Good Acting,
Interesting interpretation of Joker,
outstanding Cinematography.
not to long.
I enjoyed it.
Now this is why i keep going forward in life because of films like this masterpiece with a true message and by far Phoenixe’s best role, some great acting and him and Ledger are both remarkable in their own ways.
Definitely a well made jokers origins story, i couldn’t ask for it better, everything about it, the cast, picture, action and the plot were fantastic and definitely sets up Christopher Nolans magnificent Batman franchises.
This is not the Joker you know and erm...love... and yet it is the Joker you know and love, only shot through with a plausible origin story that makes sense of the character. Phoenix gives an astonishing turn here, at once sad and chilling, and the film as a whole is quite breathtaking in its stylistic choices. Not quite what I expected, and that's a good thing. There are still snapshots of the comic book universe but it does its own thing magnificently.
An uneven movie elevated by the haunting performance of Joaquin Phoenix.
This movie is afflicted by the same confusion that most DC movies have. It can't decide whether it wants to be a serious movie or a comic book one.
This movie would have a serious claim to being the former if it hadn't succumbed to the crowd pleasing but hollow final act.
Well, I'll never listen to That's Life by Frank Sinatra in the same way again, that's for sure.
Before I start, there are two groups of people who need to be addressed:
- Regarding the people who are saying that it's too violent, and a movie based on comics shouldn't be like that: please, go back to watching Dora: The Explorer.
- Regarding the people who are calling it a Taxi Driver or King of Comedy rip-off: Is Mr. Robot a Fight Club rip-off? You have to see the difference between ripping something off and taking inspiration + adding your own ideas to it. Also, Taxi Driver is a vigilante story, something which this isn't.
So, most of the praise you heard about this movie I can absolutely get behind. The cinematography and score are without a doubt Oscar worthy. Joaquin Phoenix is front and center, and he absolutely shines. It is a full on character study, and the movie shows everything from the Joker's point of view. It keeps the movie focussed, but it has to be said that there are no other interesting characters to get invested into, something that other character studies don't forget. The pacing is also very well done. It doesn't feel like a slow movie, and the final 20 minutes are something special. To me, however, the first 90 minutes are a lot more interesting. I love the fact that we get to see an in-depth exploration of the causes of social exclusion and what leads to Arthur's downward spiral. Phillips very wisely points to a variety of causes at very different levels of society (elites, government, punks), while not forgetting that some blame also falls into the hands of Arthur himself (e.g. his megalomania). This is a very strong and nuanced message.
And then there's the film's other message. When it comes to a film like this (a protagonist with a downwards spiral), the movie often starts with making you feel sympathetic towards the character. The Wolf of Wallstreet does that. Breaking Bad does that. And Joker also does that. But then there's a point where the character crosses the line, a moment which you can almost pinpoint in this movie, namely the scene where he kills his mom . From that point on, a movie should clearly condemn what he's doing in order to not give out an immoral or wrong message. In The Wolf of Wallstreet, Di Caprio starts to lose everything. In Breaking Bad, Walter White starts to lose everything. Phillips, however, goes out of his way of condemning what his character does. Instead, he plays swelling and upbeat music during the film's darkest moments. Moreover, Joker gets a happy ending , and no other characters have a sincere conversation about the atrocities of what he's doing. In other words, the movie gives off the impression of still being on his side, thereby presenting violence as the answer to this man's problems, and I can totally agree with some of the critics who have a moral problem with that. I understand that they wanted to stay with Arthur's perspective through the end, but this comes at the cost of one of the biggest mistakes a film like this can make. At the same time, one major flaw doesn't make a film bad. I mean, Gone With The Wind is immoral in the sense that it is racist, but is it a bad film? Absolutely not.
7.5/10
Joker was much harder to watch than I thought. The movie provides a very realistic background story for Joker. This could have been someone's real life story. Not sure how I'm supposed to see Joker as the villain in future Batman movies?
By far the best movie of 2019. Phoenix is an AMAZING actor in this. This movie worked on so many levels. The music was perfect, cinematography on point, plot well thought out. Fantastic movie!
What a brilliant performance by Joaquin Phoenix! He deserves an Academy award for this movie.
And this comes from the same guy who did the Starsky and Hutch remake and the Hangover Trilogy ? I can almost not believe that.
This movie is sick, and it has to be. It pulls you into a spiral of madness, and you can see all the pieces falling into place, until there is no escape und you get: The Joker.
The look, the atmosphere, the music and last, but not least, Phoenixs outstanding performance makes this movie an absolute masterpiece. I don't know if it will recieve any Oscars, it's not the type of movie that does usually. But it sure would deserve it. But even if it doesn't it is one of the highlights of the year.
I am not comic book reader nor do I watch every Batman movie, but I went to see this movie because it seemed completely different than the typical franchise movies. I was mesmerized by Joaquin Phoenix from start to end. I ached for him and empathized even when he began killing. Joaquin Phoenix was absolutely brilliant.
There’s something beautifully hypnotic about Joaquin Phoenix.
Everytime I try to figure out why, but nothing will come closer to the answer. How lucky are we to go to the cinema and watch one of the greatest livings actors of our generation in his prime giving us a performance that we will never forget. Joaquin Phoenix was absolutely phenomenal as Arthur Fleck, or his stage name ‘Joker’. Some of the best acting I’ve seen all year.
Phoenix lost a staggering 50 Pounds for the role and there’s plenty of scenes where we see his whole body in frame. You literally see every bone in this guys body, and at times it makes him look ghoulish. Oddly shaped and mangled. With his shoulder blades in clear sight, you could metaphorically say he’s an angel fallen to hell after losing his wings, or something like that. When he laughs I feel his pain, because the character has a mental condition where he has episodes of uncontrollable laughter that doesn’t reflect his actual mood. A real life condition that’s so awful to imagine. Phoenix can act with his eyes where you see the pain and anxiety from Arthur's mental state.
Whenever Arthur feels like he’s in control of something in his life, he dances. There’s a bathroom scene where we first see his dance, which looks a lot like Tai chi while displaying such power. Its also when darkness started to crawl into his soul. Something so simple can speak more than a million words. And what’s more impressive he completely improvised that scene. I like when directors let actors play around.
I felt sorry for Arthur, not because I related to him or I saw myself in him, but because Phoenix is that brilliant of an actor that you struggle to pick a side to root for or against. Despite the questionable and straight up horrific acts he commits, but you understand how he got to this point and it dawns on you how much of a tragedy it is.
‘Joker’ has already divided people like no movie ever. People say the movie is empty and has nothing to say. I don’t agree, because the message is loud and clear - don’t be a dick to your fellow neighbor. Todd Philips never intended to make a political statement, but to hold up a mirror to reflect the ugliness in people and the filth in our “improved” society.
This was the most uncomfortable movie experiences I've had in awhile. A brutal dive into madness that was so bleak and yet so compelling.
When I heard that Todd Philips was going to be directing, I thought it made perfect sense. Just watch the ‘Hangover 2 & 3’, the two most uncomfortable comedies he’s ever directed that felt more crime drama than anything funny. There’s also some dark humor in ‘Joker’ that involves a door chain. It’s silly, yet absolutely terrifying with the given context. A complete departure from his other work and that’s why I think it’s one of his best. I honestly think he made something so unique and meaningful. Seriously, I do.
The score by Hildur Guðnadóttir helped set the tone tremendously. A melancholy tone with a chaotic twist. A representation of Arthur slowly drowning in his own misery and pain. A little fun fact: The score for the film were written based on the script even before the actual filming of the movie started, which I think is the best way to do it, if you ask me. Someone to imagine movie by songs and incorporate their interpretation through music.
The cinematography was gorgeous and there’s a handful of shots that has imprinted into my memory. Lawrence Sher does an excellent job off showing the decaying Gotham city and the sewer waste look of the city. Bright neon lights with striking colors that manage to make the most run down of places look pretty.
