Joker (2019) - Reviews

[Lord Temptation 11,209]

24 minutes ago, M Monstre said:

People were yawning and checking their phones because they were walking into a movie expecting giant action sequences and set pieces. They aren't yawning cause it's "unbelievable". 

As for it being "unbelievable" though, I'd argue that it's not unbelievable at all. Here's the thing...I feel like when people say "Oh, that would never happen in real life" whenever they talk about a movie or tv show, they're often talking about it from their own point of view. Maybe you haven't experienced anything like Arthur has experienced, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.

People are unforunately beat up, mugged, and ridiculed everyday. And like Arthur says in the end, "If it were me lying on the street you'd all walk right over me!". That's the point the movie's making. These things do  happen and often times we turn a blind eye to it because we don't want to "deal with it" when the reality is that people like Arthur have to deal with it everyday. 

I'd also say that the movie does let you witness what's going on in Arthur's head. That's literally the entire movie...

 

15 minutes ago, M Monstre said:

But that's the point of the movie. Look, like I said in my first post, I'm not going to try and berate you and say "you're wrong" or "you're stupid" for having a different opinion. That's the beauty of art. People can have different opinions on things. That being said, like @ReginaGeorgesaid, I think you're missing the point of the film.

Everyone else in the film is second to Arthur/Joker. You say that's a bad thing, but that's literally the point of the film. Arthur is the center piece; Arthur is the character you follow. We don't need a backstory for the Wall Street guys, or the kids that beat him up in the beginning of the movie. We don't need half an hour spending time on his manager at Ha Ha's. Those would all be superfluous things to add.

I don't remember exactly if it was Todd Phillips or Joaquin Phoenix who said this, but I do remember them saying that the point of having characters like the kids and the Wall Street guys is to show people that these are just everyday things that happen to Arthur. If anything, that should make it more  impactful. 

Arthur gets beat by society on a daily. Him being made fun of, ridiculed, etc. is the same as you or me walking down the street to buy some groceries. Do we need to know how the groceries were made? Do we need to know why 'x' street we walk down is called 'x'? No, because that's information that we just don't need. 

The fact that stuff like this is so regular to him shows you just how much people "got what they ****ing deserved" in his eyes. 

That’s the precise problem: I can believe a story like Joker’s. In fact the brilliant 2003 film Monster, starring Charlize Theron as real life serial killer Aileen Wuornos, does a great job at showing how a person who has been treated like a victim their whole life, can all of a sudden turn into a powerful monster.

But in Joker, it’s the dialogue itself and how the story treats secondary characters as unimportant that lets it down. And in way it treats the audience as unimportant as well because we never actually escape being inside Arthurs head. We’re like prisoners.

Anyways, bottom line is that I still think it’s a good film, but just not a memorable one.

[Lilmonzter 2,864]

I did see it 

I'm predicting  oscar wins for Todd Phillips and Joaquin Phoenix.

It was disturbing thrilling and so cleverly woven. Makes you question humanity and the current parallels of classism 

These quotes were so memorable!

"You'd step over my body "

"He was such a happy little boy, I've never heard him cry"

[REALITY 76,060]

1 hour ago, kyanewest said:

It's called Joker, not Joker & co 

lol I didn't say that, I don't know why it quoted me

[REALITY 76,060]

1 hour ago, Lord Temptation said:

That’s the precise problem: I can believe a story like Joker’s. In fact the brilliant 2003 film Monster, starring Charlize Theron as real life serial killer Aileen Wuornos, does a great job at showing how a person who has been treated like a victim their whole life, can all of a sudden turn into a powerful monster.

But in Joker, it’s the dialogue itself and how the story treats secondary characters as unimportant that lets it down. And in way it treats the audience as unimportant as well because we never actually escape being inside Arthurs head. We’re like prisoners.

Anyways, bottom line is that I still think it’s a good film, but just not a memorable one.

But secondary characters  are unimportant...That's the point. Again, I'm not sure you completely understand what the movie is getting at.

We don't need to know who are the secondary characters are to understand how they affect Arthur. The only secondary characters that were really of any importance were his mother, Thomas Wayne, and Sophie (for that reveal in the beginning of the third act). Everyone else is there to serve the purpose of Arthur's story. 

I guess I just don't understand what you mean by the "dialogue" itself, or how it treats the audience  as "unimportant" as well. 

In the beginning you said that we aren't going into Arthur's head, but now you say "we never actually escape being inside Arthur's head"...so which is it? Are we inside his head or not?

[Galvon 1,868]

I really want to see it, but from what I've heard I think I just wait for the dvd release.

Like I can't watch saw movies or final desination. Way to nasty, I don't get it. I like Sweeney Todd (the Tim Burton movie) and AHS, but some of those scenes allready make me little uncomfortable.

[Lord Temptation 11,209]

46 minutes ago, M Monstre said:

But secondary characters  are unimportant...That's the point. Again, I'm not sure you completely understand what the movie is getting at.

We don't need to know who are the secondary characters are to understand how they affect Arthur. The only secondary characters that were really of any importance were his mother, Thomas Wayne, and Sophie (for that reveal in the beginning of the third act). Everyone else is there to serve the purpose of Arthur's story. 

I guess I just don't understand what you mean by the "dialogue" itself, or how it treats the audience  as "unimportant" as well. 

In the beginning you said that we aren't going into Arthur's head, but now you say "we never actually escape being inside Arthur's head"...so which is it? Are we inside his head or not?

Wow gurlie, no need to interrogate me.  If the movie is a masterpiece to you, then so be it. I didn’t express my opinion to challenge anyone else’s and neither should you.

