Joker Movie

[Nick]

Just saw this, and wow! Best movie I've seen in a while. Though I could certainly understand someone disagreeing with me, it's not for everybody. And yeah, Taxi Driver is an obvious comparison, but nonetheless I'm impressed at how the director was able to use a comic book movie as a Trojan horse to get a gritty 1970s character study made.

[JasonEvans]

Just saw this, and wow! Best movie I've seen in a while. Though I could certainly understand someone disagreeing with me, it's not for everybody. And yeah, Taxi Driver is an obvious comparison, but nonetheless I'm impressed at how the director was able to use a comic book movie as a Trojan horse to get a gritty 1970s character study made.

Did you listen to my podcast? We talked about the very same thing that they used a comic book character as a way of getting a gritty crazy man story sold to the masses.

I agree with you that it was a fabulous flick, though a challenging one that is not for everyone. I think the mild critic backlash that we have seen over the past few days will not be reflected in the Cinemascore for the film (I bet it is an A-minus with some quadrants hitting an A). I suspect this film will be very popular with the general public.

[Nick]

Did you listen to my podcast? We talked about the very same thing that they used a comic book character as a way of getting a gritty crazy man story sold to the masses.

I agree with you that it was a fabulous flick, though a challenging one that is not for everyone. I think the mild critic backlash that we have seen over the past few days will not be reflected in the Cinemascore for the film (I bet it is an A-minus with some quadrants hitting an A). I suspect this film will be very popular with the general public.

Yes, that must be where the idea worked its way into my head.

Currently B+ cinemascore, 92% audience rating on RT.

[fuse]

Good movie (or not) aside, I am still stuck on the director publicly stating they actively ignored comic source material.

So basically they made their own arthouse flick about the transformation of a depressed man into a violent maniac and slapped the Joker name on the film in an attempt to boost ticket sales.

I am sure there are other examples of movies that took this approach. I’m struggling for an analogy, or other examples.

I guess the best I can do is quote Doc Holliday in Tombstone:
“My hypocrisy only goes so far.”
(Yes, I am aware the far better quote is the “my hypocrisy knows no bounds.)

Hope the folks that go see it, enjoy it.

[bigperm13]

SPOILER(ish):

Saw it Thursday night. Really liked it and think all the fuss about the violence and stuff is ridiculous. The nod to Ledger and Dark Knight was fantastic. Don't go if you're trying to quit smoking.

[LasVegas]

Saw it and like others have mentioned, this isn’t a Joker film. As a comic book fan in my younger years, this movie really rubs me the wrong way. I’ll have to cool down some more before commenting further.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

SPOILER(ish):

Saw it Thursday night. Really liked it and think all the fuss about the violence and stuff is ridiculous. The nod to Ledger and Dark Knight was fantastic. Don't go if you're trying to quit smoking.

I thought the "fuss about violence" was in reference to specific internet threats about violence at movie showings, not violence in the movie.

I also thought this was a direct call back to the theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado during a showing of Batman with Ledger's Joker.

Am I way off base? Are people bemoaning the violence in the movie too?

My "Violence Meter" is upside down and sideways because the missus and I have been (finally) binging The Walking Dead.

[Nick]

Saw it and like others have mentioned, this isn’t a Joker film. As a comic book fan in my younger years, this movie really rubs me the wrong way. I’ll have to cool down some more before commenting further.

I, for one, would like to hear why. I enjoy comic book movies but have never read an actual comic book before, so I'd enjoy hearing your perspective.

[JasonEvans]

Good movie (or not) aside, I am still stuck on the director publicly stating they actively ignored comic source material.

So basically they made their own arthouse flick about the transformation of a depressed man into a violent maniac and slapped the Joker name on the film in an attempt to boost ticket sales.

I agree which is why I was viscerally mad that they...

Spoiler!

...put all the Wayne family stuff in there, including the death of mama and papa Wayne while young Brucie watches. I mean, is Todd Philips so out of touch that he has not heard the repeated criticism of every movie including the Waynes being killed (even including mama Wayne's pearls dropping to the ground)? At this point, if you include that scene without having it really, really be an important part of your movie, you are raising your middle finger at the audience and daring them to hate you for it. And that scene had zero to do with the Joker or his development or anything else about him. It is like Philips included it for "fan service" only but instead of "fan service" it was a "fan F-you."

[JasonEvans]

I, for one, would like to hear why. I enjoy comic book movies but have never read an actual comic book before, so I'd enjoy hearing your perspective.

It is a polarizing film, I think. As I said on the pod, a lot of people will love it but some people will hate it. I think there are not all that many who will fall in between.

[fuse]

I, for one, would like to hear why. I enjoy comic book movies but have never read an actual comic book before, so I'd enjoy hearing your perspective.

I won’t speak for the original poster.
I used to read comics a fair bit, but not enough to have a die hard “it’s gotta be exactly like the comics” perspective.

I dislike the disingenuous bait and switch. It’s a movie about a comic book character where the director explicitly stated he actively ignored any comic source material. So, its not really a comic book movie or a movie about a comic book character. It’s a movie that essentially licensed a name to gather attention and did its own thing instead of standing on its own merit.

It’s a super flawed analogy, bear with me. Imagine seeing a new Batman trailer and getting excited to see another caped crusader movie, only to sit through a romcom about Bruce Wayne and Selina Kyle, except you never see them in costume or doing anything Batman/Catwoman-esque.
(As I type this, that might actually be an interesting flick. So much for a decent analogy.)
You could understandably feel pretty cheated if you were expecting an action flick and got a romantic comedy instead.

From what I have read, the director could have made the exact same movie (for all intents and purposes) without the DC universe and Joker name. Maybe you end up with something gritty like Pulp Fiction or The Usual Suspects, and get credit for some deserved originality.

In the end, its just a movie and probably doesn’t even deserve (good or bad) the amount of energy I just put into typing why I have no interest.

[Nick]

From what I have read, the director could have made the exact same movie (for all intents and purposes) without the DC universe and Joker name. Maybe you end up with something gritty like Pulp Fiction or The Usual Suspects, and get credit for some deserved originality.

..except it's really hard to get those types of movies made today because it's harder to get people into the movies to see them.

[fuse]

..except it's really hard to get those types of movies made today because it's harder to get people into the movies to see them.

Companies have to make decisions all the time about what will be profitable and what will not. I suspect popular/high profit movies enable the release of pet project movies / movies not likely to make a big profit all the time.

[BD80]

I agree which is why I was viscerally mad that they...

Spoiler!

...put all the Wayne family stuff in there, including the death of mama and papa Wayne while young Brucie watches. I mean, is Todd Philips so out of touch that he has not heard the repeated criticism of every movie including the Waynes being killed (even including mama Wayne's pearls dropping to the ground)? At this point, if you include that scene without having it really, really be an important part of your movie, you are raising your middle finger at the audience and daring them to hate you for it. And that scene had zero to do with the Joker or his development or anything else about him. It is like Philips included it for "fan service" only but instead of "fan service" it was a "fan F-you."

Watched the premier of Batwoman last night, and enjoyed it. Chuckled when a key scene involved Martha's pearls and "cousin" Bruce's recollection of the fateful night.