I like how they actually gave Thomas Wayne a character rather than “guy gets shot in alleyway”. He’s portrayed as a ruthless man with blunt ways of saving Gotham City. However he loves his wife and son, so his unforgiving attitude was all for the shake of keeping his loved ones safe. He’s also a massive movie buff where he often goes to watch the classics on the big screen. So it’s an interesting take on the character viewed in somebody’s else perspective.
There’s a scene where Arthur goes to watch a comedy standup show to take notes on a comedians act. Every time a joke is told and everyone laughs, his face is frozen in place with an unsure grin while his eyes look around the room wondering why everyone’s laughing, but when the laughter dies down he jumps to live with a delayed laugh. It’s moments like that are simple, yet says a lot about him. Basically showing how disconnected he is with humor and everyone else.
Now lets talk about the controversy that's been surrounding this movie:
This is one of the most ludicrous controversy in recent memory. The movie will not cause or inspire violence, but shows why violence happens. I mean, there probably has been incidents when somebody committed a horrendous crime because their were influenced by a movie or a game. However, it’s he/she that should be brought into question, not the creators. Maybe this movie could inspire people to think twice about how they treat others. Why not think about the positives? If “Joker” is going to be responsible for violence and mass shootings, then so is every other movie with any form of violence ever. If people really care about how violence is portrayed in movies, then Rob Zombies ‘3 From Hell’ should also receive the same attention. Just imagine ‘Natural Born Killers’ times 100, but I guess it’s not mainstream enough for any of that. And sure, there’s some brutal and raw approach to violence in ‘Joker’, but we all have seen worst. ‘Deadpool’ is more graphic than this. It's not the directors duty to teach morals to the viewer. People will never learn to stop pointing fingers at things to blame and actually do something about it! People often understandment how much power their got.
Anywhere, sorry about that folks, just had to get that off my chest. Go and check it out.
Overall rating: “Send in the clowns” ⇠ you’ve gotta sing that like Frank Sinatra.
A strange movie that makes you question reality and if you are sane. You might not be after watching it.
The film is an insane masterpiece. That deserves better reviews and to be certified fresh. Since it’s definitely one of the years best.
disturbing, beautiful, very dark and strangely funny film! joaquin phoenix is absolutely golden. great social commentary. the more I watch it, the better it gets. you can't help but think about it for days afterwards
I'm seeing this a second time soon. But honestly, the way this movie shows the society's viewpoints and the amazing hypocrisy plus the negligence of guilt because people did nothing to stop something wrong is stunningly horrific, it's sadly rolled into truth so much that it hurts. All the characters are portrayed fantastically. Especially Arthur himself. Joaquin is jaw-dropping.
The damn score is so chilling and haunting that it will stick with me for a long time. The way it fills the room works great like the text the title impacts the screen with.
This film is flawless. I don't know if I'll have a change of mind a second time around. Because I am certain in my opinion currently, that this movie is perfect, and my favourite movie of the year so far.
10/10
I've had an amazing experience watching the movie premiere in Venice, I've been waiting for this movie for a long time and I was not disappointed in the slightest.
It's a gorgeous movie, it's disturbing but moving at the same time, violent at times, but also subtle. It's a different and fresh spin on the character and on the cinecomic genre as a whole and Phoenix delivers an amazing performance portraying a version of the Joker we've never seen before, he's not the villain of someone else's story, he is the hero and villain of HIS own story, and the audience can be orrified by him, but we can't help but feel for him at times.
Without giving anything away I would recommend to go and see the movie not expecting to go and see an action packed, but gritty cinecomic, I suggest going in and watch it pretending that it's not even about a famous comic villain, but simply a movie, I think that people will appreciate it more in that way, not comparing it to the cinecomics we've seen before, but thinking of it as a normal movie.
P.S.: People will of course compare Phoenix to Ledger, I don't think it's possible, they give a totally different percormance because they portray totally different versions of the character, and I think it's going to be hard to compare them, you either prefere Ledger's version or Phoenix's but only based on the character, the actor's performances cannot be judged by comparison, they're both great. Just enjoy the movie
What an experience! It was magnificent and really powerful. Brilliant lead actor.
Astonishing performance. It’s a really good movie and worth watching if you are both a fan and a movie lover.
I don't undestand the 9/10 and 10/10 reviews, in my opinion this movie is way overhyped.
I will give, that the actors performance is amazing, but then it's only famous people.
My main problem with the movie is, that nothing interesting happens, its basically like every other tragedy released over the last decade - just with DC's IP behind it.
There are entire segments in which literally nothing happens in the first 60m minutes which were a snoozefest, the character is walking somewhere and its followed by another scene in which, you guessed it: also nothing happens.
I only enjoyed the last 20 minutes, although they didn't hold a single unforseen twist either...
I've just stepped out of the cinema having watched the worst movie of the year. I feel like the director has played me for a fool. I feel like the joke here.
Joaquin Phoenix must want to shake Todd Phillips till his eyes pop out his head for he went 100% down the rabbit hole to create this performance - only for a horrendously bad director, languid editing, and a screenplay-by-numbers to fail this picture into the miserable, sodden, car-crash of a film it is.
The last time I felt so vitriolic after a 'much-hyped' film was Guy Ritchie's Revolver. Another stinker for the ages.
I particularly feel like a joke has been had at my expense by the presence of Robert De Niro, who must have had deja vu cashing his paycheck reminiscing back to his (actually a good film) The King of Comedy.
This film tries to marry that Rupert character to Taxi Driver and comes up with garbage. Much like the garbage epidemic denoted in the plot itself.
I paid 8 pounds to see this. You'd have to pay me 800 to watch it again.
It almost worked for a few minutes during the scenes with Bobby D's Johnny Carson bit. Almost. The rest was as predictable yet immensely tedious as it could be without me being handed a copy of the script on the way in.
Do yourself a favour... Don't ruin your opinion of Joaquin Phoenix by seeing this. It doesn't feel like he is to blame here. But it's best to just steer clear of the movie altogether. It offers nothing to the DC universe. It offers nothing to the Batman legacy. It actively dishounours the greatness of Heath Ledger, Jack Nicholson, Cesar Romero and all future Jokers.
This film itself IS the joker.
Utter crap.
3/10 - for the attempts made by Joaquin Phoenix saving it from 1/10.
Incredibly overrated. I don't mind dark movies that deal with depressing subject matter. But this is not intriguing. The character doesn't have enough depth. Not an engrossing movie.
I don't think I have ever seen Gotham city this bad in any other movie or video game. They portrayed it like the shit hole it is. They did a really good job.
100% Will watch again
this shitty movie is so fuckin overrated and overhyped
Everything you’ve heard about Joachim Phoenix in this is true. Unfortunately a great lead performance doesn’t make a movie when the script is derivative and filled with plot holes.
Doesn't really juggle its messages and influences as skillfully as it seems to think it does. I had a hard time watching this in the theater because so much of it was just plain cringe-y to me. I know people are absolutely adoring this film, but it felt like a shallow misunderstanding of The King of Comedy and Taxi Driver to me.
Phoenix gives a solid performance and the cinematography is good though.
This is going to be one of those posts where I go against the mainstream but my reaction when I watched this movie was: You got to be f… kidding me?
The only resemblance to the REAL joker in this movie is the name. As far as I am concerned this movie is an insult to the fans of Batman and the REAL Joker.
The “Joker” in this move is a unintelligent deranged nutcase. There is a sob story in the background about how he became that way which is totally uninteresting.
The REAL joker is a intelligent criminal mastermind. I was waiting for this nutcase to actually become that for the entire movie. Spoiler alert, it never happened! This guy starts as a useless sobbing nutcase and he ends the movie as the same useless sobbing nutcase.
The movie has NOTHING to do with the real Joker. It is a blatant attempt to garner support for a unrelated psychopathic thriller by using the Joker name. If it would have been advertised as such I probably would have, if not liked it, so at least appreciated it for it’s qualities. It is indeed a well done movie technically and the main character is indeed excellently performed.
