Joker origin Movie

Tools    





Well I just saw the movie. It was decent enough for sure, but I feel that Phoenix was too old to play the Joker, if Bruce Wayne is about 9 years old. They should have gotten a younger actor in their 20s to play him probably.

WARNING: "spoiler" spoilers below
I also feel that the movie should have ended with the scene of Joker in the street rather than being locked in an asylum at the end.


But all in all, decent, but not great per say. Also, did anyone feel that for all the hype this movie was getting for being an R rated comic book movie, that it's not really that R rated, and just a bare minimum R really?

Or maybe they did not want to go for a very dark movie and that's fine, but there is all this controversy surrounding the movie about how it has such dark subject matter. Because of all the controversy I was thinking, what is Joker going to become, a child rapist murderer or something like that? But no, he just a vigilante who likes to kill the rich like we've seen before and tha's nothin really new to get controversial over, is it?



"Money won is twice as sweet as money earned."



I thought it was a decent flick, that was largely aided by being tied to a popular franchise. Take away the Joker tag and it wouldn't have faired so well.
Pheonix produced a great performance.

I also agree with @ironpony. The movie should have ended at the riot scene. The last asylum scene was unnecessary. But then again Todd Philips aint a great director to realise that.



Welcome to the human race...
I think you can make the case that

WARNING: "Joker" spoilers below
the asylum scene is necessary because hey gotta "punish" the bad guy somehow - even The Dark Knight had Joker get captured. Also, you get the compromise of the film ending right as he's in the middle of an escape - whether he succeeds or fails at this attempt is just ambiguous.

Regarding Arthur Fleck being too old to play Joker against Batman, I think that's why the current fan theory is that the Joker that faces Batman is a young copycat.
__________________
Way too much stupid talk on the forum. Iroquois, I’m thinking about you.



I just want to hug (your FACE)!
Well I just saw the movie. It was decent enough for sure, but I feel that Phoenix was too old to play the Joker, if Bruce Wayne is about 9 years old. They should have gotten a younger actor in their 20s to play him probably.

WARNING: "spoiler" spoilers below
I also feel that the movie should have ended with the scene of Joker in the street rather than being locked in an asylum at the end.


But all in all, decent, but not great per say. Also, did anyone feel that for all the hype this movie was getting for being an R rated comic book movie, that it's not really that R rated, and just a bare minimum R really?

Or maybe they did not want to go for a very dark movie and that's fine, but there is all this controversy surrounding the movie about how it has such dark subject matter. Because of all the controversy I was thinking, what is Joker going to become, a child rapist murderer or something like that? But no, he just a vigilante who likes to kill the rich like we've seen before and tha's nothin really new to get controversial over, is it?
WARNING: "stuffy stuff" spoilers below
Had they closed things down from the street then I feel that probably would have created more of a cliff-hanger response in the audience. Fans might have felt a though that implied a sequel or more a continuation of Joker's escalation into a second movie. I'm also with Iro on the final scene. Even though the asylum shot at the end is ambiguous enough that something more could come from a possible escape, I believe that it was a better end cap for closure. We all sort of already know he escapes sooner or later. That's what the Joker does. So there probably would be less theory crafting than had they ended the movie on the streets.

As to the controversy hype before release, a lot of that was, I'm sure, clever marketing whispers. On the other hand, being a "...vigilante who likes to kill the rich..." is a hot topic already, no? Also consider the 2012 theater shooting during The Dark Knight Rises screening. That happened. Joker is a more realistic path of a poor, angry white male turned to extreme violence. I have mixed feelings on the hyped fear and headlines of this movie, but I'm not sure where the line is today to err on the side of caution. 20 years ago, no problem most likely. Today though, I'm not sure.
__________________
"My Dionne Warwick understanding of your dream indicates that you are ambivalent on how you want life to eventually screw you."
- Joel

"Ever try to forcibly pin down a house cat? It's not easy."
- Captain Steel



I'm not old, you're just 12.
I loved Joker. It's a movie for our times. It has a lot to say about the way mentally ill people are treated in society, the lack of civility and compassion in the world, how the media elevates murderers into hero figures, the rich/poor divide...it's like looking onto a fun house mirror version of Trump's America (before you jump all over me, Thomas Wayne is totally a Trump stand in, let's be honest). That it is so unrelentingly bleak, that it doesn't offer anything in the way of redemption, that it ends the way it does is a miracle. How did this get made?

