Joker Review Thread

[MikeandRaph87]

Originally Posted by MsMarvelDuckie

So, self-absorbed narcissist. Yeah, makes sense. Or, maybe losing that ONE person who actually matters to him is what drives him over the edge?

It worked for Mr. Freeze and they can react differently. Besides with Nora there is some hope while not with Joker's unnamed wife and unborn child. I don't know why Joker has to be an unknown identity either. Pushback in Gotham Knights had the right idea, but did not execute it well. Its like Joe Chill going unnamed With everything Joker is done it makes little sense for no one to know what his name was.

[CyberCubed]

In Batman ‘89 and B:TAS Joker is already a gangster/mob boss before falling into acid. I like his origin already being rooted in crime to begin with rather than just an ordinary guy going crazy.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

In Batman ‘89 and B:TAS Joker is already a gangster/mob boss before falling into acid. I like his origin already being rooted in crime to begin with rather than just an ordinary guy going crazy.

Though if not that, I like the postulation about TDK that he's like a former military Special Ops guy who did crazy stuff in Afghanistan/Iraq and came home messed up, angry at the human condition.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Though if not that, I like the postulation about TDK that he's like a former military Special Ops guy who did crazy stuff in Afghanistan/Iraq and came home messed up, angry at the human condition.

I like that it's only implied, though.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

I like that it's only implied, though.

Same. I'd love to know whether Heath and Christopher Nolan were playing around with that idea, but either way, it works quite well, being nebulous, as is common with the Joker.

[Andrew NDB]

I really prefer to look at the Joker's origin like most people with the origins of Immortals in Highlander. As in, prefer not to ever know with the belief that making up an origin would cheapen the thing.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I really prefer to look at the Joker's origin like most people with the origins of Immortals in Highlander. As in, prefer not to ever know with the belief that making up an origin would cheapen the thing.

I generally agree, but maybe less so than I did a year ago. Like, I’m obviously completely fine with how it was handled in Joker. I essentially just need some element of mystery to the truth, but I’m fine with a past being implied, quite heavily, apparently.

[Voltron]

Joker's dip in the chemicals was always a solid and present part of his past. Everything else was not. It contrasts with Bruce's background, where everything is known and expanded upon to the point that there are no secrets with him. It makes sense that his antithesis would be a mystery.

I don't think it makes him scarier to be unknown, though. I think it makes it more difficult to empathize with him, though. That's important, since it keeps the Joker pure. Any redemption arcs or tear jerking back stories are typically lies he's using to manipulate or delusions he's using to justify his behavior.

[Leo656]

The cinematographer tries to clarify one of the things people are speculating and debating about, giving a conclusive answer from the perspective of the people who made the film. Spoilers, obviously.

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/10/jo...84505/#respond

Spoiler:

As I theorized, the filmmakers tried to present Arthur only killing people who had "done him wrong" before the end, therefore he spared Sophia.

What I find entertaining and annoying are the people in the Comments who see fit to argue with the people who made the film about what actually happened. I'm all for leaving some things open for interpretation, BUT, I'm also really big on taking what filmmakers say they intended at face value. If a person says, "I/We made this thing, and what I intended was This," it's kind of arrogant for another person to insist otherwise. Like there's "interpretation" and then there's Facts, y'know?

Anyway. For better or worse it looks like we have an official answer on how that scene was intended to be received. Whether a person agrees with it or not is their own prerogative, of course, but I choose to take them at their word.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

What I find entertaining and annoying are the people in the Comments who see fit to argue with the people who made the film about what actually happened. I'm all for leaving some things open for interpretation, BUT, I'm also really big on taking what filmmakers say they intended at face value. If a person says, "I/We made this thing, and what I intended was This," it's kind of arrogant for another person to insist otherwise. Like there's "interpretation" and then there's Facts, y'know?

Like TMNT (2007).

Kevin Munroe, writer/director of the film: "It takes place after the old movies and is in the same universe. Period."

Fans: "But iiis it, though?"

[Leo656]

Oof, that's a whole other can of worms.

I'll say that while I respect that may have been their intention they did a very sloppy job of executing it in that particular case. But if they say that they made the movie with that mindset, I won't argue with them. It's their thing, they wrote it.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Like TMNT (2007).

Kevin Munroe, writer/director of the film: "It takes place after the old movies and is in the same universe. Period."

Fans: "But iiis it, though?"

I’ll accept the director’s word but they have to work with me. TMNT wasn’t able to do this. Felt nothing like the older films.
Plus, I feel like there should be a reason. It doesn’t build on any narrative threads. The only purpose it serves is to handwave having to explain what happened to Shredder and show a scepter on a shelf.

That said, I’m not that invested, so if people want to say it’s connected, whatever.

[sdp]

TMNT 2007 is a horrible example, he posted here in the drome that it was not a sequel, then a sequel to the first movie, then he stated loose sequel to the first two movies, and then he stated it was its own thing but fans could put it in the same continuity if they wish. Later we got to see the movie and it had a reference to TMNT III which he never stated was in continuity, so pretty much left open for debate and he didn't seem to want to make it in continuity, more like fans asking him every 10 mins if it was or not that he threw them a bone.

Had the film gone for longer it would've not been in continuity and the supplemental stories comic/game/books pretty much also contradict the theory it'st he same universe.

[ProphetofGanja]

lmao who yells “beat him up!” while they’re jumping somebody

That took me all the way out right from the jump

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by ProphetofGanja

lmao who yells “beat him up!” while they’re jumping somebody

That took me all the way out right from the jump

What? I always yell that when I jump somebody!

Whether or not I ever have.

[Andrew NDB]

Finally got my answer about Scorsese. So he did work on it for 4 years but stepped back.

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/11/ma...rs-1202187094/

[Andrew NDB]

Hm.

[ZariusTwo]

Eleven nominations in the bag
https://variety.com/2020/film/news/2...es-1203461985/

[Vegita-San]

man, twitter femenists are a sad little bunch.

not happy a movie no one liked got at least some nominations....smh.

they all seem to have a hate on for joker.

[AquaParade]

To be fair, even much of this place had a hate-on for the movie before seeing it.
Gonna toot my own horn and say I saw this coming miles away. Couldn’t be happier, because this is the direction I’d like to see more comicbook adaptions go - less cgi, more focus on character and story, more creative freedom.

Infinity War is one of my favorites. Keep those around. But the success of this film is a wonderful thing.

Congrats to the team. Hope we get a sequel.