However, even if I try to distance myself from the deceitful Joker label, I find it overall boring, too long and really a movie about a psychopath probably made by someone with mental issues himself. But then that’s Hollywood today.
That the politically biased and elitist so called “critics” on sites like Rotten Tomatoes like it is not really surprising but I have to confess that I am somewhat surprised at the rave ratings by real viewers on some other sites.
Honestly, I was expecting to be disappointing by this movie. Then I am always cautious about movies getting rave reviews, especially from the previously mentioned totally useless and crappy “review” site. I did not expect this level of disappointment though. Epic fail as far as I am concerned.
Damn. Wow. Just powerful. This movie nails it on so many levels..
Joaquin was so damn good. The underlying themes, the undertones.. The sounds, the visuals.. The score. The colours.
DC please continue to allow your characters to be used in this way.
A bit too psychotic.
With all the different depictions of Jokers, this by far is not the best. With dorky 60's Joker (Cesar Romero) eerily funny Joker (Jack Nicholson) and the Monster Joker (Jared Leto). It's extremely hard to top the late greats Heath Ledger's version.
With all understanding that this morning is was to show the upbringing of the real joker, it still is a bit much. The murder scenes, the psychotic episodes, and the mental issues all where a huge over reach. It does not do well in meshing all previous Jokers storylines.
Remove the painted face and the horrible laugh and this would make for a very decent thriller. but Joker? No.
I don't recommend this movie for anyone who loves any other previous version of joker.
[9.2/10] There’s an old adage for critics -- when you’re not sure what to write about a film, write about how it made you feel. Well, Joker made me feel sad and scared. Sad, because there really are people like that. And scared because, well, there really are people like that.
The grandest accomplishment of Joker is how it makes its title character simultaneously comprehensible and terrifying. He is ridden with pathos, a victim of so many people and institutions and raw misfortunes. But he is also truly frightening, a grim reflection of the violence that can and has erupted in our society when people feel left behind and don’t receive the help that they require. For all its unflinching depiction of the brutality Arthur Fleck inflicts on those around him, it doesn't make him a monster. Instead, Joker makes its title character the inevitable result of an overriding neglect, the karmic consequence of excess finally brought to bear, and a society’s grease-painted chickens coming home to roost.
None of that would work without an utterly volcanic performance at the center of the picture. Joaquin Phoenix completely inhabits this cinematic creation. He shifts from a gravelly whisper to a sing-song voice as the winds shift in the character’s mind. He masters a laugh that toes the line between laughter and tears and conveying the sense of something not right within the mind that unleashes it. He sways electric with the music, whether it emanates from the film’s score or his dusty old television. He moves with a primal looseness and weight. He is captivating at every moment, an unsettlingly real image of disturbia, that Phoenix delivers with the vocal, the physical, and the emotional at every turn.
That performance is in service of what is self-consciously an origin story for the Clown Prince of Crime (despite, or perhaps because, of the character declaring that his past should be “multiple choice”). That means we learn why he laughs the way he does -- as it’s a product of his condition. We see the rationale behind his getup and tricks -- a career as a party clown and aspirations toward stand-up comedy. We see the heart of his grievances with Gotham City -- a disillusionment with its city fathers for reasons both environmental and personal. I doubt we’ll be seeing Phoenix’s version of the character terrorizing Batman in some sequel, but Joker explores the most basic elements of its iconic character and traces them down to their roots.
But more than that, the film is a portrait of a psychopath. While director Todd Philips and co-writer Scott Silver dress up their story in the world of the Dark Knight, what makes Joker so gripping and unnerving throughout is the way it could play out just as well, just as potent, if you shaved off the comic book serial numbers.
There’s added resonance from knowing, if only in broad strokes, the star-crossed future that lies in wait for Arthur Fleck and power in seeing the sterling legacy of Bruce Wayne’s father eroded by the white shoe reality this budding folk hero is poised to scuff up. And yet, while far fewer people would venture to the theater without the brand name, the story of this mentally ill young man reaching his breaking point would pierce and terrify just the same.
That’s because Joker offers a thoroughly grounded, if still outsized take on its eponymous protagonist. Fans lamenting how the four-color, whizbang stories for children have been turned into grim and gritty tales for misery-loving teenagers will have no shortage of fodder for complaints. Still, this film isn’t dark for the sake of darkness. It’s realer than that, pointing to a brand of untreated or under-treated mental illness, institutional rot, and societal neglect that would create an Arthur Fleck, whether or not he’d ever don a red nose and painted smile.
Phillips is chiefly interested in the psychology of Fleck. At the two-thirds mark, the film unveils the explicit abuse, the family history of mental illness, that Arthur was subject to. But it also traces the all-too-real sense of someone feeling overlooked and unseen lashing out against the world because bad attention is better than no attention. It captures the utter weirdness of its title character, making him sympathetic from his background and the punishment he endures, but also not flinching from his abject creepiness, and the violations that come with it.
Most of all it shows him reaching out for a series of father figures, real and imagined, who only hurt or ignore him. His mother’s former partner abused them both. The seemingly kind man at the clown agency who calls Arthur “his boy” throws him under the bus when his own well-being is threatened. Thomas Wayne, the object of probably imagined but still ambiguous affair with Arthur’s mom, rejects this unwell man’s assertion of parentage, denies him the warmth he seeks, and gives him a punch in the face for good measure.
But they key to that gnawing absence within Arthur is Murray Franklin, the host of a Carson-esque late night show, the lead figure in Arthur’s fantasies of affirmation and acceptance, and the one, admittedly parasocial relationship in Arthur’s life that he thought he could rely on. Robert De Niro does great work in the role, not only channeling a subtle hypocritical veneer of decency that helps contribute to Arthur’s starry-eyed disillusionment, but conjuring the ghosts of his past work in Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy that gives Joker a certain type of benediction. Its Murray’s perceived betrayal that cuts the deepest, while the man’s presence and presentation create the unwitting model for the Joker’s eventual persona and flair for the camera.
That speaks to the other key ingredient in the rise of this reflexively lethal man -- that need for attention and connection. Joker captures the sense of being unseen and unnoticed, of the perverse thrill the title character gains from seeing his work celebrated and imitated, of the chance to steal the spotlight and finally demand some attention. It’s scary in an age of livestreamed mass shootings and manifestos about being ignored to see those ingredients dramatized in such stark, if colorful tones.
Joker extrapolates that from the personal to the societal. One of the most interesting, and again, alarming elements of the film is the way it depicts Joker becoming an accidental folk hero. When he shoots the Wayne executives on the subway, he’s not striking a blow against the overclass. He’s just attacking the odious but still unfortunate outlets for a lifetime of degradation. When he sics an angry crowd on the cops chasing him, it’s a half-accident and a half personal convenience, rather than any intended commentary police preserving the status quo.
And yet, for a large contingent of the city, kept safely behind police barriers and in faraway places, his instinctive act sparks a class rebellion. The film touches on genuine tensions between rich and poor, between those who feel protected by law enforcement and those who feel attacked by them. There’s an irony to Arthur Fleck being elevated as a symbol of this movement, granted the attention he so desperately craves for a cause that isn’t even his.
But the truth is that it is, even if he doesn't realize it, because Joker frames Fleck as a product of those larger forces and tensions, regardless of whether he countenances or understands them. The unnerving thing about his riot beatification is the grim plausibility of it amid the sea of lost souls craving something to believe in. One only need recall the real life cult of personality that grew up in the shadow of Heath Ledger’s take on the character to envision this type of killer finding a fawning audience, ready to forgive his sins and champion his unwitting cause.
