I just left the theater about 20 minutes ago (and walked past a private security truck parked outside the theater during a matinee. Had never noticed that before in all the times Ive gone here.) I don't know how this film got made. I have seen hundreds of movies over the years but this one just knocked me on my ass. I was wide-eyed throughout most of the film, and fighting back tears watching this character suffering from severe mental illness go from sweet and innocent to just absolutely f***ing stark raving lunatic. I have never seen an actor so dedicated to his performance in all my life. If there were ever a film that deserved an R-rating, THIS IS IT. It is not only possibly the darkest film I have ever seen but the film's messages are likely to be interpreted as a justification for violence for many of the wayward souls watching this film. And not only that but in an era where people have been dressing like clowns in real life, scaring people, shooting up theaters dressed as the *JOKER,* and the heated political rhetoric of "us vs. them," "rich vs. poor" and the omnipresent bullying and stigma against mental illness that seems to have always been around, it just absolutely floors me that this film was made.
It's not for the faint-hearted and I actually saw a theatergoer jump at one of the more particularly violent scenes. That is something that is very hard to do these days with so many of us being desensitized to violence. But it's a testament to how realistic and dramatic this film is.
I hung on every word of dialogue in the film, and Im not sure if I blinked during the entire two hours. I have never felt empathy for a character who does the most unspeakable things on film, and so for that I'd say it is easily the ballsiest film ever made. And I feel privleged to be able to say I was able to see this film. Bravo.
Joaquin Phoenix turns in a stellar performance, several interesting themes are explored, and there are quite a few plot twists in the middle of the film. It is a sophisticated picture, but not an especially deep one. The movie is oddly hesitant to commit itself to its own themes. At times the message seems to be that rich people are evil and capitalism is to blame for all of society's problems. At other times it is critical of mob rule and casts Joker as a dangerous anarchist sowing destruction and misery. I think the attempt was to make Joker a nuanced character and make it difficult to say for sure whether he's a hero, villain, or victim. But pulling off such subtly takes extreme writing talent, which is just not present here. The end result is a film that contradicts itself and says little of substance. It is still worth a watch though, because as a character study it is excellent. As a critique of any major issue, it fails.
Phoenix does a very good job.
It's a slow burner.
It has its moments.
It's not an easy watch.
There's a lot of social commentary.
I'd give it a solid 7.5/10, though I could see it being a very polarising film where some give it a 9 or 10 out of 10 while others give it a very low 4 or 5.
Avoid the trailer; buy a ticket; let Phoenix take care of the rest.
I think I can add this movie to my favorites, but I'm unsure because there was a talking, sighing, cellphone buzzing, soda slurping cunt in the cinema who threw me off. As the movie progressed my imagination on how to rough him up was in sync with Joker's evolution. If it wasn't for the lady next to him who sternly told him to shut up multiple times I'd have dragged him to the front, kicking him in the gut, yelling: "Is this the entertainment you want?"
Joker is about anti-assholes—which I can obviously get behind—not anti-rich people. From the latter point of view the story is black and white, but not as the former.
As it's own story I think this film succeeds on its grimy aesthetics, deft cinematic callbacks, and of course Phoenix's magnetic performance. It's interesting. However as a BATMAN movie, I would call it a failure, the crucial problem being that it has no relationship to the character it exists to portray. Whoever this "Arthur Fleck" fella is, he is obviously not arch-nemesis material. The Joker has actual defining character traits/abilities and isn't just any fictional murderer dressed like a clown (Pennywise isn't the Joker, etc).
Let's leave aside the fact Fleck is an anorexic grandpa that, we can only assume, the much younger Batman will one day accidentally kill with one punch. The Joker character, in all his adaptations, is a criminal genius because Batman is a crime-fighting genius. It takes a Moriarty to challenge Batman's Holmes. But Fleck is a fuckup; a clumsy simpleton with no discernible skills or gifts. In fact almost every defining trait of the character is reversed: The Joker is a sadistic psychopath who you are supposed to hate (Fleck is a sympathetic "anti-hero" who only harms those that harm him), the Joker is extroverted and domineering (Fleck is withdrawn and socially inept), the Joker is disturbingly mirthful (Fleck is deeply depressive). These are not expendable traits, they purposely define the Joker in yin-yang counterbalance to the virtuous, cloistered, sullen Batman. This contrast is what makes these characters and their dynamic appealing, yet Arthur Fleck (mediocrity aside) is basically the same emo avenger as Bruce Wayne.