But anyway, I understand the constant comparisons to Taxi Driver, but the film it really seems to follow closely is Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times. It's even shown during this film. In that classic, Chaplin plays a nameless factory worker who is so brutalized by society that he considers going to prison a better alternative to life in,well, modern times. It's sneaky, really. It's not like Todd Phillips hasn't done this before. Old School was a remake of Fight Club, really, only replacing Fight Club's toxic masculinity with mid-life crises, so Joker kind of replaces Chaplin's down-trodden Little Tramp with the Joker. Just a thought.
__________________
"You, me, everyone...we are all made of star stuff." - Neil Degrasse Tyson

https://shawnsmovienight.blogspot.com/



I loved Joker. It's a movie for our times. It has a lot to say about the way mentally ill people are treated in society, the lack of civility and compassion in the world, how the media elevates murderers into hero figures, the rich/poor divide...it's like looking onto a fun house mirror version of Trump's America (before you jump all over me, Thomas Wayne is totally a Trump stand in, let's be honest). That it is so unrelentingly bleak, that it doesn't offer anything in the way of redemption, that it ends the way it does is a miracle. How did this get made?

But anyway, I understand the constant comparisons to Taxi Driver, but the film it really seems to follow closely is Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times. It's even shown during this film. In that classic, Chaplin plays a nameless factory worker who is so brutalized by society that he considers going to prison a better alternative to life in,well, modern times. It's sneaky, really. It's not like Todd Phillips hasn't done this before. Old School was a remake of Fight Club, really, only replacing Fight Club's toxic masculinity with mid-life crises, so Joker kind of replaces Chaplin's down-trodden Little Tramp with the Joker. Just a thought.
Wow, that’s a cool comparison. I have yet to see Joker but I love Modern Times so I’ll have to check it out.



WARNING: "stuffy stuff" spoilers below
Had they closed things down from the street then I feel that probably would have created more of a cliff-hanger response in the audience. Fans might have felt a though that implied a sequel or more a continuation of Joker's escalation into a second movie. I'm also with Iro on the final scene. Even though the asylum shot at the end is ambiguous enough that something more could come from a possible escape, I believe that it was a better end cap for closure. We all sort of already know he escapes sooner or later. That's what the Joker does. So there probably would be less theory crafting than had they ended the movie on the streets.

As to the controversy hype before release, a lot of that was, I'm sure, clever marketing whispers. On the other hand, being a "...vigilante who likes to kill the rich..." is a hot topic already, no? Also consider the 2012 theater shooting during The Dark Knight Rises screening. That happened. Joker is a more realistic path of a poor, angry white male turned to extreme violence. I have mixed feelings on the hyped fear and headlines of this movie, but I'm not sure where the line is today to err on the side of caution. 20 years ago, no problem most likely. Today though, I'm not sure.
I guess I would have preferred the cliffhanger ending over the unnecessary asylum ending, since he escapes right away anyway. What are your mixed feelings?

After letting the movie digest now, I think it's a well made psychological/thriller drama, but it feels like an unnecessary origin story, like do we need this, after seeing the Joker as a more mysterious figure before, who perhaps, should have been kept mysterious.



I just want to hug (your FACE)!
Fair enough.

Mixed feelings are in whether warnings and attention should be heightened on any given topic under the desire to promote safety in some way. Is it necessary? Maybe. If there is actual risk then does that also not heighten the risk by pointing a spotlight on it? Is society really at this point? Or are we magnifying a fear for ad revenue?

Stuff like that.



Do you mean the notion that was going around that someone might commit murder in the theater at the movie showings, like it was talked about before? If that were to happen, I don't see how this movie were to make it happen more likely. I mean it did happen in The Dark Knight Rises, and this is also a Batman movie, but I think that shooters like that pick movies that are popular on opening nights cause there are more people. I don't think there is any more of a chance of it happening on this movie, compared to something a movie that also has a lot of seats filled like a movie like Jurassic World in comparison. I don't think it has to do with the content of the movie itself, unless I am wrong?



Regarding Arthur Fleck being too old to play Joker against Batman, I think that's why the current fan theory is that the Joker that faces Batman is a young copycat.
Is this serious? Don't people just stop and think? Who else would have done such a performance? Probably no one, Joaquin was the most logic and risk free actor to play that role, and he played that role, and as expected by the audience, incredibly. A younger actor to play that role? Yes, sure, comic book plot wise, but the age of the Joker is not the only discrepancy. I find it silly that comic book fans come to this movie where the author had totally (according to him) freedom to do what he wanted with the character and story trying to make some comic book sense out of it.



Welcome to the human race...
Personally, I'm not sure what Arthur's age is even supposed to be - we don't necessarily have to assume that he's the same age as Phoenix himself. He might be in such an unhealthy physical condition that he ends up looking older than he actually is. That's without questioning how old Bruce would be when he became Batman in this continuity. I don't think it matters that much, really.



Professional horse shoe straightener
I loved Joker. It's a movie for our times. It has a lot to say about the way mentally ill people are treated in society, the lack of civility and compassion in the world, how the media elevates murderers into hero figures, the rich/poor divide...it's like looking onto a fun house mirror version of Trump's America (before you jump all over me, Thomas Wayne is totally a Trump stand in, let's be honest). That it is so unrelentingly bleak, that it doesn't offer anything in the way of redemption, that it ends the way it does is a miracle. How did this get made?