Philips and cinematographer Lawrence Sher capture this unsettling rise in striking tones. The air of seventies grime, borrowed from Scorsese, is palpable in each frame, but the movie contrasts it with Fleck’s almost lurid primary colors. There’s a visual journey alongside the emotional one, with a world that gets grayer and grimier while the protagonist becomes more and more colorful. Philips and Sher always make time for the scenes to breathe, particularly giving Phoenix’s creation the space to simple exist, to writhe, to dance long enough that the audience must take it in and can’t look away.
In that, the film flinches from nothing. It gives us the pure awkwardness of so many of Fleck’s interactions. It gives us the sheer creepiness he exudes in the conflation of his real life loneliness with his inherited delusions of connection and support. It gives us the abuses Arthur suffered and continues to suffer, and chastises a city and a class unwilling to fund the services and initiatives it would take to treat him. It uses its violence not for titillation, but for horrible catharsis, the culmination of unbidden misfortunes and reflexive reactions. In digging deep into the psyche of one of pop cultures most visible villains, it posits that it takes more than one bad day, but rather a lifetime and yes, a society of horrors to create this sort of man.
The most piercing thing about Joker is its statement that this is how monsters are made, that all you need is a raft of lonely, purposeless people who feel unloved and unseen, the spectre of inherited illness, a dearth of institutional options to fulfill their most basic needs, and a social and political environment that makes it seem like they have no choices in the face of concentrated power. It is tragic and painfully poignant how many individuals out there endure the same sort of obstacles, the same sort of hopelessness that Arthur Fleck faces. And it is terrifying and distressing, to think of the environment we’ve created, the morass of unmet needs and building societal resentments, that continue to give us wave after wave of real life Jokers.
Oh come on, Murray. Do I look like the kind of clown that could start a movement?
- Arthur Fleck
Oh what could have been. For me Heath Ledger will forever be the ultimate Joker, but Joaquin did his friend proud with a great performance. To bad the rest of the movie was a slow moving train wreck.
:clown::police_car::bomb::tram:
I have a couple of problems with this film. I really wanted to love it but didn't.
The first is that is that it reminded me of so many other films. That in itself is fine - when you've seen hundreds of films that is bound to happen. The problem is that all of the films that popped into my head while watching this were better than this one. The obvious one is Taxi Driver. That film is an all-time great film by a legendary actor. As Joker went on I thought it reminded me more of The King of Comedy (ironically both starring Robert De Niro). And finally it seemed that the Joker ended up being an anti-hero like we saw in Cool Hand Luke. All three of these films featured top-flight actors at the top of their game. The difference is that the character matched the backdrop and thus felt authentic.
All of this brings me to the second problem. Just what is the backdrop here? They told me it was a world gone mad but I really didn't feel it. The Joker was said to be a tortured soul but I really didn't feel that either. The final scene where he is some kind of new leader of the scorned? Didn't feel right. The movie was trying hard to be a drama but this felt cartoonish. Look, Phoenix is amazing but if you've watched his work in recent years (You Were Never Really Here and the amazing Her come to mind) this isn't a surprise. He kills it. But it felt like they took a comic book character and dropped him in to a random film and this is what you got. I could watch Johnny Depp be Captain Jack Sparrow in just about anything. They could have dropped in Captain Jack into this film in place of Joker and it would have felt no less discombobulated.
In a nutshell the parts of this movie were better than the sum.
follow me at https://IHateBadMovies.com or facebook page IHateBadMovies
I think where this movie goes wrong is in the portrayal of "Arthur" as Joker. Joker is a successful villain because we love to hate him. He does things out of cold blood, and for no other reason. However, Arthur is deeply troubled, abused, humiliated, and most importantly mentally ill. He may not be relatable, but he is someone we can sympathize with, and that's not scary or intimidating. So instead of a heartless murderer who has no past and no motives, we have a tale of revenge by someone who is handicapped. Even if you put all that aside, this movie made Joker fucking awesome by the end, and that's not really what the character should be. You fear what you don't understand, and this movie made us understand him completely.
(This didn't lower my rating, but I had to mention it.) I know his stand up routine was supposed to be this humiliating bomb of a performance, but it was honestly hilarious. If it was real life, people would have thought he was some kind of Andy Kaufman genius. I was literally laughing out loud. And I laughed so hard at that knock knock joke, I thought DeNiro was yelling at ME when he yelled "hey that's not funny!"
1 / 2 directing & technical aspect (I'm being nice here cause there were some really dumb musical cues)
1 / 1 story
1 / 1 act I
1 / 1 act II
1 / 1 act III
1 / 1 acting
.5 / 1 writing
0 / 1 originality
0 / 1 lasting ability to make you think
-.5 / 1 misc (portrayal of Joker)
6 / 10
If this was a movie about a person becoming some previously unknown villain, it would've been a lot better. Originality works, guys.
I guess people walked into watching this movie with different expectations which turned them down in a way or the other. to a those complaining Joaquin overshadowing all other characters in the movie, c'mon you gotta take the movie for what it's . It's a first person character study like Taxi driver or Dog day afternoon or something so don't expect it to be just like any other entertainer flicks out there . Plus to those who say movie is draggy at points, you gotta improve your taste mate !.
Now coming to Joker, I absolutely loved it to the core and also it satisfied me in every sorta way. Can't imagine anybody else than Joaquin portraying Arthur and little references made to taxi driver and king of comedy felt like icing on cake. And it was also a great pleasure to see Deniro on screen !.
After a long time a movie that's worth called as "cinema" in this superhero - movie - fatigue - era where almost every superhero movie is just another forgettable average movie .
I've never made a comment here, but this movie deserves one.
Please read the following comment as my personal opinion, I'm sure not every one will agree with my point of view and thats okay.
And also non native speaker here, so I apologise in advance.
1. This movie is amazing. It was everything I expected it to be and much more. I was afraid because I got hyped a lot before seeing the movie, but I must say it was even better than what I was expecting to see.
2. The music and the sound is amazing. All the choices for the tracks/songs are on point. The moments where they want to build the suspense work perfectly. Also what they do with the Frank Sinatra song is superb. At the end of the movie it will have a whole different meaning for you.
3. The acting of JP is astounding. He portrays the role of Arthur Fleck perfectly. Not that we have a real world example of this role, but for me it comes awfully close to what I imagine a Joker from A Killing Joke (Graphic Novel) to be. Further comparing JP to different Joker portrayals might be fun, but they don't work in the same context, so I won't tell you JP is a better Joker than HL.
4. Don't watch the movie if you're only a Batman fan. For people who are only amazed by how cool the Batman character is, this won't do it for them. This movie needs to be seen as a single uncoupled work of art. Forget Bruce for a second and try to understand how the Joker is the perfect incorporation of what Gotham is.
5. Watch the movie if you like to be challenged. You won't walk out without feeling a tiny bit of empathy for the person Arthut Fleck becomes, and yes he does become a sociopath.
6. This movie reflects society. This movie is in many ways a mirror in whats happening on some parts of our world. This movie shows what happens when people treat other people like garbage. And the elegance of the movie, is that it keeps the discussion so far away from politics.
7. It raises some serious questions. In the beginning Arthur Fleck is just a clown, that has a rough time and we feel for him. At the end he is the Joker that kills people freely and thinks it's funny and even though we don't identify ourselves with this character, we still understand where his thoughts come from. This dissonance between in us that we feel sorry for him in the beginning, that we understand why he becomes the Joker and still wouldn't tolerate anyone that takes such actions in real life is fascinating, to say the least.
8. Will definitely watch it again in the cinema.
For all people that want to see something similar, watch Blue Ruins.
"We live in a society..."
all jokes aside, a surprisingly deep movie. Not something I expected from Todd Phillips.
Even great acting couldn’t save this.
It was in a word - pointless.
Go watch Taxi Driver and see what this could have been.
Joker’s past is supposed to be an enigma. But this was just a sad pass at something that could have been good.
The screenplay could have used some tidying up; some scenes should have been shortened or cut out altogether. E.g. I love Zazie Beetz, but her arc was pointless; I did not need to live with it for half the film only to realize this one aspect of Joker's character that was already hinted at before. Also, there are some reused character motives in the first hour that should have either been replaced or cut out.