I mean this almost seems intentional. With the Joker depicted as the REAL sympathetic vigilante hero (and official spokesclown of the new BLM/Antifa/Pepsi Resistance™) and the Wayne family as callous robber barons, it kind of seems like we're supposed to think the Joker is giving you his own fair and unbalanced version of events here. They should've added a Duck Amuck style pull back after the end credits with the Joker decked out as Cecil B. DeMille: "Ain't I a stinka?"
Not only does Mark Hamill remain the best movie Joker, but Paul Dini's no-frills Joker backstory in Mask of the Phantasm -- a cunning mafia thug -- is still the least gimmicky and most rewarding one available (See also). Dini keeps Joker's origins mysterious, but not overtly shrouded a la Nolan. I know that 'vicious gangster used to be a vicious gangster' is kind of an anti-backstory, but that’s kind of the point. Writers are so eager to make a character “interesting” that they tack on any dramatic absurdity at the expense of authenticity. It’s the writing equivalent of bad CGI: unless it looks real, less is more. (And to be fair, I do appreciate how Todd Philips has moved beyond the corny traditional "chemical vat" storyline, like Nolan who also implied Joker simply wears makeup.)
Indeed if you want to see the best non-animated prequel version of the Joker just watch Richard Widmark in Kiss of Death (1947). Same character! In the unreleased sequel the Batman freak shows up, energizing the chaos, and Widmark (and other savvy criminals) successfully co-opt his crazy formula. As Joker he is more terrifying and this gives him an additional edge over the more ordinary, less adaptable crime bosses. Batman didn't fix crime in Gotham, he injected it with steroids.
I am quite ambivalent about the Joker movie, so don't expect a glowing review from me. First, let me say that Joaquin Phoenix's performance is unimpeachable. And sure, the picture's look is strong, with Gotham City being played by a well-reproduced 1970s New York. But I have two problems with the flick, and they bothered me well beyond the 2-hour experience. First is how derivative it is. Todd Phillips' hard-on for 70s cinema is obvious, and at his most clever, he uses the Exorcist stairs to evoke something (well, almost, we'll get to that), but otherwise, as everyone's said, he's doing Scorsese (in particular Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy), but also Fight Club, Frank Miller (ugh, can't we get away from Year One's specifics even once in these movies?), and a couple seasons of Gotham. In fact, I often felt like this was just a Gotham episode writ large. The other more important problem is that Joker pretends to have a message, or messages, but it's really not about anything (so the very meaning of the word "pretentious"). It never closes the deal on anything it might have to say. It's not really about we treat the mentally ill, because it's ultimately a cartoonish and negative portrayal of mental illness. It's not really about the making of a serial killer, as it's so keen on Joker staying sympathetic, it avoids any real shock to the audience's system (and does a hit job on the Waynes so he can never ever stop being a victim no matter what). It's not about how we should be kinder to one another and punch up rather than down, because the film itself makes fun of a minority character in a "punch-down" kind of way, a darkly comic moment that is sadly one of the only moments of comedy in the film. Because it's not a comedy, not even a dark one, and Joker's line about his life that's in the trailer comes out of left field and isn't earned. It's not even really a subversive Joker origin story, chickening out of its twist connection between Joker and the eventual Batman (then still polluting Batman's origin story by not understanding the power of its simplicity as part of a by-that-time interminable coda because WE NEED THAT MONEY SHOT! No we don't). Hey, I would probably have criticized that too, but at least it would have meant Joker completed a pass on SOMEthing. I think the film is actually summed up in the preachy but confused scene where Joker denies twice that he's not political and doesn't care about anything, as bookends to a sermon that's entirely political. I kept waiting for the movie to decide what it was about, but it isn't about anything but itself as a product (look at me! I'm a serious alternative to MCU-type, four-color action comedies!). Whatever dude, I'm not buying it.
This wasn't necessary. The first two hours of this film were not needed. The Joker doesn't need a backstory, he just kills without reason. But ya, let's blame his mother and his mental illness. Let's make him an incel folk-hero.
