So is Joker still a "dangerous" movie?

[Naphu]

No. But it's not because it was manufactured media controversy or because left-wing concern trolling, outrage culture or whatever else 90% of the posts in here are saying.

People were concerned it might end up being a sympathetic portrayal of a mediocre while male who lashes out after the world treats him poorly (while maybe even killing a women who rejects him.) Concerned a certain demographic, already prone to lashing out, would identify with it and find it empowering. I mean, it already sort of happens to movies by much more talented filmmakers like Fight Club and American History X; even with a clear critique being the point of the movies.

Turns out the movie isn't that. And so.......that's why it shouldn't be much of a concern anymore. It's that simple.

 

[Siggy-P]

And now those comments are relatively non-existent.

Click to shrink...

Now it's moved onto "this film has nothing to say".

 

[Kurdel]

No. But it's not because it was manufactured media controversy or because left-wing concern trolling, outrage culture or whatever else 90% of the posts in here are saying.

People were concerned it might end up being a sympathetic portrayal of a mediocre while male who lashes out after the world treats him poorly (while maybe even killing a women who rejects him.) Concerned a certain demographic, already prone to lashing out, would identify with it and find it empowering. I mean, it already sort of happens to movies by much more talented filmmakers like Fight Club and American History X; even with a clear critique being the point of the movies.

Turns out the movie isn't that. And so.......that's why it shouldn't be much of a concern anymore. It's that simple.

Click to shrink...

This post should be stickied and put on every page.

 

[Felt]

No. But it's not because it was manufactured media controversy or because left-wing concern trolling, outrage culture or whatever else 90% of the posts in here are saying.

People were concerned it might end up being a sympathetic portrayal of a mediocre while male who lashes out after the world treats him poorly (while maybe even killing a women who rejects him.) Concerned a certain demographic, already prone to lashing out, would identify with it and find it empowering. I mean, it already sort of happens to movies by much more talented filmmakers like Fight Club and American History X; even with a clear critique being the point of the movies.

Turns out the movie isn't that. And so.......that's why it shouldn't be much of a concern anymore. It's that simple.

Click to shrink...

Yeah what it turned out to portray is a society with minimal gun control and healthcare lol

 

[Dysun]

Nope, and it just showed the double standard people have around here when it comes to their video games 'glorifying violence' versus a movie doing the same thing. Being a DC movie just added another wrinkle to the absurdity

 

[Seeya]

No. But it's not because it was manufactured media controversy or because left-wing concern trolling, outrage culture or whatever else 90% of the posts in here are saying.

People were concerned it might end up being a sympathetic portrayal of a mediocre while male who lashes out after the world treats him poorly (while maybe even killing a women who rejects him.) Concerned a certain demographic, already prone to lashing out, would identify with it and find it empowering. I mean, it already sort of happens to movies by much more talented filmmakers like Fight Club and American History X; even with a clear critique being the point of the movies.

Turns out the movie isn't that. And so.......that's why it shouldn't be much of a concern anymore. It's that simple.

Click to shrink...

I haven't seen it yet so I can't comment if it is or isn't. Though certain demographics had no problem misappropriating American History X, so I wouldn't count on a common sense reading 100% of the time.

That said you're absolutely right. The framing of this as simply a concern over a shooting was either an unintentional or deliberate obstruficating from the broader, actual issue.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

weird that the man outlet saying the joker is dangerous is owned by warner. Wonder if something is going on here????????

 

[UltraMagnus]

Except the movie sidesteps all of that by making the Joker apolitical and non-ideological. The movie is too chickenshit to align it's anti-hero with the underclass and mainly just suggests that his persona was co-opted by anarchic opportunists. Ultimately, the film has very, very little to say about class resentment.

Click to shrink...

Well in fairness to the filmmakers ...

The Joker has never in any iteration of his character had a political ideology. He is very much a pure "agent of chaos" in every version of the character. That is the crux of the character.

Secondly lets say they did align him with the "underclass". Then what? What are you saying then, that the underclass is aligned with a mass murdering, mentally ill serial killer? I can't even imagine the gong show of the reaction if they tried to do that explicitly and on the nose. If the Joker knowingly stands for the working class/"left", that's actually pretty awful and I think I'd walk right out of the theater if they tried that.

My view on the film is ultimately it's a bit overrated and wasn't worth half the bruhaha it caused, but if they made the Joker clearly political, I think that's incredibly problematic.