The political aftermath of what Arthur did seemed a bit shoehorned; I thought it was neither given enough time nor attention to develop properly.
The dialogue, and the logic behind it, seemed a bit too barebone in some scenes—even Joaquin Phoenix's dedication to the character could not help some of it.
Joker was an OK film—not close to great, but it was an intriguing and, dare I say, brilliant origin story. There are some aspects of this story that I prefer to Alan Moore's The Killing Joke, and I am eager to see what Warner Bros. are going to do next with this version of Joker.
Watching Arthur go full Joker made sense, and this is exactly what I want from an origin story. Based on that alone, I would recommend the film, but I would ask anyone who has not seen it to disregard the hype and try to take it in for what it is.
Okay, this film has already been so widely debated that I’m not sure what I can really add to the conversation. So, I’ll just give my thoughts.
“Joker” is a fairly basic character study of Arthur Fleck, a mentally ill man who feels increasingly marginalized by an uncaring and brutal society in Gotham City. To start, the characters, except for Arthur himself, are pretty flat. They seem to have little purpose other than to further Arthur’s story. This includes Thomas Wayne, who in other media is portrayed as a man of many dimensions, wealthy but caring, and instilling these values in his son Bruce. Here, he is portrayed as much more uncaring and elitist. Which gives much less of an impact in the inevitable alley scene we see in everything remotely related to Batman. More on this in a minute. It’s important to the point.
Arthur suffers a condition that makes him burst into laughter at inappropriate times. He also has other unspecified mental illnesses. We’re never given the specifics. This is actually a little troubling because of the general depiction of mental illness. It almost seems like they are saying that if someone is mentally ill then they are a ticking time bomb and it’s only a matter of time before they go off. This is not a good look.
After a series of events, Arthur begins spiraling downward, but at the same time realizes how much influence he can have over other people, an aspect of the Joker that isn’t often explored. And this is where the characters other than Arthur being rather flat comes into play.
There’s more than one indication that we are actually witnessing these events through Arthur’s eyes. And this creates a brilliant depiction of a narcissistic personality. The only character that gets fully fleshed out is Arthur himself, but he can’t or won’t connect with other people to see their depth. As such, we get to see narcissism from the inside, no connection to others and in fact seeing them as pawns in his own schemes. It’s subtle and definitely not in your face, but if you look carefully, the hints are there.
Those who fear that "Joker" would glorify incel violence or otherwise can rest a little easier, but as I mentioned, the film isn't without its troubling portrayals. It does vilify the mentally ill, which creates a whole host of other issues. The movie swings wildly between "excellent" and just "okay," and sometimes even "meh." As such, it gets a recommendation, but only a mild one.
Why so Serious?
Not a DC fan, but a great fan of Joker storylines. One who considers the Dark Knight one of the best movies ever made and absolutely the best of his genre. The best villain ever created by a crazy mind!
But this...? Doesn’t feel like Joker for the most part (something like 90mins) to me. Don’t get me wrong, its a good movie but if the name of the movie was “Mad Clown” or something like that.
Wow! What a great movie! This is not a comic book version of Joker but rather version of Joker as a man with a mental illness and his downward spiral. This movie is dark, gritty and beautiful. A look into the mind of psychosis and all it lends itself to. This movie leads a lot of room for interpretation which is great. Joaquin Phoenix should get an Oscar for his disturbing portrayal. My review is not good enough for this movie.... I need to watch it again.... it’s beautiful and my heart is to full of emotion to find the right words for this masterpiece.
I loved Joaquin Phoenix's performance it was a real 10/10 great balance between creepy and campy I also loved the scenes on the train with the 3 guys bullying him (and the woman) and him killing them and the excruciating stand up gig, him being ridiculed on television and eventually murdering Murr-ayy on air. However, overall I felt that it dragged in places it didn't need to, this probably sounds weird but I feel like it would've benefited from more violence? I thought it was a bit weaksauce for the hype lol
81 | Arthur Fleck might be the most pathetic character who has ever been written. Every life decision he makes is terrible and he blames his own fault on society. Life is a hard place to live, but it is up to us to become stronger and mature about it or just whining and depressed. Aside from that, Joker is visually beautiful and has better Gotham than The Dark Knight. We could see how damaged and corrupt this city is. A place like Gotham would be a great place to born anarchists. Joker also portrayed how disconnected the rich and the poor are. That is the main problem that made the system in Gotham is broke from in or out. Some people probably have a different perspective about Arthur Fleck. But the fact is he is a terrible person who was born in a terrible city, that's why Gotham is a beautiful place for him to be.
•••••••••••••••••••••••
Rating: 80.45
Plot
25%: 2.3
50%: 2.3
75%: 2.4
100%: 2.5
Favorite Characters
A super-villain origin story. This reminded me of the seriousness that "Logan" went for a few years ago. This was dark and violent but it wasn't as shocking as the media was describing it. The film should have ended on the street scene. I didn't see any potential for Arthur Fleck to become the criminal mastermind that was the Joker, though. Just the rage and psychosis. That was the most disappointing aspect of the movie.
Not really sure how this movie got such a high rating. Joaquin's performance was incredible, but otherwise it was 2h of boredom for me. Story basically did not exist.
Joaquin Phoenix' performance makes this movie, it's impressive what he's managed to do with a character that's paper thin. Beyond that the movie's not really as deep as it's been made out to be, though it's entertaining all the same.
Well, I thought I saw the best "comic book movie" ever earlier this year when I finally saw Logan. That title has now moved to Joker. I was a bit hesitant going into this. One, because I'm not that into comic movies normally, two, because DC movies are a lottery of quality standards, and lastly because its by the guy who's famous for comedies like The Hangover and Old School taking on the aforementioned 2 things. But I'd recently seen a still from the movie, of Phoenix laying back against grimy 70s subway glass and for some reason that sparked something in me that made me want to go watch it finally. I'm glad I did. This is the first "super hero" movie I can recall, that would be the same movie even without the "super heroes". Phoenix is completely amazing through-out the entire movie, and the story held up its end of the bargain. Was this ever a comic story or was this brand new? I have no idea. I do know that if every comic movie was this dark and grounded in reality, I'd watch them all, constantly. The whole cast shines through, but 1970s New York (Gotham) outshines them all but Phoenix himself. The city is disgusting and scary and going through collapse. Thomas Wayne is not the white meat good guy. Joker is not entirely a bad guy, certainly not until the very end and certainly not when the movie starts. I cannot say enough about how much I liked this movie. I read that it was supposed to be a one-off but the obscene success it saw has lead to a sequel that is currently in the idea phase. I can only hope it lives up to this. Stay f*cked up and stay in reality, and it just might.
DC abandons their Extended Cinematic Universe and attempts to revive the Batman franchise with the indie character drama Joker. The story follows a psychologically disturbed clown named Arthur Fleck who’s an aspiring comic as he’s fired from his job and gets a shot on a late night talk show after the host riffs on a video of one of Fleck’s stand-up routes. Starring Joaquin Phoenix, Robert De Niro, and Brett Cullen, the film has a pretty decent cast that gives good performances; though Phoenix often overacts, drawing attention to how weird and eccentric he’s being for no reason. And the liberal politics are not in any way subtle, overshadowing the plot at time. Still, it does do some interesting things with the Batman mythos and there are some exciting and fun action scenes. Yet while Joker is a novel addition to the Batman franchise, the film style doesn’t really feel apiece with the material.
If you're not a fan of the Batman universe, this movie will be 7/10, maybe 6/10. But for us fans, it's a great movie.
I never thought I'd see a performance that would eclipse Heath Ledger. I'm not saying it's better, it's different. Each portrays the Joker in his own style and the result is a masterpiece of acting.
If Joaquin Phoenix doesn't win the Oscar for this I will be surprised.
