JFAD; What went wrong?

[Kayi 2,406]

Unpopular and controversial opinion :

Don't come to me guys please it's just my opinion 

Every Harley fans who dared saying that Margot's Harley was perfect and that Gaga's Harley is the worst version of the character, are wrong. 

Margot's Harley was badly written, she's a mix between Suicide Squad Harley/New 52 and classic Harley, which create inconsistencies in her evolution. So ppl who claim that she is playing the most accurate Harley are delulu. 

And Margot Robbie's acting isn't peak cinema cause she use the same gimmicks too much. I think that Gaga is a better chameleon in term of acting. 

Lee is a codependent character that developed an aspect of Joker's writing. She's not the main character but let's not forget that classic Harley was codependent too. It doesn't mean she is useless or uninteresting. 

[REALITY 75,357]

It was a combination of fan expectation and execution. 

Simply put, the movie is not good and it was extremely different than what most people wanted to see. From a purely intellectual perspective, I think the story and Arthur Fleck's character are interesting. The idea that he didn't want to be "the Joker," but instead was made out to be by the public and his supporters, is inherently interesting. Gaga being a stand-in for his adoring fans, and by extension the movie-going audience, was also an intriguing idea. That said, it wasn't the movie people wanted to see. You might argue, "Who cares? It's the director's vision. Not all art is made to service the fans." It's a noble ideology, but this movie was a sequel to a $1 billion, Oscar-winning picture (with a budget of ~$200 million). It needed to make money, and therefore, needed to live up to fans' expectations in some way. If this was some little indie film, it wouldn't have mattered that much.

Fans wanted to see a Bonnie & Clyde-esque story, with the musical elements being big spectacles that furthered both Joker and Harley's delusions. That isn't the movie we got. Again, you might say, "That's the point of the film," but in that case, I'd disagree with the fundamentals of the movie. This movie shouldn't have been subversive in that way. It could've been subversive in other ways—much like the first movie—but to completely strip Joker (and Harley) of their identities is not what people wanted. 

Beyond that, the movie was also just not executed well  In every way except for the acting, the movie was inferior to its predecessor. The musical elements also felt tacked on. I didn't even dislike them as much as most people, but they just weren't good musical sequences. It felt like the movie wanted to be a musical without committing fully to it, which is what they kinda did with the press interviews.

Edited April 11 by REALITY

[Plastic Flower 4,354]

A second movie wasn’t needed in the first place. That + the musical aspect. The fans hated it from day one. It was destined to fail.

[Dawson 9,466]

It’s flawed but it’s not a 0/10 movie like everyone is making it out to be. The right wing crowd attacked it for not glorifying the joker and focusing on mental health. Lee is a good allegory for the audience reaction tbh. No one cared if Arthur was happier not being the joker, they wanted chaos and violence and incel behaviour even at the expense of Arthur’s happiness 
 

Hating the movie became the cool thing to do too, everyone hopped on the bandwagon of hating it in fear of being ostracised for liking it. Obviously some people didn’t like it for valid reasons but a lot of the negative reaction came from fragile masculinity, incel behaviour and bandwagoning

i still love the movie 

Edited April 11 by Dawson

[spookytanooki 389]

The real problem with the movie is that nothing happened throughout the entirety of the film.