 

[Deleted member 48897]

weird that the man outlet saying the joker is dangerous is owned by warner. Wonder if something is going on here????????

Click to shrink...

THE MOVIE THEY [uh, we] DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT!!!!

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

I have to own up and admit I was completely wrong about this movie before release. Leaks I read (which were either later changed in the script or fake to begin with) painted it as much more of a masturbatory incel fantasy. Turns out there's some solid leftist messaging to be taken. Mea culpa.

 

[Deleted member 8196]

Click to shrink...

It is really not surprising lol

The press wanted so hard the failure of the movie and they are trying even harder to paint it as a white supremacist, pro-Trump movie.

 

[Deleted member 21339]

Secondly lets say they did align him with the "underclass". Then what? What are you saying then, that the underclass is aligned with a mass murdering, mentally ill serial killer? I can't even imagine the gong show of the reaction if they tried to do that explicitly and on the nose. If the Joker knowingly stands for the working class/"left", that's actually pretty awful and I think I'd walk right out of the theater if they tried that.

Click to shrink...

The protests were sparked by the Joker killing three Wall St businessmen and Thomas Wayne calling the poor resentful sore losers who never made anything of themselves. Wittingly or not, Joker becomes the face of that movement. So yea, the protestors who ostensibly did have legitimate economic/social grievances did indeed align themselves with a nihilistic killer.

It was kinda hard to missed the 'RESIST' sign seen just before a certain family's murder.

Was this an example of the movie being critical of mob rule and the media stirring the passions of the lower classes? Who the fuck knows! I don't think the movie knows either because the whole thing is such a muddle.

The riots end with Arthur raised up on the hood of a car to the cheers of the lawless crowd. It sure felt like the movie was getting off on what was happening.

 

[UltraMagnus]

The protests were sparked by the Joker killing three Wall St businessmen and Thomas Wayne calling the poor resentful sore losers who never made anything of themselves. Wittingly or not, Joker becomes the face of that movement. So yea, the protestors who ostensibly did have legitimate economic/social grievances did indeed align themselves with a nihilistic killer.

It was kinda hard to missed the 'RESIST' sign seen just before a certain family's murder.

Was this an example of the movie being critical of mob rule and the media stirring the passions of the lower classes? Who the fuck knows! I don't think the movie knows either because the whole thing is such a muddle.

The riots end with Arthur raised up on the hood of a car to the cheers of the lawless crowd. It sure felt like the movie was getting off on what was happening.

Click to shrink...

The Joker is definitely getting off on what's happening, but I don't think the movie ever makes the leap of saying what the Joker is doing is good or even glamourous. It is unsettling and the you don't feel great seeing the violence he inflicts.

I think having the Joker be explicitly politically aware and a political ideologue could very quickly become incredibly insulting.

The presumption then is basically the working class are the Joker's side, and his side is the "evil side".

If they did that they would have a real shit storm on their hands. Him rather being an apolitical psychotic that inadvertently takes advantage of political strife is the only way they could have gone, and quite frankly even that is already tip toeing into some questionable areas (does that mean by extension Batman, being the foil to the Joker and the "good guy" represents the right?).

 

[Lowrys]

It's a mainstream comic book movie. Of course it's not "dangerous".

 

[UltraMagnus]

The hysteria/outcry was the best marketing the movie could have gotten anyway. It probably effectively doubled/tripled the movie's marketing reach without the studio spending a dime.

 

[Deleted member 21339]

The Joker is definitely getting off on what's happening, but I don't think the movie ever makes the leap of saying what the Joker is doing is good or even glamourous. It is unsettling and the you don't feel great seeing the violence he inflicts.

I think having the Joker be explicitly politically aware and a political ideologue could very quickly become incredibly insulting.

The presumption then is basically the working class are the Joker's side, and his side is the "evil side".

If they did that they would have a real shit storm on their hands. Him rather being an apolitical psychotic that inadvertently takes advantage of political strife is the only way they could have gone, and quite frankly even that is already tip toeing into some questionable areas (does that mean by extension Batman, being the foil to the Joker and the "good guy" represents the right?).

Click to shrink...

In this universe? Yes... Batman would be the law n order guy representing the establishment. The Wayne's are entrenched firmly in the establishment in this film .

 

[MilesQ]

The 'incel uprising' thing was always BS, did we forget those assholes had been murdering people long before this movie was even an idea?

