They were in a room full of Joker's henchmen. Chechen's organization is basically over at that point. The mob doesn't work for Joker as the mob is a group of figures like Malroni and others.
There is logic to the movie, you just don't like it but critics and audiences did. "better" is relative as you don't actually need Joker to detail his escape plan unless you disregard a bus in a school bus line, grenades to scare off the mob, henchmen holding Gambol, Joker running through a parade dressed as a cop, Joker using a bomb inside a person as a distraction to escape the precinct, Joker tossing Rachel off the building to escape Batman, or those 2 times where is caught after trying to get Batman on the road or at the end.
You even have Joker tell you he's been ripping off mob bosses for years so he has experience in, ya know, not getting caught.
Like, Joker isn't breaking any internal logic the movie sets forth. Your point is ridiculous and meaningless.
Fury Road isn't great because of the logic. It's the story telling through action and camera work where each frame can give off visual information through quadrants.
You're saying, "just makes films better" but what suggestion do you have that would improve the film? Remember, these changes must fit within the established themes and moral of the story -- the reason why the movie exists in its current way.
Like, you're entire thing so far has been, "well, he just gets away, so they lack creativity, it could be better". I'm pretty sure you don't know what you're talking about at this point. You couldn't even recall Harvey's transformation scene and why its important.
FYI: The Joker worked for the mob at some point, and the mob had police working for them, it's not a stretch to assume the mob told them to stay away from the Joker as its clearly established throughout that the police are corrupt except for Gordan's unit -- SURPRISE THERE'S CORRUPT COPS THERE TOO who kidnap Dent and Rachel and take 'em to warehouses the Joker set up.
INTERESTING.
Alright so let's try this again starting off with two things:
I'm not here to argue with you to win internet points I'm fine with discussing the merits of the film with you and opinions on the character, but your hostility is pretty obnoxious. I never said I didn't like the film, I never even said it was a bad film, so come off it.
Next, this was supposed to be an argument about plot armor. I have no issue admitting that I don't remember each and every detail of a film that I haven't seen in years, because its not a big deal, so i have no issue being wrong about some things. It's not a contest of "Gotcha!'s" because really, at the end of the day this isn't an important discussion. What "Critics and Audiences" liked or didn't like is entirely irrelevant.
So with that being said, lets continue off of my point of Fury Road. In Fury Road, Max is the main character, the intention is that Max live to the end of the film, as a result, Max is never put into a situation that he or anyone else wouldn't be able to survive. When Max is chained to the front of Nux' vehicle traveling through the sandstorm, outside of one unlucky vehicle that gets caught in a sand tornado, everyone is able to make it out alive, this means that traveling through such a storm is generally non fatal, and thus Max survives along with the rest of the cast. This is the internal logic of the film. It's not necessarily realistic, but it works within the films universe.
To contrast that, Jon Snow is a character in Game of Thrones that needs to live to the end of the story. Knowing this, rather than the writters intentionally keeping him from engaging in what would be lethal threats to anyone else, Jon Snow continuously escapes each situation with his life. Ignoring his resurrection, two examples of this would be when he's battling Rasmey's army and time and time again he avoids harm while the bodies pile around him to the point of nearly suffocating him. This is not fitting within this show's internal logic, which consistently has characters, main or otherwise dying in battle or to other causes with less fantastical odds of survival. Later seasons of Game Of Thrones have many examples of this and is a large reason as to why many fans are at odds with the quality of writing of said seasons. Because it consistently breaks the show's internal logic in favor of large scale action, what feels like unearned resolutions to plot-lines that have spanned multiple years.
This is part of storytelling and why some storytelling is good and some storytelling is poor. Fury Road while exciting and fantastical and filled with action
This is what people mean when they talk about "Plot Armor", yes the intention is to have X character live to Y point to do Z thing. But there are ways to write around that to make Y situation for X character surviving to be more believable. This is what I mean when it can make a film "better" because it's less clunky and requires no suspension of disbelief. It's not about making everything "realistic" and you can absolutely have a movie that follows a certain degree of logic, it purely depends on your creativity and writing ability.
I think it's kind of silly that the Joker is able to pull off the massive crimes that he does without being apprehended when the film's plot allows for Batman to hack into every device and use its microphone* to create a sonar signal to find him and that's one of the last things he does. It's a bit goofy, and I feel that it could have been written in a way that would allow for the plot to advance towards a more natural conclusion without pulling out something so ridiculous. I feel that Batman Begins does it quite well. You're right, you don't need Joker to detail his escape, nor am I asking for exposition detailing that, I just feel like it could have been done better.
This has been my "whole thing" up until this point. You've established that the film does a better job with planting and payoff than I remember. I may have been wrong to call Joker's ability to get away plot armor, but that doesn't invalidate the existence of plot armor or relegate it to "meaningless" criticism.
You brought up some details that I haven't remembered, and that's fine, I don't have any issue with you being right, and again, I've already said I'm being nitpicky, so where you're getting the idea that I just
hate this film and that's why I have a differing opinion I have no idea, but it's really the only thing that's ridiculous and meaningless here.
I suppose my issue is moreso that if your plot requires such a convoluted solution to be resolved maybe there's a better way to do it rather than with Joker particularly.
