Ilov80s
Footballguy
True, it is not 1st person but Bruce/Batman is the hero and character the audience is setup to identify with. At least as the movies go- I’m not a comic book reader so I’m unfit to comment there.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
The Joker (w/ Joaquin Phoenix) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jdoggydogg
- Start date
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
But then it can't be the point of the movie that the rich/society leave the poor behind because that perspective in Joker is from the unreliable narrator - and is not the truth.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Just because a narrator is unreliable, doesn’t mean everything they reveal is untrue or that they can’t deliver a message/theme. I think this illustrates why the movie was a successful piece of art. There’s a lot to pull from it and debate. I do think there’s room for interpretation:
- was Joker so unreliable that we are meant to take away the idea that we can’t trust his world view at all and he just sees an excuse for his own failings in everything
or
- was Joker a hard luck guy who tried to do his best but was rejected, looked down upon and ignored at every turn by a cruel and uncaring society until he lashed out in the only way he had: violence?
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
I thought the Deniro character was a recreation 'of sorts' of the host in the movie King of Comedy.Ilov80s said:For the Deniro part, see the post above yours. As for making the Wayne family bad, I think that’s the point of the movie. It’s about how we as a society treat the poor, unstable, etc. We just pretend they don’t exist, cut services, etc. I’m sure I would call it liberal either since it’s the white male rage movie and it’s done by Todd Phillips who has made the same argument you’ve made that “liberal cancel culture” has ruined comedies. If it’s told from the POV of the Joker, doesn’t that automatically make Batman and the Wayne’s his rivals and hence the villains of the story?TheIronSheik said:Finally got to see this. I thought the movie would’ve been better just as a normal movie, and not tried to be a Joker movie. All of it felt shoehorned in. And not well. I always pictured Joker as this brilliant person.
Also, Phoenix is 45. Bruce was a kid. So Joker is supposed to be a 60 year old man when they battle it out?
Lastly, DeNiro is a great actor, but he was terrible in this role. Why have him in the Johnny Carson character role? All of the other comedians were real comedians. Why chose DeNiro to play a funny guy role? He was so stiff.
And honestly, the movie was rather boring. Slow moving. And why did we make Wayne a bad guy? Felt like Hollywood pushing a political agenda that billionaires are evil.
Not sure I get the love for this movie.
The King of Comedy (1982)
I thought the King of Comedy sucked and I thought the Joker sucked.
Pheonix is incredible but if you want to see him act brilliantly in an offbeat role/movie then check out >> Inherent Vice (2014)
Katherine Waterson is amazing in that movie which is weird but far more appealing than the Joker IMHO.
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
I don't care if it's a nod to a certain movie or not, DeNiro in that role was a terrible choice. And, again, I think he's a brilliant actor. But that role made him look so stiff and terrible.
simey
Footballguy
My point of saying his laugh changed as if it was the real him sitting there means I felt like that was the real him sitting there, which means I felt it was his real laugh. Anyway, I don't think anyone is right or wrong in their interpretations of the movie, and I think the director wanted it that way.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
I agree he wasn’t good. Literally everyone in the movie was bad or misused except Phoenix which was my problem with it. Joker is too on the nose remake of King of Comedy imo. That’s a very underrated Scorsese movie.
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Which is why I was surprised that it got so much critical love. It's not a movie a ton of people have seen, but figured it's more likely critics and film nerds have, and critics usually sniff out and reject that type of rehashing of a movie like that.
I get the nods for Phoenix, just not all the nods for writing, directing, etc..
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
Phoenix was great, but sadly, he was too old for the part. I feel like this was my biggest complaint of the whole movie. When Batman's 30, Joker is going to 80.
simey
Footballguy
I think in the movie, Phoenix was supposed to be around 30 or early 30s. His mother had allegedly adopted him 30 years ago. In the original batman tv series, Adam West was 38 when the series began, and Cesar Romero who played Joker was 59.
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
He can "supposed to be" whatever age he wants. But Phoenix looks every bit of 45, if not more.
And I'm not sure using the original TV show as an argument is that great of an idea.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Right, some speculated that JQ was not the actual joker but was the guy that inspired the Joker (who kills the Wayne family). I don’t think that fully makes sense either. There’s some holes for sure.
simey
Footballguy
It wasn't an argument. I was just sharing the age difference in the tv show. I don't see the age thing as a big deal. The director wasn't following the comic strip.He can "supposed to be" whatever age he wants. But Phoenix looks every bit of 45, if not more.
