David Fincher says Joker was 'a betrayal of the mentally ill’

[BUtterfield 8 41,466]

the filmmaker slammed the major studios 4 taking fewer risks on innovative projects, citing last year's Joker as an example of Hollywood's derivative tendencies. Fincher echoed many of the film's critics by describing its protagonist, played by Joaquin Phoenix, as a mash-up of 2 Martin Scorsese characters, Taxi Driver's Travis Bickle & The King of Comedy's Rupert Pupkin. (Both were played by Robert De Niro, who also appears in Joker.)

“Nobody would have thought they had a shot at a giant hit with Jokerhad The Dark Knight not been as massive as it was,” “I don’t think anyone would have looked at that material & thought, ‘Yeah, let’s take Travis Bickle & Rupert Pupkin & conflate them, then trap him in a betrayal of the mentally ill, & trot it out 4 a billion dollars.’”

“I'm sure that Warner Bros thought at a certain price, & with the right cast, & with De Niro coming along 4 the ride, it would be a possible double or triple,” “But I cannot imagine that movie would have been released had it been 1999.”

That year is a reference to Fincher's own film Fight Club, whose reception among studio executives the director contrasted with Joker's: “The general view afterwards among the studio types was, ‘Our careers are over.’ The fact we got that film made in 1999 is still, 2 my mind, a miracle.”

"The reality of our current situation is that the 5 families" — a reference to the 5 Mafia organizations depicted in The Godfather — "don’t want to make anything that can’t make them a billion dollars," "None of them want to be in the medium-priced challenging content business. & that cleaves off exactly the kind of movies I make. What the streamers are doing is providing a platform 4 the kind of cinema that actually reflects our culture & wrestles with big ideas: where things are, what people r anxious & unsure about. Those are the kinds of movies that would have been dead on arrival 5 years ago."

Source

[elijahfan 26,305]

Not 100% with him on the Joker saltiness, but his analysis of the state of the industry is accurate. The fact big directors like Fincher or Scorsese can only make their films the way they want through Netflix nowadays is pretty telling.

[Guest]

Confused about the point hes trying to make 

[weed 73,900]

King! Only truth was spoken

[CautiousLurker 19,470]

He's not wrong, Joker does not handle the topic of mental illness well, it just comes off that way because Joaquin's performance is really good, but it really doesn't say anything insightful... If anything, it falls into the same trope of 'society made this mentally ill person into a monster' trope...

[Curunir 7,510]

Just now, CautiousLurker said:

He's not wrong, Joker does not handle the topic of mental illness well, it just comes off that way because Joaquin's performance is really good, but it really doesn't say anything insightful... If anything, it falls into the same trope of 'society made this mentally ill person into a monster' trope...

I don't think it needed to say anything "insightful" about mental illness. The audience can pretty easily draw their own conclusions.

[CautiousLurker 19,470]

14 minutes ago, Curunir said:

I don't think it needed to say anything "insightful" about mental illness. The audience can pretty easily draw their own conclusions.

Then don't make a movie about it - Joker's main thesis is about mental illness, it posits that the mistreatment the main character goes through because of his condition puts him on a path of violence, so... what conclusion is the audience supposed to draw that isn't that?

Popular media has an effect on people, it's really good at shaping a person's world view and another movie about a mentally ill person who commits crime is not doing anyone any favors... 

Edit: I mean you can make a movie like that but it's clumsy and it's fair to critique it for that...

[Curunir 7,510]

30 minutes ago, CautiousLurker said:

Then don't make a movie about it - Joker's main thesis is about mental illness, it posits that the mistreatment the main character goes through because of his condition puts him on a path of violence, so... what conclusion is the audience supposed to draw that isn't that?

Popular media has an effect on people, it's really good at shaping a person's world view and another movie about a mentally ill person who commits crime is not doing anyone any favors... 

Edit: I mean you can make a movie like that but it's clumsy and it's fair to critique it for that...

How are you so certain that the only conclusion the audience can draw from it is that one though? That's such a limited view to me.

I wouldn't call the movie clumsy just because it doesn't directly address mental illness.