 

[Donald Draper]

It never was, the posters on here that were losing their minds look foolish but a lot of them still don't back down they've just moved on to "it's mediocre" " it has nothing to say" " I could have been right so therefore Im not wrong "

They will move on to the next manufactured controversy as long as it doesnt involve a Marvel film.

 

[UltraMagnus]

In this universe? Yes... Batman would be the law n order guy representing the establishment. The Wayne's are entrenched firmly in the establishment in this film .

Click to shrink...

If they made the two parties explicitly/on-the-nose political like that I think I would walk out of the theater. No thanks. That to me is more insulting than anything in the actual film, lol. Which again, I think is kind of overrated, it's a 7/10 film.

 

[Donald Draper]

Also Batfleck would have destroyed this Joker in about 5 seconds 😂

 

[UltraMagnus]

100% guarantee Warner Bros. loved the added publicity ... it helped the film's marketing reach.

 

[Donald Draper]

100% guarantee Warner Bros. loved the added publicity ... it helped the film's marketing reach.

Click to shrink...

Todd Phillips was 100% purposely stirring the pot.

 

[ldcommando]

was not dangerous and it is still not dangerous

 

[Deleted member 21339]

If they made the two parties explicitly/on-the-nose political like that I think I would walk out of the theater. No thanks. That to me is more insulting than anything in the actual film, lol. Which again, I think is kind of overrated, it's a 7/10 film.

Click to shrink...

I was actually way more insulted by how much sympathy the movie generated for Arthur.

 

[BZL8]

Don't think the film was worth the publicity it got, but Phoenix sells the film for me. I loved him in The Master and You Were Never Really Here, and he shines here as well.

 

[UltraMagnus]

I was actually way more insulted by how much sympathy the movie generated for Arthur.

Click to shrink...

Every movie to some extent makes its lead character sympathetic. Is Tony Soprano a good person? No. Would it be watchable if there's zero humanity to the character? No. Even evil characters have to start from some point of humanity, unless you're making a Michael Myers movie and there's a reason why he is never explicitly the defacto protagonist because there's nothing there to follow if you literally made a movie that just followed him around all day.

There's no drama/tension if your lead character is just "well he's evil ok? And he's going to kill people and that's all". That's not interesting.

 

[Mona]

it was but then the bloggers scared off any would be delinquents via their awareness campaign, they're the true super heroes

 

[Deleted member 21339]

Every movie to some extent makes its lead character sympathetic. Is Tony Soprano a good person? No. Would it be watchable if there's zero humanity to the character? No.

Click to shrink...

Not really. That portrayal is way more nuanced and offers contrasting perspectives. This movie takes inspiration from Taxi Driver. In that movie, Travis Bickle is an antisocial weirdo. He creates all his own problems. His co-workers listen to him and try to give him good advice. Betsy goes on a couple dates with him and treats him kindly until he takes her to a porn theater. By contrast, Arthur is a saint who's treated cruelly by literally everyone. From little kids, to co workers, to his boss, to the black mother on the train, to his therapist, to his mom, to white bankers, to the detectives, to talk show hosts ... you name it. He's wrong by everyone. The message of the movie was clear to me... society is responsible for creating this monster. The movie goes out of its way to absolve Arthur of responsibility.

 

[NameUser]

I'm going to eat my crow now. I went in on this in the lead up to the release. Saw it and now I feel so silly. This movie isn't even that violent and most of the violence felt purposeful. He's no mass shooter and I thought it was wise of them to cover their asses by having him say he's not political. Which is a little untrue because I walked away from this movie feeling like, "Fuck the rich!" haha.

 

[Empyrean Cocytus]

If anything, I noticed a definite left-wing bent to the movie with its commentary. Rich elites holding all the power. The stripping away of social services dedicated to helping the less fortunate. And how hard it is to live life with a mental illness when nobody seems to want to help you. "The worst thing about having a mental illness is that everyone expects you to live as if you don't."

In fact, I saw it with my friend, who is a staunch conservative, and he was rather upset that the movie made such a point to humanize and create sympathy Arthur and essentially blame him becoming the Joker on the rest of society. I don't think that's fair at all. Arthur is a loathsome human being at the outset, but he is still salvageable. It's just then that the weight of everything crashing down upon him forces him over the edge. Which is why it's gotten a lot of flack for not taking a stand, but I feel like it doesn't need to.