Totally worth my time.
Cinematography is great
Acting is superb.
Give Juaquin his Oscar!
Joker is a film that messes with your head. The way American Psycho and Birdmad did. Joaquin Phoenix gives an epic performance as Arthur Fleck.
A wannabe comedian who no one takes seriously. Due to a disorder that makes him laugh uncontrollably. Pushing him further to madness. Is his talk show host role model played by Robert DeNiro. Constantly airing his comic performance, mocking it.
The film is full of uncomfortable situations and can be hard to watch at times. it’s also hard to know what is real and what isn’t, in Joker.
Which can be frustrating but Todd Phillips (The Hangover, War Dogs) does his best work yet. Giving us a trippy and complex movie that makes us question reality and our sanity.
It just dragged and did nothing for me.
Not as great or as terrible as expected. The politicization in the media is overkill. I found the movie a decent character journey but a one-note experience. Too many cliches (perhaps unavoidable) to be groundbreaking. It does it's job in making you feel something for the Joker because it pulls out so many human and societal issues that some are bound to stick. Some people take this movie personal. My guess is the identify of the movie leads to insecurity or positive confirmation. Other will just be disappointed it's not a typical movie for it's genre. Joaquin Phoenix does a good job.
Terrible story acting filming no real redeeming qualities at all
This was a thoroughly unenjoyable, pointless film. It's entirely unsurprising that the sequel will be a musical.
Todd Phillips' Joker received mixed reviews and controversy when it was released, and it came with high expectations. The film won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival in 2019 and had the burden of the threat of gun violence from some factions who may be inspired by the film's events. The film is not a masterpiece, but it is still a very good film. Phillips presents an origin story for the Joker that is a psychological thriller that deals with real-life issues. The tone is dark, disturbing and visually the movie is no different. The setting in the early-1980s goes well with the overall atmosphere of Joker, but it is Phoenix's performance that steals the show. His portrayal of the Joker is not someone to root for and is equal parts menacing, vulnerable, evil, and scheming. While the story borrows heavily from Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy, it lacks the style of both, and the attempt at real-world social commentary is not very deep. The movie's score is hauntingly creepy and there are moments that will stop you in your tracks. However, the inclusion of the Wayne family feels unnecessary and takes away from the Joker's story. The writing in the movie's big finale was weak but the crescendo was marvelously chaotic. Overall, Joker is a very good film despite its mixed reviews and controversy.
Joker de Todd Phillips recibió críticas mixtas y controversia cuando se lanzó, y llegó con grandes expectativas. La película ganó el León de Oro en el Festival de Cine de Venecia en 2019 y tuvo la carga de la amenaza de la violencia armada de algunas facciones que pueden inspirarse en los eventos de la película. La película no es una obra maestra, pero sigue siendo una muy buena película. Phillips presenta una historia de origen para el Joker que es un thriller psicológico que trata sobre problemas de la vida real. El tono es oscuro, inquietante y visualmente la película no es diferente. El escenario a principios de la década de 1980 va bien con la atmósfera general de Joker, pero es la actuación de Phoenix la que se roba el espectáculo. Su interpretación del Joker no es alguien a quien apoyar y es a la vez amenazante, vulnerable, malvado e intrigante. Si bien la historia se basa en gran medida en Taxi Driver y El rey de la comedia, carece del estilo de ambos, y el intento de comentario social del mundo real no es muy profundo. La partitura de la película es inquietantemente espeluznante y hay momentos que te detendrán en seco. Sin embargo, la inclusión de la familia Wayne se siente innecesaria y le resta importancia a la historia del Guasón. La escritura en el gran final de la película fue débil, pero el crescendo fue maravillosamente caótico. En general, Joker es una muy buena película a pesar de sus críticas mixtas y su controversia.
Joaquin Phoenix just Amazing !! the movie shows a human side about a superheroes saga worst criminals, out of superpowers and full of weaknesses !
WTF is people liking this crap? The premise of the film is all wrong where they is trying to create an origin story for a villain that is not supposed to have an origin. But then it's also a very stupid story in and of it self. The movie offends me to be honest.
Not the masterpiece some people seem to think. But a good movie nonetheless. It drags a bit in some parts too, although the ending is fantastic!
the society is not really like this but okay whatevers
Think I watched 10-15 minutes of this and turned it off. Every thing about it felt awkward. I couldn’t do it.
Flawless performance by Phoenix, but the movie provides little value beyond this.
Each to their own, as always, but for me: Incredible!
I was fully aware of 'Joker' ever since its release, impossible not to be given the extraordinary hype that surrounded it, but it still absolutely surpassed my expectations - a sensational film. I adored every second of this; and I'm not even a Joker/DC Comics etc. 'fan'.
Joaquin Phoenix gives an astonishingly outstanding performance as the titular character, undoubtedly one of the greatest showings that I've ever seen from an actor. I'm not one that takes notice of awards, but he is fully deserving of anything of that ilk that he won due to this. Quality!
Everything else about the film is fantastic. Great score, great cinematography, great pacing... it's all just utterly superb and makes for a spectacular watch. I love that they avoided just going wall-to-wall crazy with this, don't get me wrong things get mad but there's more to it than just violence et al.
I had presumed that I was going to enjoy this, but it honestly smashed any predictions I had about it before seeing it. Even after just one viewing, I can already state it's one of my favourite films. Excellent!
One of the best films this last decade. Really well thought out origin movie. Phoenix plays the part so well. Dont expect this to be your average Batman film even though yes its based on it. That said it still slots into the Batman story but has a much darker twist. Action, drama, tragedy and madness. Brilliant!
Finally getting around to see this. While it is a good movie, for me it suffers by being about "The Joker".
If it was an origin story where he was going to join the DCU then I'd be all for it. But as a stand alone film, it didn't need to be about that character. It could have stood on it's own.
My Ratings
10 - I love it, regardless of quality
9 - Very good, might not love but very well done or might love, forgiving some issues
8 - Very enjoyable or Just OK for me but well done
7 - Good
6 - Watchable despite not liking the film/show
5 - Mid
3-4 - Not great, but got through it
1-2 - Very bad/You might be a communist if you like this garbage
More unsatisfactory than my expectations, which were too high. A prequel about the birth of batman's enemy. The story is very original, but sometimes it's a little unlikely. Two things are really amazing: the cross-section of our society and the interpretation of Joaquin Phoenix, oscar more than deserved.
A very good film with an excellent central performance, but the love fest is odd. We seem to be living in a time where we are told a movie is controversial and knife edge 'of the moment'. It's a fairly repeated formula and nothing new at all. We have to face the fact that Hollywood can't make a controversial film out of fear they will offend someone and get Twitter cancelled. shame really.
I remember being quite confused as to why Joaquin Phoenix would take this role, especially considering early trailers which did not impress me. But the movie far surpassed my expectations.
This is a slow burning character piece, but one which never bored. It’s probably the most interesting conception of the character, and one that makes restrained allusions to its greater lore, leaving the possibility of more without the necessity.
Phoenix’s performance is incredible. It isn’t always violent, but when it is, it commits. It’s riddled with ambiguities. The climactic sequence delivered in major ways despite my having been spoiled on what would happen.
I’m not sure if DC intends to make more films in this vein, but they absolutely should.
Worst movie. They could introdice joker in 3 minute. I waste my two hour...
Enjoyed this, loved the soundtrack. I know it shows violence which people were complaining about in regards to mental illness but as someone whos suffered from (non-violent) psychosis, its portrayed very well which very few movies do.
I was very much looking forward to seeing this. However, sadly i did not like it very much. Not sure i can put my finger on exactly what it is that turned me off to this movie. The acting was great. The story was very good. I enjoy seeing alternate origin stories for these larger than life comic book characters. And this was a very human, realistic origin story. And yet, I still did not like the movie that much.