Add your comment
Comments 1 - 15 of 42
SemirGenetics
A masterpieceDeus
Amazingly deepShijo88
Based and clownpilled.hugeposuer
A man finds meaning in life through his love for dance.gbpxl
I just left the theater about 20 minutes ago (and walked past a private security truck parked outside the theater during a matinee. Had never noticed that before in all the times Ive gone here.) I don't know how this film got made. I have seen hundreds of movies over the years but this one just knocked me on my ass. I was wide-eyed throughout most of the film, and fighting back tears watching this character suffering from severe mental illness go from sweet and innocent to just absolutely f***ing stark raving lunatic. I have never seen an actor so dedicated to his performance in all my life. If there were ever a film that deserved an R-rating, THIS IS IT. It is not only possibly the darkest film I have ever seen but the film's messages are likely to be interpreted as a justification for violence for many of the wayward souls watching this film. And not only that but in an era where people have been dressing like clowns in real life, scaring people, shooting up theaters dressed as the *JOKER,* and the heated political rhetoric of "us vs. them," "rich vs. poor" and the omnipresent bullying and stigma against mental illness that seems to have always been around, it just absolutely floors me that this film was made.It's not for the faint-hearted and I actually saw a theatergoer jump at one of the more particularly violent scenes. That is something that is very hard to do these days with so many of us being desensitized to violence. But it's a testament to how realistic and dramatic this film is.
I hung on every word of dialogue in the film, and Im not sure if I blinked during the entire two hours. I have never felt empathy for a character who does the most unspeakable things on film, and so for that I'd say it is easily the ballsiest film ever made. And I feel privleged to be able to say I was able to see this film. Bravo.
Paravail
It was...okay.Joaquin Phoenix turns in a stellar performance, several interesting themes are explored, and there are quite a few plot twists in the middle of the film. It is a sophisticated picture, but not an especially deep one. The movie is oddly hesitant to commit itself to its own themes. At times the message seems to be that rich people are evil and capitalism is to blame for all of society's problems. At other times it is critical of mob rule and casts Joker as a dangerous anarchist sowing destruction and misery. I think the attempt was to make Joker a nuanced character and make it difficult to say for sure whether he's a hero, villain, or victim. But pulling off such subtly takes extreme writing talent, which is just not present here. The end result is a film that contradicts itself and says little of substance. It is still worth a watch though, because as a character study it is excellent. As a critique of any major issue, it fails.
MrDoog
Phoenix does a very good job.It's a slow burner.
It has its moments.
It's not an easy watch.
There's a lot of social commentary.
I'd give it a solid 7.5/10, though I could see it being a very polarising film where some give it a 9 or 10 out of 10 while others give it a very low 4 or 5.
Cynicus Rex
Avoid the trailer; buy a ticket; let Phoenix take care of the rest.I think I can add this movie to my favorites, but I'm unsure because there was a talking, sighing, cellphone buzzing, soda slurping cunt in the cinema who threw me off. As the movie progressed my imagination on how to rough him up was in sync with Joker's evolution. If it wasn't for the lady next to him who sternly told him to shut up multiple times I'd have dragged him to the front, kicking him in the gut, yelling: "Is this the entertainment you want?"
baraka92
“The world is shit... the world is shit... the world is shit... the world is shit...”Wait! He’s finally going to make a speech.
...of course... “THE WORLD IS SHIT”.
Not awful but I found it monotonous and derivative. It really doesn’t say much about anything. Just watch The King of Comedy and Taxi Driver.
Also, I liked Phoenix better in The Master.
greenhorg
As it's own story I think this film succeeds on its grimy aesthetics, deft cinematic callbacks, and of course Phoenix's magnetic performance. It's interesting. However as a BATMAN movie, I would call it a failure, the crucial problem being that it has no relationship to the character it exists to portray. Whoever this "Arthur Fleck" fella is, he is obviously not arch-nemesis material. The Joker has actual defining character traits/abilities and isn't just any fictional murderer dressed like a clown (Pennywise isn't the Joker, etc).Let's leave aside the fact Fleck is an anorexic grandpa that, we can only assume, the much younger Batman will one day accidentally kill with one punch. The Joker character, in all his adaptations, is a criminal genius because Batman is a crime-fighting genius. It takes a Moriarty to challenge Batman's Holmes. But Fleck is a fuckup; a clumsy simpleton with no discernible skills or gifts. In fact almost every defining trait of the character is reversed: The Joker is a sadistic psychopath who you are supposed to hate (Fleck is a sympathetic "anti-hero" who only harms those that harm him), the Joker is extroverted and domineering (Fleck is withdrawn and socially inept), the Joker is disturbingly mirthful (Fleck is deeply depressive). These are not expendable traits, they purposely define the Joker in yin-yang counterbalance to the virtuous, cloistered, sullen Batman. This contrast is what makes these characters and their dynamic appealing, yet Arthur Fleck (mediocrity aside) is basically the same emo avenger as Bruce Wayne.