And I'm not sure using the original TV show as an argument is that great of an idea.
DallasDMac
Footballguy
The fact that is so many different interpretations of what the movie really was that I think it cements the initial choice of waiting until it's $2.
El Floppo
Footballguy
I'm a big king of comedy fan.
While I get the use of deniro and his characters role reflecting KoC in Joker....'on the nose remake" is a giant stretch I'm not agreeing with.
El Floppo
Footballguy
Did you ever watch the show? The joker ain't exactly young there.He can "supposed to be" whatever age he wants. But Phoenix looks every bit of 45, if not more.
And I'm not sure using the original TV show as an argument is that great of an idea.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I think it might be a bit of hyperbole, sure. It's not a shot for shot remake or anything, but IMO is far more than just a subtle nod to a couple Scorsese movies. So much so that I would say it makes Joker pretty unoriginal. It's pretty obvious to anybody who has seen those movies - and using DeNiro in that role made it all the more so.
Last edited by a moderator:
El Floppo
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
I did. I loved the show. But it's probably the most embarrassing version of Batman out there. It was fun and campy. But I don't think it was a good representation of what the comic book characters were supposed to be.
Of course, I'm not a comic book guy, so others might be able to speak better to that. #SomedaysYouJustCantGetRidOfABomb
El Floppo
Footballguy
I was trying to go with a more "do you even lift/watch the show" vibe there.
Btw, the original Batman movie is a camp masterpiece.
Tony Jabroni
Footballguy
I thought it was ####### disturbing. Like, cringe worthy. And I am kinda twisted as well. I walked out of the theater mumbling..."woah". A great performance. IMO.TheIronSheik said:
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
Tony Jabroni
Footballguy
1. Him being brutally honest with his therapist. Then having her crap all over him. Sad state of affairs, if that is the case. (I don't know)
2. The entire situation with his mother. To go from "loving, caretaking," son, to you are dead sucker, just because you slighted me. Bear with me please, it almost felt right. In the context of the movie, she got what she deserved.
3. The awkwardness of acceptance from Deniro(Talk show host). Only to call him out on his hypocrisy, and shoot him on live TV.
It's a good, deep movie.
*The whole Mr. Wayne is your Daddy schtick was poorly done. On purpose. Hence the madness.
Last edited by a moderator:
El Floppo
Footballguy
I think it was better than mediocre. Thought the art direction and overall look of it, including cinematography and lighting, was excellent. The tone and story was decidedly one-note though, so I can see sheiks boring comment. And the whole thing was a shot by shot recreation of King of Comedy..
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
You obviously have not seen the King of Comedy because what you described was his character personified.
The whole point of K of C was that character was not funny but thought he was. I hated that movie and didn't like the Joker for a number of reasons but saw the DeNiro character instantly as the morphed unfunny and stiff Pupkin-turned host.
The key point is that the 59 year old Cesar Romero played a broad cartoonish Joker who never appeared on screen without generous applications of pancake makeup where we had stark close ups of the grim aged face of Phoenix through many parts of the movie.
The movie was completely engulfed by Phoenix who appeared in virtually every scene. It felt claustrophobic without any other compelling characters and the parallel plot point of the city disintegrating due to inequity doesn't match up to everyone INSTANTLY falling in love with his Joker due to his public violent act. Just awful.
To insinuate that only murders/thieves/criminal types see inequity of one percenters dominating society and that the criminals are waiting in the weeds ready to spring to violent action and reap revenge if only they had some sort of non-charismatic leader is absurd.
The whole super hero genre has turned from the cartoonish/heavy pancaked laughable twisting mustache villain into CGI craptastic special effect garbage to excite the 12 year old boy crowd. I had higher hopes for the movie because I knew Phoenix would provide a great performance but it was too much of him and a terrible story.
The only thing cartoonish was the story which is truly blithering and idiotic and ugly, not over the top cartoonish and funny like Cesar Romeo.
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
As I said, I don't care what they were trying to do there. It didn't work. I'm guessing more people didn't see KOC. So it falls on deaf ears to the majority and in doing so, looks like terrible casting. Which means, it was terrible casting.
El Floppo
Footballguy
This is all very well said. and even though I liked the Joker and flat out love King of Comedy, I appreciate the thoughts and agree with a lot of it.
ETA.. I meant to mention that as this is a roots/background piece for the joker, I get the idea of starting off without much makeup here...until his showdown with deniro when he "becomes" the joke we know and recognize
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
El Floppo
Footballguy
I'd say the mandalorian is flat out bad, in spite of it's fans here.Well not a movie, but The Mandalorian is mediocre and we talked about that a lot too.
