-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
JOKER |OT| Viviamo in una società |SPOILERS|
- Thread starter Cpt-GargameL
- Start date
That is exactly how I took it. He idolized Murray, had dreams about being on the show, hell in that one scene you see them hug and Murray saying something about him being a son he never had or something alluding to that. When Arthur see's Murray making fun of him, he kind of snaps and kills him because of that.
We see that after years of mental anguish and meds he has an awakening and embraces who he is, I see this as a launch pad for what he becomes.
I'm just gonna post my few thoughts I have.
I think the movie is incredible.
I truly love the last 30 minutes, and I leaned over to a friend of mine and said "I'm kinda upset I won't see him again."
His slow transition to the joker is incredible to watch, and I loved the paralleling of the Birth of Joker and the Birth of Batman at the end.
It is dark, but I think people should see it.
I think the movie is incredible.
I truly love the last 30 minutes, and I leaned over to a friend of mine and said "I'm kinda upset I won't see him again."
His slow transition to the joker is incredible to watch, and I loved the paralleling of the Birth of Joker and the Birth of Batman at the end.
It is dark, but I think people should see it.
While obviously they're not meaning to follow this up with any direct Batman sequels and it's not important, I don't think their age difference is that outlandish when playing around with the idea.
Joaquin is 45. His age isn't necessarily exactly the same as the character. Could we say that his character is a rough 40 from a hard upbringing? We know this dude has some mileage on him. (I dont remember if any hard age was established in the movie)
Dante is ~10. Could we say Bruce is 11, or possibly stretch to 12?
Bruce usually becomes Batman somewhere around age 22ish depending on the continuity, sometimes earlier sometimes later. Lets lean earlier and go with 21.
So believably, these two could clash at ages 21 and 49. Batman could always beat Joker to a pulp in a straight fight, so there's no change there. Dude would have to pull his punches which plays right into their dynamic anyway. And a 49 year old Joker isn't so old that he can't be manipulative, crazy and scheming. That's all in the head. So... what's the difference?
Those two could clash for 10 years and the Joker wouldn't yet be out of his 50s. Nolan Batman was active for less total time than that. If Tom Cruise can do what he does at 57, make-believe character Arthur Fleck could remain perfectly slippery at 49.
Their future together is still perfectly viable and that imaginary sequel would then take place in 1990.
Joaquin is 45. His age isn't necessarily exactly the same as the character. Could we say that his character is a rough 40 from a hard upbringing? We know this dude has some mileage on him. (I dont remember if any hard age was established in the movie)
Dante is ~10. Could we say Bruce is 11, or possibly stretch to 12?
Bruce usually becomes Batman somewhere around age 22ish depending on the continuity, sometimes earlier sometimes later. Lets lean earlier and go with 21.
So believably, these two could clash at ages 21 and 49. Batman could always beat Joker to a pulp in a straight fight, so there's no change there. Dude would have to pull his punches which plays right into their dynamic anyway. And a 49 year old Joker isn't so old that he can't be manipulative, crazy and scheming. That's all in the head. So... what's the difference?
Those two could clash for 10 years and the Joker wouldn't yet be out of his 50s. Nolan Batman was active for less total time than that. If Tom Cruise can do what he does at 57, make-believe character Arthur Fleck could remain perfectly slippery at 49.
Their future together is still perfectly viable and that imaginary sequel would then take place in 1990.
Last edited:
he doesn't kill him because he made fun of him, but because he called him out on his actions.
murray making fun of arthur was just arthur's justification
He literally tells him he's awful because the only reason he booked him to be on the show was to make fun of him.
Hell, Arthur NAMES HIMSELF joker because it's what Murray called him before introducing his clip. He absolutely killed Murray for the public humiliation
again, that's his justification. but the thing that makes him snap, is murray calling him out on his killings
i don't think Arthur is supposed to be that old. I got more of an early - mid 30s vibe.
Nah I'm gonna go with the actual motive that Arthur verbally spells out in dialog to the audience vs the theory you are proposing
what theory man?, he was going to kill himself, not kill arthur, he snapped when arthur started calling him out on his killings
lol
You keep saying it was his justification. You just made this up. I don't even know why you're debating me on this point. The sequence of events and motivation is clear as day
there was the scene showing him practice the joke for murray's show and the knock knock punchline is him shooting himself.
Black Sabbath - Paranoid energy says Joker knew he was gonna pop Murray from the moment he got invited, but changed the script to add that kill himself angle to fuck with you, his audience.
Yet another twist in the Jokers everlasting tale.
Yet another twist in the Jokers everlasting tale.
This.
The laughter was wholly a part of the character himself. Not just some random act but a part of him like his vertebrae, elbow, heart or lung. And making it an actual condition gave substance like no other iteration of the Joker ever has. I loved this film on so many levels - I'm still reeling over it and saw it two days ago. My girl and I are going to see it again in a couple of weeks. I can't wait!
I think it was said that his mom worked for the Waynes 30 years ago. If Thomas Wayne knew of his adoption and his mom was able to make him think he was Thomas Wayne's son, maybe he was a baby when he was adopted? Anyway, I would've thought he was supposed to be early to mid-30s
I dont think you were supposed to feel sympathetic to Arthur Fleck murdering people. Even in the subway scene once he kills the Wall Street guys, I never once felt like, "I understand where Arthur is coming from."
