So it’s almost literally using the DC ‘Universe’ just to give the film some extra marketing clout?!
It’s a study on the charcter of Joker, the director has a said a lot about detaching it from peoples expectations, and it not really being a regular comic book movie:
This film is more than a comic book movie. The nature of a character study really shines through in Joker . A lot of it has to do with the time period in which the film is set. “This is like a separate universe,” states Phillips. “Tonally, the movie is very much a character study. Same as movies we grew up on and loved. And you go, ‘God, those movies don’t get made as much anymore.’”
“We didn’t take anything from one particular comic. We picked and chose what we liked from the 80 year canon of Joker. We pulled a few things that we liked, but to us it could have been called ‘Arthur,’, and it just be about a clown, maybe.” He continued to elaborate. “I just thought, there’s a new way to tell a comic movie. Maybe I’m wrong, but let’s do it as a character study. So, a big part of what interested me about it, more than making a movie called ‘Arthur,’ was to deconstruct the comic book movie a little bit.”
Lol directors chatting so much shite and trying make the film seem more high brow/ important than it is
In terms of ‘character study’ it was lazy and obvious with zero subtlety, guys a hack
Can’t say I’m buying it either, a character study on a character that will become a criminal mastermind has to feature someone that you could slightly believe will become a criminal mastermind.
Why be constrained at all then?
The whole film just felt like a checklist of ‘crraazzzyyy’ guy
1 Like
Saw it at the weekend, exactly this.
Although, as a film, I was entertained for 2 hours (even though I fell asleep for 10 mins), so I suppose it served it’s purpose. Didn’t want to come out of the theatre wanting to psychoanalyse and deep-dive, just needed to get away from screaming kid for 2 hours!
1 Like
Yeah exactly, just irks me the amount of people banging on about it being anything deeper than that. Especially the director
He started a movement by accident. He was the figure head. You saw some of the protesters save him from the police, that would become his goons (his Manson family) and so the crime spree begins.
1 Like
Was bob in it?
1 Like
I’m being asked to go to see this but I would much rather watch the new Shaun the Sheep…
Surely the writer/director is exactly who can say how deep it is? They just wanted to show how a guy could have become the Joker, it was more about showing what could make him that mentally disturbed rather then showing how he could become a criminal mastermind, because how could they have even shown this? Going to Harvard for criminals? It was just as much looking at what was going on around Gotham that made people side with him rather than the more wealthy elite, Joker has always needed his goons, he’s never been a physically strong or spectacularly intelligent character, he’s called the Joker…
1 Like
He can state his intentions, doesn’t mean I agree though
If I wrote a book that I claimed was the novel of its generation it doesn’t make it true
Yeah if you had to categorise the film then it sort of is a character study but it is a shit one. Just feels the the director of such classic as The Hangover trilogy trying so hard to be taken as a serious director making a film with a deep message but it is very transparent and not all that well made
This is going to be looked back on in 10 years with confusion why everyone was loving it so much, kinda like Avatar
To me a good character study film has a bit more subtlety, this spelt every single little thing out for you
I agree, but this is in part what needs to be done for the audience of a film that is based in a comic book universe.
If you look at the most popular films ever they are all dumbed down, Avatar being a prime example, it’s one massive cliche the whole way, but Avatar 2 and 3 are on their way, along with a whole theme park based on Avatar so that tells you something about the stupidity of the general public…
I personally liked Joker, I think it was a slightly risky take on things, when you look at the drivel of Justice League and think this is from the same studio it could have been a hell of a lot worse! I think they did a good job.
1 Like
Yeah you’re right, probably in part to me just being a bit of a film nerd/ snob
He could’ve at least attended the League of Shadows but instead of Liam Neeson telling him ‘the training is nothing the will is everything’ it would be John Wick. But seriously, we all know the character portrayed in that just wasn’t going to become an arch enemy of Batman or Bruce. If rival criminals were to come at him in future how would he be planning to protect himself? Would his goons plan it all for him and in which case what would his role actually be?!
I enjoyed a lot of it but it had serious flaws for me,
1 Like
I find it hilarious that people are saying he can’t be a super villain, because they are being shown the man behind the curtain first (like finding out who the Wizard of Oz is at the start). Are all great people born great? I guess curtain things had to be spelt out because of added confusion of past Jokers for the super fan boys nerds and this is a comic book film, so a certain amount of disbelief has to be checked in at the door on the way in (this is the city where a man dressed as a bat saves people with amazing gadgets). Joker was always a bit of a two bit hood, robbing jewellery stores and banks, no super brain.
The film has to make blockbuster returns too at the box office, so you don’t want your key audience walking out confused and alienated, it’s a Bat-Man film! Not some indie art house look at mental illness.
I think it pushed the envelope as far as the backers would let it for what it is.
1 Like
I see Daewon Song is in The Last Black Man in San Francisco
Stacy Peralta is in Real Genius, that film with Val Kilmer