This may seem ridiculous, but I see a lot of parallels between Arthur's story and that of Christian Weston Chandler, aka Chris-chan.

 

[Prine]

No, not at all. I don't know why there was so much energy spent to make it so controversial. What it has done is highlight the absurd levels people go to, to raise objections. Feels like it's getting out hand, mostly from a growing crowd of unpleasant and captious individuals with too much free time on their hands.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

The pearl clutching before the release of the movie was hilarious to watch

 

[Joeytj]

The Marvel movies represents the US as essentially heroic at its core.

The Joker movie was a savage and devastating indictment of the way America treats people at the bottom.

A lot of corporate media shills think that is a very dangerous message, yes.

Click to shrink...

I really can't understand how anyone can look at the Joker movie as a successful "indictment" of America's real problems. Or an indictment of anything.

Plenty of people on the bottom in the movie are just ignored by the Joker or even killed, and the movie gives off clumsy messages, like the Joker insisting he isn't "political".

The whole movie is clumsy, not dangerous, but definitely sets the popular conversation about who "the system" really affects back a few years.

It's definetly the Green Book and Bohemian Rhapsody of this year.

 

[prophetvx]

No. But it's not because it was manufactured media controversy or because left-wing concern trolling, outrage culture or whatever else 90% of the posts in here are saying.

People were concerned it might end up being a sympathetic portrayal of a mediocre while male who lashes out after the world treats him poorly (while maybe even killing a women who rejects him.) Concerned a certain demographic, already prone to lashing out, would identify with it and find it empowering. I mean, it already sort of happens to movies by much more talented filmmakers like Fight Club and American History X; even with a clear critique being the point of the movies.

Turns out the movie isn't that. And so.......that's why it shouldn't be much of a concern anymore. It's that simple.

Click to shrink...

Except everyone who had seen or had been associated with the movie said all of this already, yet shockingly, the internet didn't listen.

It was pretty obvious from the trailers that Arthur was in no way glorified.

 

[UltraMagnus]

Not really. That portrayal is way more nuanced and offers contrasting perspectives. This movie takes inspiration from Taxi Driver. In that movie, Travis Bickle is an antisocial weirdo. He creates all his own problems. His co-workers listen to him and try to give him good advice. Betsy goes on a couple dates with him and treats him kindly until he takes her to a porn theater. By contrast, Arthur is a saint who's treated cruelly by literally everyone. From little kids, to co workers, to his boss, to the black mother on the train, to his therapist, to his mom, to white bankers, to the detectives, to talk show hosts ... you name it. He's wrong by everyone. The message of the movie was clear to me... society is responsible for creating this monster. The movie goes out of its way to absolve Arthur of responsibility.

Click to shrink...

I mean Taxi Driver and Sopranos are top tier creations, not everything is going to measure up directly to that.

The Joker film very clearly takes place from the POV of Arthur, and his POV clearly is not reliable. I'm sure he does feel like he's being shit on by everyone, and this is really nothing new for the Joker's origin story by the way.

The Killing Joke, which is basically the defacto Joker origin story basically did the same thing, he's a struggling well intentioned stand up comic who's broke with a pregnant wife who has virtually everything go wrong with his life and then just snaps and goes crazy.

 

[Mona]

Medium answer?

Click to shrink...

 

[Depths]

Bunch of ya'll got Joker's tricked.

Embarrassing.

 

[DevilMayGuy]

Lmao no just a bunch of softies chicken littling over fuckingnothing.jpg

The movie didn't say enough to be dangerous, even if you buy into the idea that films can incite violence

 

[Deleted member 9932]

Only fascists believe that they should control what the populace can watch, or be produced justifying their decisions with whatever fearmongering they can come up with. Fuck fascists, today and always.

 

[Deleted member 21339]

I mean Taxi Driver and Sopranos are top tier creations, not everything is going to measure up directly to that.

The Joker film very clearly takes place from the POV of Arthur, and his POV clearly is not reliable. I'm sure he does feel like he's being shit on by everyone, and this is really nothing new for the Joker's origin story by the way.

The Killing Joke, which is basically the defacto Joker origin story basically did the same thing, he's a struggling well intentioned stand up comic who's broke with a pregnant wife who has virtually everything go wrong with his life and then just snaps and goes crazy.

Click to shrink...