In fact, I was shocked! Even moreso when he chases the last guy and guns him down. Not once does this film ask you to sympathize with Arthur Fleck and his increasingly bad choices. In fact, when you remember his downward spiral throughout the entire film, each act of violence equates to being steps towards a real tragedy (that being his life in general), as it's somewhat heartbreaking to watch Arthur descend down his path. But it's also his destiny - seemingly from birth.
american physco is another film which people over think and the director of that movies says as much,
to be honest in the movies universe, he could be even younger than 40 in some ways, could be 35 for all we know, he is poor as hell, doesn't eat right at all(look how skinny he is), dealing with a lot mental anguish, that ages your life A LOT quicker than a normal person.
Sooo how did you guys interpret his condition? Did his mom think he had something wrong with him because he was a happy and laughing a lot? There wasn't really anything wrong with him until he suffered head trauma from one of her boyfriends?
i think that's the reason why he killed her, he could have been someone "normal" but she not giving a fuck about him is what fucked him, what made him this "broken" person.
i dont think he cared that much about Thomas Wayne not being his father.
It may not be the popular opinion but I hope The Batman lays off going too damn dark/depressing.
I'd like something tonally darker and more grounded than the two Burton films but not as realism oriented as the Nolan films. Basically maybe something along the lines of the Arkham games.
I'm fine with this being a one off and this version of the Joker not being continued.
I'd like something tonally darker and more grounded than the two Burton films but not as realism oriented as the Nolan films. Basically maybe something along the lines of the Arkham games.
I'm fine with this being a one off and this version of the Joker not being continued.
I didn't know who this guy was until it was posted here a few times. I've also heard the song tons of times in my life, is he getting royalties from all the stadiums that play it also?
nah give me more of the realism. that's always what I found so appealing about Batman movies, especially the Nolan ones and this Joker film, is that Gotham parallels real life's issues in a way that's ultimately relatable. It's a breath of fresh air from the more fantastical fluff of Marvel movies.
The Nolan movies already did it though. To be honest this version of the Joker is depressing and even Batfleck was a bit ridiculously dark.
I'd like something more like the Burton films but more grounded. Joker is supposed to be fun at least a little bit.
Honestly, this x1000.
We need to be careful to not fall into the assembly line superhero mould that stifles independent expression, I love that WB are maintaining this form of approach to thier franchises.
It was a solid film carried by the one and only Joaquin Phoenix. I'll say this.. i went into the film expecting Joker to be portrayed as sympathetic and likeable due to the buzz leading up to its release. I found Joker's portrayal throughout the film to be straight up unnerving. I had no sympathy for him, except for the broader aspect and implications of Gotham cutting it's social services and dropping it's mentally ill patients. Which is also something that has already happened in America.
I think this movie would have been a lot more interesting if Arthur actually did attach himself to the disaffected lower classes and became a kind of champion of their cause. Would have been a very interesting subversion of the conventional Batman story, with Joker a figure of the proletariat and Batman a defender of the bourgeoisie.
I don't understand how anyone can say this. 95% of the movie is dedicated to scenes of Arthur being shit on and misunderstood by every person in Gotham, regardless of class or background. They even show him going out of his way to be nice to the midget character. He's absolutely sympathetic!
But that's not the character at all, he doesn't believe in anything political.
I liked how the riots and uproar of the masses built up in the background. How Arthur triggered it, but Thomas Wayne's interview and general state of the world that got the ball rolling, equating the lower-class citizerns to clowns etc.
Liked how focused on Arthur the movie was, while giving some justification for his actions he'd still come off as a crazy maniac in the end. Former co-worker coming over to show support to Arthur just for Arthur to kill him. The ending to that scene with the locked door was legit funny!
Seems weird for posters to be so hung up on Joker's intelligence. Don't think there ever really was any clear display of Arthur's intelligence or the lack of and most of it could be moreso explained with Arthur's lack of confidence, really. Arthur seemed more like a beaten and caged dog that was finally set free at the end of the movie. Looked like quite a suave motherfucker after having escaped the cops in the subway.
Would actually be pretty cool get a movie of Joaquin Phoenix playing that ending Joker for a whole movie. Wouldn't even want batman in it, just have him face off against another villain or just turn Gotham into an even bigger hellhole. Could use it to further explore some themes that don't get much spotlight in your usual hero movies.
Liked how focused on Arthur the movie was, while giving some justification for his actions he'd still come off as a crazy maniac in the end. Former co-worker coming over to show support to Arthur just for Arthur to kill him. The ending to that scene with the locked door was legit funny!
Seems weird for posters to be so hung up on Joker's intelligence. Don't think there ever really was any clear display of Arthur's intelligence or the lack of and most of it could be moreso explained with Arthur's lack of confidence, really. Arthur seemed more like a beaten and caged dog that was finally set free at the end of the movie. Looked like quite a suave motherfucker after having escaped the cops in the subway.
Would actually be pretty cool get a movie of Joaquin Phoenix playing that ending Joker for a whole movie. Wouldn't even want batman in it, just have him face off against another villain or just turn Gotham into an even bigger hellhole. Could use it to further explore some themes that don't get much spotlight in your usual hero movies.
My issue with this movie is that at the end of the day it doesn't believe in anything either. It doesn't take a position on ANY of the themes it explores.
Comedy Clubs (real ones) have recorded comedians (both professionals and open micers) for decades. It is extremely common practice, for two reasons. First, many professional comics are looking footage of their set after a show to review. Second, Clubs often used the video as scouting material to find new hosts / features for traveling comics / weekly shows.
This practice isn't quite as common today, because most comedians travel with their own cameras or recording devices (phones) and use that instead.
people questioning his intelligence is quite moronic since we are shown that he either is restricted because of his depression or his medicine or everything around him.
at the end being totally free of all burden, he is totally another person.
It has a lot to say about mental health and healthcare in my opinion
The message that mental health care is important isn't necessarily a new or unique idea.