I mean this almost seems intentional. With the Joker depicted as the REAL sympathetic vigilante hero (and official spokesclown of the new BLM/Antifa/Pepsi Resistance™) and the Wayne family as callous robber barons, it kind of seems like we're supposed to think the Joker is giving you his own fair and unbalanced version of events here. They should've added a Duck Amuck style pull back after the end credits with the Joker decked out as Cecil B. DeMille: "Ain't I a stinka?"
Not only does Mark Hamill remain the best movie Joker, but Paul Dini's no-frills Joker backstory in Mask of the Phantasm -- a cunning mafia thug -- is still the least gimmicky and most rewarding one available (See also). Dini keeps Joker's origins mysterious, but not overtly shrouded a la Nolan. I know that 'vicious gangster used to be a vicious gangster' is kind of an anti-backstory, but that’s kind of the point. Writers are so eager to make a character “interesting” that they tack on any dramatic absurdity at the expense of authenticity. It’s the writing equivalent of bad CGI: unless it looks real, less is more. (And to be fair, I do appreciate how Todd Philips has moved beyond the corny traditional "chemical vat" storyline, like Nolan who also implied Joker simply wears makeup.)
Indeed if you want to see the best non-animated prequel version of the Joker just watch Richard Widmark in Kiss of Death (1947). Same character! In the unreleased sequel the Batman freak shows up, energizing the chaos, and Widmark (and other savvy criminals) successfully co-opt his crazy formula. As Joker he is more terrifying and this gives him an additional edge over the more ordinary, less adaptable crime bosses. Batman didn't fix crime in Gotham, he injected it with steroids.
jmunro91
Easily one of the worst films I have ever seen.Siskoid
I am quite ambivalent about the Joker movie, so don't expect a glowing review from me. First, let me say that Joaquin Phoenix's performance is unimpeachable. And sure, the picture's look is strong, with Gotham City being played by a well-reproduced 1970s New York. But I have two problems with the flick, and they bothered me well beyond the 2-hour experience. First is how derivative it is. Todd Phillips' hard-on for 70s cinema is obvious, and at his most clever, he uses the Exorcist stairs to evoke something (well, almost, we'll get to that), but otherwise, as everyone's said, he's doing Scorsese (in particular Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy), but also Fight Club, Frank Miller (ugh, can't we get away from Year One's specifics even once in these movies?), and a couple seasons of Gotham. In fact, I often felt like this was just a Gotham episode writ large. The other more important problem is that Joker pretends to have a message, or messages, but it's really not about anything (so the very meaning of the word "pretentious"). It never closes the deal on anything it might have to say. It's not really about we treat the mentally ill, because it's ultimately a cartoonish and negative portrayal of mental illness. It's not really about the making of a serial killer, as it's so keen on Joker staying sympathetic, it avoids any real shock to the audience's system (and does a hit job on the Waynes so he can never ever stop being a victim no matter what). It's not about how we should be kinder to one another and punch up rather than down, because the film itself makes fun of a minority character in a "punch-down" kind of way, a darkly comic moment that is sadly one of the only moments of comedy in the film. Because it's not a comedy, not even a dark one, and Joker's line about his life that's in the trailer comes out of left field and isn't earned. It's not even really a subversive Joker origin story, chickening out of its twist connection between Joker and the eventual Batman (then still polluting Batman's origin story by not understanding the power of its simplicity as part of a by-that-time interminable coda because WE NEED THAT MONEY SHOT! No we don't). Hey, I would probably have criticized that too, but at least it would have meant Joker completed a pass on SOMEthing. I think the film is actually summed up in the preachy but confused scene where Joker denies twice that he's not political and doesn't care about anything, as bookends to a sermon that's entirely political. I kept waiting for the movie to decide what it was about, but it isn't about anything but itself as a product (look at me! I'm a serious alternative to MCU-type, four-color action comedies!). Whatever dude, I'm not buying it.satisfythecrave
This wasn't necessary. The first two hours of this film were not needed. The Joker doesn't need a backstory, he just kills without reason. But ya, let's blame his mother and his mental illness. Let's make him an incel folk-hero.BoiledFish
DC's renaissance!SpacedJ
Incel Passion of the Christ.Showing items 1 – 15 of 42