I think a lot of the negative reception to this film is almost entirely coming from sections of the audience coloring the film how they want to and disliking how it looks with that coloring applied. It's expectation baggage weighing the experience down. I've seen people sad this isn't a normal comic book film. I've seen people who can't separate this from the co-opting it has received ironically and unironically from negative memes. I've seen people who don't understand that protagonists are allowed to be bad people. I've seen people unable to handle bad people having sympathetic things happen to them. I've seen people who can't handle the slow burn of a character study despite it being rife with heavy important moments. I've seen people misunderstand that the "girlfriend"/early scene with Arthur on the show are delusions (which was done incredibly obviously). I've seen people criticize the movie for drawing from very apropos inspiration (Taxi Driver/King of Comedy) and calling it a ripoff like movie dna isn't borrowed in almost every film they watch to great effect like it is done here. I've seen people upset that Arthur "wins" in the end despite the fact that the character has canonically been fairly uncontested until Batman comes around and this is long before that time, and that this movie was made with the assumption that literally everyone knows that. I've seen people upset that the chaos and disorder were driven by co-opted rallies inline with their beliefs.
The movie isn't perfect, but it certain deserves the Oscar noms and attention it has received. This is a beautifully shot film with a beautiful score, with a driving marvelous performance from our lead, and some basic messaging that is a consistent problem today. It's a character study that may not be crazily innovative, but its the template done in top condition. I'm a sucker for character studies though.
If you want real comedy go take another look at some of the reviews on here and letterbox and from the "top critics" of rotton tomatoes. I find them hysterical. There's nothing wrong with disliking the film for what it is, but I feel like a lot of the hate is based on something it's not.
I have to rewatch a 2nd time before I give it a 10
Rewatched it today. "This film is about someone who tried to smile through the pain, until the pain made him smile."
A super-villain origin story. This reminded me of the seriousness that "Logan" went for a few years ago. This was dark and violent but it wasn't as shocking as the media was describing it. The film should have ended on the street scene. I didn't see any potential for Arthur Fleck to become the criminal mastermind that was the Joker, though. Just the rage and psychosis. That was the most disappointing aspect of the movie.
Joker was enjoyable, especially considering I've taken a liking to serialized TV shows over movies because of the complexity they support. I'm personally not a fan of the unreliable narrator style of storytelling, since it's an easy answer to any inconsistencies in the story. The movie does a good job of creating a believable origin story for the Joker. The end of the movie sets up a somewhat different character than Heath Ledger's Joker, which so far has been my favourite. I'm not very familiar with the source material so it's hard for me to tell which Joker is most accurate.
I thought the interview with Murray at the end of the film resembled the viral interview of Joaquin Phoenix with David Letterman. I'm not sure if that was an intended easter egg or just me reading too much into it. For whatever reason, I found the random outbursts of laughter kind of funny. It worked in the context of the character and his story though, so no complaints.
As a bonus, there's commentary about mental health and how poorly it's handled by society, without it being an overpowering part of the film or forced down your throat.
As someone who has studied cinematography/photography I always remember what my teacher always said while watching movies. A good movie isn't just the story it's how it's made. Can you stop at any frame and it will look like a beautiful photography? Then you have succeeded.
I normally won't like a movie like this but it's so well done and thought out so it's worth a watch. Joaquin Phoenix deserves an oscar after this performance. Everything is as it should be, Nothing negative to say about Joker.
Such a dark yet mesmerizing story.
Gruesome yet beautiful
3 - Bad
I think the problem with this movie is that it tries to much to be a Joker movie by introducing the Wayne family story as well. Joaquin Phoenix does a good job, certainly better than Jared Leto but can sometimes go a little too far.
Story wise it's okay but personally I would've removed a few things such as the "girlfriend" plot, the Bruce Wayne scenes and perhaps shortened the part before he became the joker.
This movie is overhyped. What’s good is the second half of the movie
Joaquim Phoenix is amazing. Great movie.
I honestly felt like it was a little bland, flat. But I think it's interesting to watch and origin story of Joker, and how he came to be. Maybe I only enjoyed the last 3rd of the movie, but that doesn't deter me from giving it a 7/10 rating.
I loved it. Easily one of the best movies I watched recently and this year too.
The acting, the photography, the soundtrack, the story,... I loved everything about his movie.
Everything but one :point_up:. I think the scene where we see Thomas and Martha Wayne be killed was too similar to every time we see their death on tv. I would’ve loved to see another take on that one or at least not see the actual details. I would’ve preferred to see only the shot where we see Bruce over their dead body.
Still a :100:
Joker (2019)
It goes dark... Within ten minutes of starting..
Deeper an darker than any film this year...
It truly deserves an Oscar...
I know Joaquin Phoenix can act..
But every scene is a picture with so much symbolic feelings...
An emotional roller coaster...
I want to watch it again but its left me in a mess.. Awe Well..
Put on a Happy Face..
Cos this movie will suck the marrow out ya bones... An walk away laffin..
Hell of a performance piece. Great work all around, from Joaquin to the set designs and cityscape, to the whole build up. All very well done. Even the unnecessary nod to De Niro in "The King of Comedy" was perfect fit in. That said, I'm not the exact audience for this as I couldn't care less about all the superhero and comic movies coming out or that have been flooding the market. This felt like it's own standalone story for about 99% of the film other than the inevitable "beginnings" of Bruce Wayne. That's a good thing. It didn't need to feel like an anti-superhero movie, and it didn't at all. Was it necessary? Not really. Was it entertaining? Yes. Would I watch it again? Doubtful.
One of the darkest movies I've seen recently, dealing with a sensitive topic, so well written and marvelously executed. Phoenix was absolutely brilliant here, he gave an Oscar worthy performance.
Now this is the kind of movie that shows "WHAT ONE MAN CAN DO", all other characters maybe except De Niro appear blurred, and u just wanna watch Phoenix at his best.
Pain and past make you believe in in dreams, while your hunger makes you hunt.
1st half: 7/10. Understand why they did it but still feels slow.
2nd half: 9/10. When the movie really starts. Just great from here on out.
So many people think Batman is the sole character of DC. I desagree, The Joker has its own life and when people actually started to say that Heart Ledgers' perfomance was the best, Phoenix make this unique and amazing job playing one of my favorite villains in the whole world. And no, Ledger and Phoenix are totally different and both made amazing perfomances.
Not a patch on Taxi Driver or Dead Man's Shoes.
An interesting take on the Joker's origin, and even more on Gotham's society. We're always shown that things are bad n Gotham. Life is hard, lots of poverty, lots of criminality. But this time we see the real impact on regular people's lives, not from the point of view of the billionaire whow will make things better because he thinks he's a hero.
Let's get rid of the obvious: Joaquin Phoenix is amazing. Awkward, violent, crazy, mostly sad. The idea of the neurologic dammage that makes him laugh is pretty good, and this laugh is so weird and disturbing. It's uncontrollable and awkward, you can really see it's not intentional, it's something else, but it physically, painfully turn into a laugh. Just this is already an amazing performance. The movie is mostly about Arthur, and his slow transition to the Joker personnality. We only really see the Joker in the final sequence on TV, but the transition is perfectly executed and Phoenix is really at the top of his game there. Will be hard to beat for the Oscar, obviously.
A lot of people commented that the movie promoted violence and incel culture. I don't really agree with that.
First for the incel part, well, it's obvious what it's in reference to, but it's only promoting it inasmuch you think that behaving like the de facto number one criminally insane character in fiction is good advertising. Yes, it's very cringy. The stalking. The "Was it you that stalked me the whole day ? That makes me so hot! Wanna go for a drink later ?". The just go in and grab her (without even having gone for this drink or a single word). But it's pretty heavily shown that those are just the fantasies of a madman.