And yes, we are stuck inside Arthur’s head throughout the whole movie, and it’s superficial as hell because we lierally only see two things: Arthur as the victim (for the first half of the film), and then Arthur as the psycho killer for the second half. No in between, no ambiguity. As if the two are mutually exclusive. We the audience basically inhabit a black and white universe where we see only what the Joker wants us to see. For someone as complex as that, you never see more than the TWO personas. We never see the real Joker. He’s not fully treated as a person, actually no-one in the film is. They’re more like archetypes. Real people have ambiguity. 

And no I don’t expect secondary characters to be important in the film, but they should be important in the scene. And not just treated like objects.

[Freud 5,650]

Seeing it tonight cause a friend wanted to go and I liked the trailer, so I donthave any expectations but the OP got me excited

[Tranquility 343]

It's definitely one of my favorite films of this decade. Certainly the best of this year.

[REALITY 76,060]

9 minutes ago, Lord Temptation said:

Wow gurlie, no need to interrogate me.  If the movie is a masterpiece to you, then so be it. I didn’t express my opinion to challenge anyone else’s and neither should you.

And yes, we are stuck inside Arthur’s head throughout the whole movie, and it’s superficial as hell because we lierally only see two things: Arthur as the victim (for the first half of the film), and then Arthur as the psycho killer for the second half. No in between, no ambiguity. As if the two are mutually exclusive. We the audience basically inhabit a black and white universe where we see only what the Joker wants us to see. For someone as complex as that, you never see more than the TWO personas. We never see the real Joker. He’s not fully treated as a person, actually no-one in the film is. They’re more like archetypes. Real people have ambiguity. 

And no I don’t expect secondary characters to be important in the film, but they should be important in the scene. And not just treated like objects.

Honey, if I wanted to "interrogate" you about this film, I could've done so easily. A film like this is meant to be talked about and discussed. If I wanted to say "you're opinion is stupid BLAH BLAH BLAH" I would've done so without elaborating on my thoughts in my previous posts. 

As for actual talking points about the film, I think that there is a lot of ambiguity within this film. That's sort of what the whole "controversy" about this film is: are you able to sympathize with someone like Arthur while at the same time condemning his actions? In my opinion,  yes. I do think you can condemn his actions while at the same time, have sympathy for someone who's been beaten by society as much as Arthur has.

I'd also argue that this movie isn't about seeing the "real Joker". This is an origin story. Whether they'll do a sequel and explore the character more is a different subject entirely, but as for this movie, it isn't about the "Joker" as we know him to be. This is about how someone can become  the Joker. 

As for the whole secondary characters thing, if you want to go back in my previous posts to know about what the secondary characters' roles are suppose to fill in the movie, feel free to do so. I'm not going to explain it to you again.

[phantasmas 10,405]

fell asleep through most of the movie 

absolutely did not like how they portrayed joker as a mentally ill person who finally snapped 

the mob scene where someone held up the "We're all clowns" sign had me cracking up 

his ideology was quite stupid too... it was like watching 4chan posts come to life 

cant wait for Birds of Prey which no doubt will be 1000x better 

[Gaby15 12,819]

I saw it today. The movie was very good, I predict Oscar noms.  I am surprised not about Phoenix acting skills primarily, but about Phillips. He seemed a good director for comedys only. And I am very surprised that some kind of a psycho thriller-drama can have so huge success. 

[Bio 23,538]

A movie made by rich white people about how anti-sistemic  movements are self-serving. Shocking.

[Morphine Prince 105,404]

Loved the social commentary and how real it was. Refreshing to see in a villain movie. 

[sampool 5,560]

On 10/10/2019 at 8:28 AM, Galvon said:

I really want to see it, but from what I've heard I think I just wait for the dvd release.

Like I can't watch saw movies or final desination. Way to nasty, I don't get it. I like Sweeney Todd (the Tim Burton movie) and AHS, but some of those scenes allready make me little uncomfortable.

Joker isn’t that bloody or brutal in any way, specially to the movies you listed. But it’s raw and mentally uncomfortable.

[PrinceOfTheStorm 5,904]

I didn't know this was a thread, but I'll share my honest thoughts when I saw the movie over a week ago.

Holy cow. That was awesome. I felt so engrossed into Arthur's Story, because he's such a morally gray character I never knew how to feel about his actions, but that made it way better.

And I still am processing the movie, and trying to figure out what is right and what's wrong. If a movie can give me mind food to chew on awhile after it releases, you did something right.

Joaquin Phoenix was excellent as Joker. He perfectly gave off the eerie vibes necessary to make a good Joker, and definitely a scary one at that.

Spoiler

Also, that ending bloody smile scene, holy sh**. That is one of my favorite scenes for how disturbing it is, it's amazing cinematography. 

The OST is also very strong, like each piece fit the eerie tone of the movie, and it just made the experience a lot better.

But sheeple, if you really think this movie is gonna inspire violence, stop sniffing so much paint because it isn't...

9/10

On 10/11/2019 at 12:28 PM, phantasmas said:

cant wait for Birds of Prey which no doubt will be 1000x better 

Birds of Prey is more of a Harley Quinn movie with the same unnecessary cringe dialogue of Suicide Squad and extra cheese feeling, and even if it's a primarily Harley Quinn movie, why the hell do we not have Joker omg that's all I wanted to have in a Harley Quinn movie, give us the King and Queen of evil some screen time. I did not like that trailer.

 

Hopefully Margot Robbie carries the movie