But anyway, I understand the constant comparisons to Taxi Driver, but the film it really seems to follow closely is Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times. It's even shown during this film. In that classic, Chaplin plays a nameless factory worker who is so brutalized by society that he considers going to prison a better alternative to life in,well, modern times. It's sneaky, really. It's not like Todd Phillips hasn't done this before. Old School was a remake of Fight Club, really, only replacing Fight Club's toxic masculinity with mid-life crises, so Joker kind of replaces Chaplin's down-trodden Little Tramp with the Joker. Just a thought.
^ Spot on.

Also worth noting the clocks in many scenes are set at the same time. This may denote that these scenes all have a common theme (are they the scenes that he's made up in his head?) The clocks by the way, are all set to 11:11. Which was also the exact same recurring biblical theme of Jordan Peele's 'US'.



I didn't think that Phoenix was the only actor that could have played it that was logic and risk free. Hollywood is a huge hotbed of talent so there are a lot of talented actors there that could have done it just as well I think. But yes, perhaps he could be younger but only look like he is in his 40s, not sure cause I haven't seen anyone in their 20s age like that, if possible.

As for comparing this movie to Taxi Driver, I don't really find it hugely similar though, as there are lots of movies of a guy descending into a psycho. I feel that people are only comparing it to Taxi Driver so much, is because one critic said it was, and then everyone ran with that in their minds and kept saying it most likely.



I didn't think that Phoenix was the only actor that could have played it that was logic and risk free. Hollywood is a huge hotbed of talent so there are a lot of talented actors there that could have done it just as well I think..
Name them.



Off the top of my head, what if someone like Aaron Paul played the Joker. He's talented and younger looking for the role? Or if there really ins't any known actors that are as good as Phoenix than Hollywood could have looked harder for someone younger.

I mean it's Joker movie. Is Phoenix the only good actor who is going to audition for something like that?



Off the top of my head, what if someone like Aaron Paul played the Joker. He's talented and younger looking for the role? Or if there really ins't any known actors that are as good as Phoenix than Hollywood could have looked harder for someone younger.
Hollywood is a “hotbed of talent” and you suggest Aaron Paul? What? Not saying he’s a bad actor but from what I’ve seen he does not have the chops to carry a movie like this. Also, at 40, the age gap between him and Phoenix is pretty small.



I guess I would have preferred the cliffhanger ending over the unnecessary asylum ending, since he escapes right away anyway. What are your mixed feelings?

After letting the movie digest now, I think it's a well made psychological/thriller drama, but it feels like an unnecessary origin story, like do we need this, after seeing the Joker as a more mysterious figure before, who perhaps, should have been kept mysterious.
Sorry, but I think you've missed the point of the movie.

WARNING: "spoiler" spoilers below
The final asylum scene is necessary to make it clear that we can trust nothing of what we've seen in this movie. Nothing. It's not just the fantasy relationship that didn't happen but clearly there are other moments and scenes that didn't happen either, or at least in the way those scenes are presented. Including the final scene. Do you believe he killed the therapist in the hospital at the end? Most likely he didn't, but we can't be sure.

This uncertainty with the whole story is important in that the Joker's origins has always been "multiple choice" and so this movie fits perfectly with that spirit. Even when the Joker tells you where he came from, you can't believe him. Ultimately we can't be sure of any part of this movie. For all we know it's just some psycho fantasizing about being the Joker. Or it is the Joker and he's lying to us. We should embrace that ambiguity. It's all part of the "joke."



As for comparing this movie to Taxi Driver, I don't really find it hugely similar though, as there are lots of movies of a guy descending into a psycho. I feel that people are only comparing it to Taxi Driver so much, is because one critic said it was, and then everyone ran with that in their minds and kept saying it most likely.
It's clearly, unmistakably similar to Taxi Driver (and The King of Comedy). We the movie audience don't need a film critic to tell us what is extremely obvious. Taxi Driver is the ultimate movie about personal alienation, and Joker is modeled on and influenced by it.
__________________
I may go back to hating you. It was more fun.



Aaron Paul? Aaron Paul? Wait, wait, wait. ahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha okay hahahahahahahahahahahhahaahahha okay okay okay ahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah



Personally, I'm not sure what Arthur's age is even supposed to be - we don't necessarily have to assume that he's the same age as Phoenix himself. He might be in such an unhealthy physical condition that he ends up looking older than he actually is. That's without questioning how old Bruce would be when he became Batman in this continuity. I don't think it matters that much, really.
His mother was committed to the hospital 30 years earlier, according to the one scene. Arthur doesn't remember any of this so we can assume he was really young at the time. So that puts him about mid-30s...?

Of course we can't trust the information they're giving us, so...



Watched this for the 2nd time yesterday, there weren't many empty seats (which was really surprising tbh) I enjoyed it more the 2nd time around. I still think that this didn't have to be a Joker movie but I'm glad people are not only seeing it, but talking about it