Jump to content

Joker origin film - Joaquin Phoenix Confirmed


Recommended Posts

Just watched this today, wow! That was a film!

Is Phoenix’s portrayal of Joker likely to be a one off performance?

Will we see him in the Batman film?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, Rha's al Ghul is about 500, and he got a kicking in Batman Begins.

 

One of the (many) dynamics between Batman and the Joker is predicated on the Joker being mean and calculating, but physically no match for Batman. They could make it work. Not that I necessarily want them too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...
On 22/02/2020 at 00:04, Spacehost said:

Just watched this. It's a triumphant performance trapped in a thoroughly mediocre and self important movie that ends with the main character literally shouting the supposed subtext at viewers at home. The score and production design are the only reason people mistake it for a great piece of art.

 

Was going to post my thoughts but am just quoting this to save time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Broker said:

This was shite. So desperate to seem intelligent despite being nothing but a bitter little screed against... whatever the moron director of the hangover thinks are society’s problems. Another DC movie produced by idiots, for idiots. 

 

Bitter littler screed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/02/2020 at 06:19, Triple A said:

Per this film’s ‘logic’, maybe just after delivering some off-brand and out-of-character speech, where the content of said speech is telling the poor and downtrodden to pick themselves up and get to work.

 

This is why I'm fully in theory it's all in his head. This is how he sees the rich and the likes of Wayne when really thats not that case at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/02/2020 at 06:19, Triple A said:

Per this film’s ‘logic’, maybe just after delivering some off-brand and out-of-character speech, where the content of said speech is telling the poor and downtrodden to pick themselves up and get to work.

 

Criticising a character in the Batman universe for not being on-brand is a little rich. There are dozens of wildly different interpretations of each character, and Thomas Wayne as a shithead isn't brand new.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing with Joker, putting the wasted story aside, is that Phoenix does a good turn in the flick, but it’s been whooped up to be something it’s clearly not. It holds up for an hour or so, and then it’s wasted too. And stick it next to Keitel in Bad Lieutenant, or more equitably Sandler in Uncut Gems, and it just seems like it’s a bit of a joke (ha ha). Maybe even Nick Cage in Bad Lieutenant now I come to think about it.

 

And De Niro stinks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Spacehost said:

I think it says something about how deeply this movie has infiltrated the cultural zeitgeist that people are taking six months to respond to a criticism of it.

 

The thread was bumped back up, thats all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Capwn said:

 

 

 


Oh I see - that doesn’t really tally with how you described it. This is saying they suspected people could use the showings as targets for mass shootings (as had actually happened with a Batman film), not that the film would incite audiences to violence.

 

Having said that, I was pretty angry after watching it at home - I bet I would have been raging if I’d shelled out twenty bones to see it at a cinema!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
7 minutes ago, Cosmic_Guru said:

Gary Glitter though. What the flaming fuck?  

 

I think the song's use in the film is due to the different connotations it has on each side of the Atlantic. In America it's thought of as "that song that gets played at triumphant moments in sports events"; in the UK we think of it as "that song by the convicted paedophile".

 

Either way, he's not getting royalties from its use in the movie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
  • 2 months later...
On 26/09/2020 at 00:00, Nick R said:

 

I think the song's use in the film is due to the different connotations it has on each side of the Atlantic. In America it's thought of as "that song that gets played at triumphant moments in sports events"; in the UK we think of it as "that song by the convicted paedophile".

 

Either way, he's not getting royalties from its use in the movie.

 

That's because Americans don't read or watch news that happens outside of their own country, so to them Glitter is that bloke that last toured there in the 80's.

 

My 2 pence - the film was well made and shot, but overall it's bollocks and a waste of time. The Joker character's backstory just didn't need to be told did it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.