Joker trailer
- Thread starter krtek a houby
- Start date
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Beetz performs perfectly well, but has almost nothing to do. If she were completely cut it would make virtually no difference. Arthur's relationship with his mother provides his 'heart' and the rest is unreal, so what's her point?
Must admit, the more I think about the film, the less I think of it. Entertaining but shallow.
DexterTCN
Troy and Abed in the morning
the reveal of him not going out with her shows him as an unreliable narrator, the depths of his insanity...and he probably killed her when he went into her flat, she wasn't seen again was she? (I was looking for her 2nd time I saw it)
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
We knew that anyway. It was pretty clearly laid out. And that last bit is just a cheap bit of 'did he/didn't he?'
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
I came here to ask the same question after watching it last night. In fact
I was actually left unsure if her mother had been involved or complicit in the abuse at all, or if she was simply a completely unconnected member of public who adopted Arthur after he'd been rescued by social services, and later on became mentally ill herself. As I understood it she was in care of Arthur while he was being abused, but surely he would have never been returned to her care afterwards, and even if he had been, who was looking after him for the period she spent in custody?
But overall, a very good film (not sure if 'film of the year' as some critics appear to be saying), but very good. And Phoenix is, of course, sublime.
D'wards
IT'S YOUR DECISION DANIEL
Was anyone bothered by the use of Glitter?
I wasn't, and it's a great track and scene.
Was the director being provocative by putting it in, or is Glitter not a big star in America? So it may not have been big news (although I'm sure someone would have put Philips in the picture, but it may not have been thought to ring any alarm bells with the American public)
I wasn't, and it's a great track and scene.
Was the director being provocative by putting it in, or is Glitter not a big star in America? So it may not have been big news (although I'm sure someone would have put Philips in the picture, but it may not have been thought to ring any alarm bells with the American public)
DexterTCN
Troy and Abed in the morning
The director did the Hangover films, the Starsky and Hutch 'comedy' and Due Date. He does not give a shit about glitter.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
US audiences know it from sports, where it is played a ridiculous amount - or the bit used in the film is, anyway. It has dropped off recently, but only well after Glitter was jailed. The director undoubtedly knew all about its wider connotations when he chose it and knew it would spark off a useful bit of controversy.
Was it bitterly cynical? yes. Did it work in the film? also, yes, absolutely.
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
Watch this on the weekend and like it
its not really comic book movie more an old school 70's Martin Scorsese character study affair as a lot of critics said
tbf the violence with it has been over stated by the media ..
imo
Should grab some awards really at least for Phoenix
and the could end the dance to freedom by removing Gary's vocals from the footage
its not really comic book movie more an old school 70's Martin Scorsese character study affair as a lot of critics said
tbf the violence with it has been over stated by the media ..
imo
Should grab some awards really at least for Phoenix
and the could end the dance to freedom by removing Gary's vocals from the footage
Cid
Proper break this time
He is credited as a co-writer so would receive royalties under most contractual arrangements. He won’t, but - reading between the lines of stuff reported after release - this is purely because he sold the rights at some point. When he sold them is less clear, hopefully in the mid 90s for a new car, but who knows really. With any luck he’ll have the good grace to snuff it in prison.
Jeff Robinson
Marxist-Lentilist: Jackboots and Jackfruit
If there's ever a film in which its appropriate to laugh inappropriately it's this one.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Some decent acting.
Shite film.
Shite film.
Reno
The In Kraut
I found this beautifully made and incredibly dull. It’s a movie where you know from the beginning where it was going to go and then there are no more surprises along the way, it incessantly bangs away at one note. Joker tries hard to be a Scorsese movie when Scorsese was on top by bluntly blending Taxi Driver with King of Comedy. They even cast De Niro so we‘ll get it, but that alone doesn’t put it anywhere near in the same league. I think I hated this.
Last edited:
not-bono-ever
meh
lovely framing of the tale in the '80s i thought- when NY was the crime spattered Gotham of the film. Not sure about the batman link but hey ho. I was impressed with JP use of his body and movement. It way maybe a bit less than satisfying overall. Lots of nods in every direction to other stuff - scorsese, mean streets,taxi driver obvs, french connection, midnight cowboy even.
eta and bernard goetz
eta and bernard goetz
I didn’t hate it. I liked the subversion of the Wayne family good, the Joker bad narrative and crime being a lot to do with life being shit. And Phoenix is v good and it's very well shot.
But absolutely agree on the Scorsese thing. I found it really depressing that no one I work with (they were all raving about this) had seen or was interested in seeing The King of Comedy which is such a better and more interesting film and was very blatantly and very knowingly ripped off.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
Yeah, even at the time I was overly conscious of it, but I tend to laugh at uncomfortable stuff.
I hear it’s not that uncommon.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Saw this last night. The last ten minutes were great but most of the rest of it fell flat. There seemed to be a large chunk of the plot missing, namely the bit which explains how and why a massive insurrection sprang up in response to the Joker's actions.
Similar threads