I don't buy the "it's not supposed to be good" argument.
Say what you want about it, but Joker at least had plenty of redeeming qualities outside of being attached to a brand.
simey
Footballguy
Yeah, the director/creator was telling his own story of how the Joker might have come to be. He said, “We didn’t follow anything from the comic-books, which people are gonna be mad about. We just wrote our own version of where a guy like Joker might come from. That’s what was interesting to me. We’re not even doing Joker, but the story of becoming Joker. It’s about this man.”
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
simey
Footballguy
The TV show had to cake on that makeup since Cesar refused to shave off his signature stache. They didn't want the The Joker to have a mustache, but you can still see it through the makeup on closeups. The Jokers true identity was never revealed during the TV series of the late 60s. I remember watching reruns of the TV series at my grandparents house when I was little. It came on some channel that also showed the TV show Speed Racer.
As Floppo mentioned, the Phoenix Joker movie is a background piece on becoming Joker. Phoenix said he thinks Arthur became the actual Joker that would become Batman's villain. The creator said maybe Arthur Fleck inspired the real Joker. He said you don't really know.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
I was addressing the age discrepancy argument of an older Cesar Romero pulling it off at an older age than the 46 year old Joaquin Phoenix. My point, Romero pulled it off because he was always in makeup and how broadly he played the role so his age was not a factor. He played it like the cartoon comic book character and looked the part. Joaquin played a much different character and looked it so the age discrepancy became an issue.
Romero was bi-sexual so his Joker was not only over-the-top broadly acted he also threw in a bit of camp which suited who he was as a person.
Joaquin has a tendency to over commit to his craft IMHO. See that infamous Letterman appearance. I much prefer Heath Ledger's version over any I've seen or probably will see.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
What you or anyone does not care about isn't relevant.
What the writer/director/casting agent were 'attempting' to do with the part and how they casted it is relevant.
They wanted Deniro recreating his Pupkin character in the role as the host in a nod to Scorsese so even if you or I didn't like how it turned out, they got what they wanted so they were successful even if everyone else didn't like the final product.
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
That's not how it works. That's like saying the writers of Ishtar were successful because they created a movie they really liked. That's not how things in Hollywood (or anywhere) are judged. In order for something to be successful, it has to be liked. Just because you create something doesn't mean you were successful.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
It was a character giving a nod not a multi million dollar green light. They wanted to cast a specific part and were successful performing that task.
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
You are right, the movie didn't make a dime due to how unsuccessful they were in casting the unknown Robert DeNiro where they had no concept of what they were doing because you and I didn't like it. My bad.
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
Please go back and quote where I said the movie didn't make any money.
I'll wait.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
El Floppo
Footballguy
I'm disagreeing with your point as well, gb.
Because you or a majority don't know Rupert doesn't mean that wasn't their intent- it very clearly was. Anybody familiar with the other KoC recognized it immediately...which makes it a successful homage on their part- even if it didn't work terribly well in the movie (imo).
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
It might have been a successful homage, but it was bad for the movie. That character he played was terrible. It didn't fit. When directors and writers want to pay homage, it's usually in a small way or with a quick image or note. It's not the main supporting character.
If they wanted to pay homage to Apollo 13, they could have had the lunar module land right in the middle of the riots. That would have been a successful homage to Apollo 13. But it would have been dumb and out of place.
El Floppo
Footballguy
Yeah. That would make as much sense as the argument you've been making.
The KoC role- deniros character and show play a big part of the movie, helping define story arc as well as showing wakeen's domestic side- quality time with Mom, adulation, etc.
I agree the deniro character was ultimately weak, especially the showdown at the end...but the homage was there tightly enmeshed with the movie.
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
It was supposed to be a ridiculous argument.Yeah. That would make as much sense as the argument you've been making.
The KoC role- deniros character and show play a big part of the movie, helping define story arc as well as showing wakeen's domestic side- quality time with Mom, adulation, etc.
I agree the deniro character was ultimately weak, especially the showdown at the end...but the homage was there tightly enmeshed with the movie.
What I'm saying is that just because you want to pay homage to something doesn't mean it's good for the movie. And there are much better ways to do so that making a huge character the actual homage.
El Floppo
Footballguy
Agreed
I tried to make the point that homage was more than just the character...it was the show and joker's admiration of the show, which filled a bigger part of plot... A lot which worked.