[Serial Chiller 8,044]

I mean the mental illness narrative was conflated with classist struggles and poorly poorly executed, turning into an incel manifesto, which is sad. Each matter deserves a more nuanced exploration. 

[Bebe 17,094]

3 hours ago, Curunir said:

How are you so certain that the only conclusion the audience can draw from it is that one though? That's such a limited view to me.

I wouldn't call the movie clumsy just because it doesn't directly address mental illness.

Not trying to speak for any other user and misrepresent what they mean - but they think what CautiousLurker is saying, and I agree, is that it DOES directly address mental illness. It’s throughout the film, it’s a major theme.

Joker’s mother had major delusions and a narcissistic personality, she was standing by Arthur’s father while he was abusive to Arthur and did a stint in Arkham Asylum. The first trauma that we know Arthur was exposed too is facilitated by his mentally ill mother allowing this abuse. Arthur was suffering from his own psychosis and, after stopping with his medications, became extremely violent and murderous.

Mental illness is at the forefront of almost every scene, Arthur’s struggles with mental illness are depicted in almost every scene and the film consistently associates mental illness with danger and violence. 

Every character struggling with mental illness in the film is portrayed as dangerous and perpetuates violence either passively (by allowing it to happen and continue) or directly by perpetrating it themselves. The film very clearly depicts Arthur’s mental illness as significantly contributing to his extreme violence.

[Stephen 30,426]

I can’t stand this film because I love the actual character of the Joker from DC comics and Arthur is nothing like the Joker. It’s pretty much an entirely different character so what’s the point of calling it Joker... 

[Curunir 7,510]

1 hour ago, Bebe said:

Not trying to speak for any other user and misrepresent what they mean - but they think what CautiousLurker is saying, and I agree, is that it DOES directly address mental illness. It’s throughout the film, it’s a major theme.

Joker’s mother had major delusions and a narcissistic personality, she was standing by Arthur’s father while he was abusive to Arthur and did a stint in Arkham Asylum. The first trauma that we know Arthur was exposed too is facilitated by his mentally ill mother allowing this abuse. Arthur was suffering from his own psychosis and, after stopping with his medications, became extremely violent and murderous.

Mental illness is at the forefront of almost every scene, Arthur’s struggles with mental illness are depicted in almost every scene and the film consistently associates mental illness with danger and violence. 

Every character struggling with mental illness in the film is portrayed as dangerous and perpetuates violence either passively (by allowing it to happen and continue) or directly by perpetrating it themselves. The film very clearly depicts Arthur’s mental illness as significantly contributing to his extreme violence.

Oh, I agree 100% with all of this. Maybe I misunderstood what CautiousLurker was trying to say.

That's how I feel too by the way, I just might be looking at it from a different perspective. His mental illness is such a central part of the movie that it doesn't need to be "directly" addressed. It would feel redundant. The audience can very clearly (and in a pretty graphic way) see what it's done to Arthur but at the same time they see what society's treatment of people like him can do.

They also get a glimpse into his mind, see how he feels and how much he doesn't have control. All of this is told through what happens to him and what he does, thinks etc. - which is a lot. But that's how the writer/director chose to portray it. Violence and compassion, or violence and empathy or pity aren't mutually exclusive. The audience doesn't need to have a pretty picture painted for them. It is a psychological thriller after all, and we're dealing with characters with some heavy psychological issues, but there's so many lessons that can be learned from it, not just "he becomes violent because he's mentally ill and mistreated".

So no, I wouldn't say that mental illness is portrayed in a clumsy way. The film is graphic, unrestrained, aggressive, but that doesn't make it any less veracious or accurate in its representation of the main character, neither does it undermine or disregard how serious of an issue mental illness is.

[Bradley 59,159]

“But I cannot imagine that movie would have been released had it been 1999.”

 

I'm sorry what are the merits of this point? Times change and things that were not acceptable in the past can become more acceptable over time. If anything, isn't it a sign that times have changed and that more kinds of stories are being made and told?

[Diamond Heart 4,400]

I agree tbh 
i really disliked the way the film portrayed mental illness. 

[Killa 17,490]

I dont really get his point. He got lost in argument, or maybe just be more direct. 

I also disliked that joker movie. Its all hype