Well, then, if the movie is going to go out of its way to specifically call out those moments when Arthur is fantasizing or hallucinating (which it does) and didn't want us to believe that everyone was terrible to Arthur; then it could have (should have) taken the opportunity to do that as well. As it stands, the lasting impression of the film is that everyone in society was pretty terrible to Arthur and they are all complicit in the inexorable outcome.

I think it's a pretty terrible message for the movie to send.

 

[Durden]

Everything about this shit was such fearmongering bullshit, and I'm convinced that competitors like Disney may have helped push the narrative as well considering just how insane it all got.

So fucking stupid. Great movie btw.

 

[Deleted member 2109]

Never was. The pearl clutchers made and continue to make pretty big fools of themselves imo.

 

[Deleted member 13798]

It was nice to see that the spirit of the moral guardians is still alive and well, and it looks like it's been passed on to the next generation! Exciting.

 

[UltraMagnus]

Well, then, if the movie is going to go out of its way to specifically call out those moments when Arthur is fantasizing or hallucinating (which it does) and didn't want us to believe that everyone was terrible to Arthur; then it could have (should have) taken the opportunity to do that as well. As it stands, the lasting impression of the film is that everyone in society was pretty terrible to Arthur and they are all complicit in the inexorable outcome.

I think it's a pretty terrible message for the movie to send.

Click to shrink...

I mean everyone's entitled to their opinion, but how far removed is that sentiment really from Tipper Gore's pearl clutching about gangster rap and violent movies and video games in the 1990s.

If that's the film they wanted to make, then that's still under a certain level of creative purview from the filmmaker to tell that story.

Also I really didn't take from it that he starts killing people "because society". I mean he appears to be a 35-45 year old man who's no winner in life for a long time and has been getting "crapped on" as it were for a long time. The inciting incident for his madness in the movie to me anyway is clearly him getting cut off from his meds due to government budget cuts.

 

[Deleted member 29660]

No, people let their fear rule their judgement and reacted accordingly to that fear.

 

[Queen Calanthe]

I've spent a great deal of time on 4 chan and seen the Nazi content myself, and never once did I refer to 4chan and 8chan as being the same thing. I would start linking to actual white supremacy content on 4 chan for you, but that's a banned site (for some reason!), so I'll just refer you to news about 8 chan and 4chan, since you think I'm being hyperbolic and appear to be out of touch.

Click to shrink...

Ok, so you know there is one of the greatest LGBTQ online communities, one of the biggest socialist communities, one of the bigger alt-right communities and by far the biggest troll communities.

It's clear when some content comes from the latter, falling for trolls it's just giving ammunitions for the real thing.

OK the fact that you must regularly post on 4chan explains a lot about why you have the opinions you do

Click to shrink...

Nope. never did and never will. I just like to inform myself about a subject when I constantly see it and constantly talk about it.

You should try it sometimes, speaking with a ground of knowledge

 

[Deleted member 48897]

Nope. never did and never will. I just like to inform myself about a subject when I constantly see it and constantly talk about it.

Click to shrink...

OK, you don't post on it, you just lurk it regularly then...

 

[uncelestial]

Ok, so you know there is one of the greatest LGBTQ online communities, one of the biggest socialist communities, one of the bigger alt-right communities and by far the biggest troll communities.

It's clear when some content comes from the latter, falling for trolls it's just giving ammunitions for the real thing.

Click to shrink...

No it isn't, and that's exactly the point. Forget Poe's Law, they've even blown past Godwin's Law. They have zero credibility.

It's easy to have people assume you're an asshole when you make asshole comments "sarcastically" while belonging to a group of assholes. And as far as those people looking "foolish" and you looking like some kind of master ironist in that situation: no.

 

[Deleted member 46414]

It never was a dangerous movie.

 

[Queen Calanthe]

OK, you don't post on it, you just lurk it regularly then...

Click to shrink...

Lol, did you even think before posting? Do I need to lurk to know what a forum is? A simple google and a couple of articles will suffice, I know it's hard but try it sometimes

No it isn't, and that's exactly the point. Forget Poe's Law, they've even blown past Godwin's Law. They have zero credibility.

It's easy to have people assume you're an asshole when you make asshole comments "sarcastically" while belonging to a group of assholes. And as far as those people looking "foolish" and you looking like some kind of master ironist in that situation: no.

Click to shrink...

Usually, you are right but I mean... c'mon, that one is blatant