As for the violence, well, it's not really a Joker movie, again, apart from the very end it's not the Joker that Phoenix is playing, just Arthur. And it's mostly a take on his private story and on Gotham's society... with the caveat that it now comes dangerously close to our own. A few years ago, the violence would have been just fiction. Today it's seen as an incitation to violence because the situation is pretty close to our own. A lot of people live in poverty and bad condition, while the walthy feel superior, have control of eveything and virtual impunity. So I see it more as a harsh critique of our society. The clown rioters are not criminals, just beaten down regular people that want change.
What's the catalyzer of the riots ? The metro murders ? For starters, maybe, but it is just as much the Wayne interview that show the whole arrogance of the upper class that are in control, if you're not wealthy, you're a clown. As for the dead guys, they were also wealthy assholes. What were they doing ? Harrassing a woman and beating up a guy. Was this ever said ? I mean if there were witness able to say, or camera showing that the murderer was a clown, couldn't they see what happened before ? They were beating and kicking a guy on the ground, pretty heavily, and were ostensibly drunk, enough that one could not be sure they would know not to go to far. That's legitimate defense. I mean it's shown here as a terrible act of violence that incits riots but people get gunned down in the US for a 20th of that on an almost daily basis ! How can people come and say it's too violent ? OK, the third one was regular murder, almost execution style though.
Same goes for Wayne, as soon as the mother obsessively talks about her letters, you know what's coming. 1) He's Batman half brother. 2) Denial, of course he's not. 3) But maybe ? And it doesn't fail. However, the way of the denial was harsh. Was the photo a proof ? Or did his mother just extrapolate and imagined the rest from that. But if not ? Damn. He just sent his ex to the asylum just to get rid of her and their child. Would the Thomas Wayne we know do that ? Certainly not. Would the one shown in this movie ? 100%! And that would be too perfect. First the Joker and Wayne are equally responsible for the riots and inspiring the guy that shot him down. But in this case, he would also be 100% responsible for th Joker himself. First, obviously by being his Arthur's father, but mostly for sending his mother to the asylum, leading to her traumlatism, that would lead to Arthur's abuse and own mental issues. And in this case, he's also a very sick criminal, but totally out of reach for the law because of his wealth. Until karma strikes again.
How about Murray ? He's definitely inviting Arthur to humiliate him. Another wealthy asshole. Does he deserve to be shot for that ? Well, no. But you get the point. On the same level, Randall. (And yes, this one was violent).
And the cops ? They litterally shot innocent people in the metro ! But again, do the news talk about it ?
As for his mother, well the medical history says it all.
"Some people just want to watch the wold burn" are we told in Dark Knight. Well, here we're just shown that when you're not in the shoes of a billionaire wannabe hero, maybe it deserves burning. I'm not saying those are rational actions, the guy is obviously mad, but it shows that at some point change can't be brought by respecting the rules, and it needs someone mad, outside of the constraint of society to do it. Because those at the top are just as criminal as those at the bottom, it's just more indirect and the consequences are at a much bigger scale. They don't play by the rules either, and there's no way to beat them if you do.
One point where the movie really diverges from reality is the newspaper titling "Kill the rich", which obviously could not happen because the rich own the paper. (Though this one might be one of Arthur's delusion ?)
Anyway, it's a bit slow at the beginning, but you rapidly get into it. The progression of the society slowly grinding Arthur down, the loss of everything that kept him whole, everything disappearing one after the other, his job, his social worker, his meds, his imaginary girlfriend, his mother (figuratively then litterally), his newly discovered father, his hope of being a comedian, his idol, it's so much that it's hard to see where the breaking point is.
The comedy part in the middl are well balanced. Though I would have liked to see more of his jokes.
The whole thing is superbly filmed, with good music. There's nothing to say on the technical point of view, that's great art.
Some bad points, though minor ones.
Too much dancing. Yeah, he's a little crazy but 5+ scenes of him dancing to an inaudible music, like for an invisible audience gets old pretty fast. It's a boring way to show it, specially repeatedly. This doesn't bring anything.
Thomas Wayne is just a regular wealthy asshole. That's not the way the character is usually portrayed. Here he's arrogant, may have had his lover sent to the asylum, and seem to despise poor people, while presenting himself as their savior. Remind you of someone ? Though he was usually seen from the Batman's perspective, (so idealized maybe ?), it's still a huge gap.
The neighbour's montage. Small thing, but come on! We get he all imagined it. If you didn't get it right away, you would when she's afraid of seeing him in her home. There was no need to replay the scenes where she in fact not there. Would there really be people in the audience thinking "What a bitch, why is she acting like she doesn't know him ?" ? Was it necessary for the US audience to understand ? It's hard to say these days. Anyway, on the moment that was annoying enough to get me out of the story. Maybe if the scenes were totally different ? She was there but, afraid, or angry and he didn't catch it ?
I have some questions on the final scene. Not sure when it happens. Was he in the asylum all this time and is this all a delusion ? Or was he sent there after being injured and it happens a little after the riot scene ?
Joaquin deserves awards for this one :trophy::movie_camera::fire::clown::black_joker:
After watching the new Todd Phillip's movie "Joker", I think that this is a great movie about society and its aftermath, but as a film about the iconic DC comic book antagonist, it is rather empty because this is no joker pre-history, but rather an arbitrary director's way of attracting viewers to the cinema thanks to its intriguing title. Therefore, it should be viewed as a social drama, not a comic book screening.
For those who want to know how this hero came about, I suggest you read "The Killing Joke" or at least watch a cartoon showing the birth of Joker.
P.S. I hope Joaquin Phoenix gets an Oscar.
Joker handles the concepts and ideas that are unusual for comic book adaptations in a somewhat ordinary way. Yet, Joaquin Phoenix somehow manages to overcome these uninspiring parts of the film with his uncomfortable but masterful performance.
Great delivery, irresponsible movie. I felt weird watching this movie. Noticing a few people clapping and be proud when 'Arthur' was standing up and slowly joining the dark side.
I'm greatly concerned how this movie will affect people who have a 'bad' day.
Joaquin Phoenix made one of the best perfomances in cinema history! If it wasn't him maybe i would rate it as a 8/10 but now 9/10 for sure..Powerfull movie with great messages and great directing must watch!
Wow! Just wow!
So close to being the masterpiece is probably deserves to be. If it were but for one tiny little scene. The scene in question is an annoyingly superfluous montage two thirds into the movie that explains what is already blatantly obvious. Underestimating the audiance is among the worst sins you can commit as a filmmaker. As for the rest of the script, the cinematography, the score, the cast and its director; breathtaking, epic!
Joker does not glorify violence more than any other film in its genre. It would be super silly to say that a film all about the Joker goes out of its way to glorify violence. Violence is what the character is all about.
As for Phoenix vs. Ledger; well,... I truthfully would not be able to choose. Phoenix is THAT good.
9/10
Fantastic acting and the Frank Sinastra tracks really made it an awesome treat.
Joaquin phoenix has been brilliant. He played one of his career best performance. The best part of this version of joker is he did in his unique way . No resemblance to dark knight joker and also didn't tried too much like messed up suicide squad joker.
Coming to the movie it's a highly intense dark drama. This movie is not for people who got hyped by the joker portrayed by heath ledger. This is a treat for people who love dark drama. The scene when he comes out as joker and the relief in his face and that excitement to do his own wish or thing he liked was so wonderful. Tod Phillips did a wonderful job.
I think most of the people won't find it good, looking for some anti villian elements.
One of a hell never again experience!!!:fire::fire:
Solid script is the backbone of this movie.After first half i thought they are messing the timeline and story for making emotions.But it was a u turn on the story after the first half.A lot of twists and intense story development.Felt frozen on lot of seens.
Dont call this masterpiece.Its something more
Shout by María SánchezBlockedParentSpoilers2019-12-24T03:28:06Z
Mr. Joaquin, you are THE BEST!
This was an amazing performance!
I loved Arthur, but then I was afraid of him too.
So many injustices to create his path of happiness.
So far, this is my favorite movie of DC Comics.
Well done... And remember to Put on a happy face.