mastermind he's been on other adaptations, I thought his transformation of the last 30 minutes of the movie was very telling. Whether it was coming off the pills (could have been numbing his capabilities) or the confidence he seemed to garner from murdering people, he was a totally different person to the first hour and a half. He was more charasmatic and confident and I could certainly buy into the idea of him further developing into the agent of chaos from TDK.
Had my doubts, so I've read the plot and I'm deeply disappointed. Won't be seeing this=
I'll stick with TDK and Leto's DCEU Joker.
The Joker a mama's boy? Thomas Wayne a piece of shit? A nasty matricide? Silly V of Vendetta riots? Wtf is this shit? Depressing and bleak, that's not the Joker I know, this is more like a deeply sick guy and failed comedian who started killing people because the state couldn't buy him his medication anymore
I'll stick with TDK and Leto's DCEU Joker.
Last edited:
Your loss.