I’ve only seen Taxi Driver, and that movie does not portray Travis Bickle as a victim or sympathetic in any way. He’s just straight up twisted. But that didn’t stop Hinckley from idolizing the character and a million d-bags from hanging this poster in their dorm rooms.
It’s not anachronistic. It’s an intentional misrepresentation.
Well, exactly. Nothing, not one single thing, about Arthur is normal or healthy. That’s because he’s profoundly mentally ill. In a sane society he’d be receiving inpatient treatment under a doctor’s care. But this is gritty broke NYC - roughly - in the 70s (I realize someone else said the 80s but I’m getting a 70s vibe) and there’s no room there for empathy of helping others when the city has enough trouble paying for cops and firemen.
It’s not necessary to be a tragic hero. Like, for example, George Clooney’s character in Up in the Air - another movie I think everyone should see - it’s possible to simply be a tragic figure in the center of the story. Arthur loses in the beginning, middle and end of the movie. There’s simply no happy ending out there for him no matter what he does.
So, I did my homework and watched “Joker” (I kept calling it “The Joker” made it a bit harder to find) last night. Stayed up a bit past what I generally like to, but it is done.
My analysis:
First is to acknowledge that we are dealing with an unreliable narrator. The world is a terrible place, but it is a world that we are seeing through his eyes. There is an almost constant drone in the background of newscasts with sad or violent stories, or even the constant updates on the garbage strike.
The world reflected his mood. When he was on top of things, the world was bright and shiny, there was little or no dirt or grime on the streets, no garbage to be seen. When he was in his more typical depressive funk, the world turned darker, dirtier, and the garbage piled up taller than a man and as far as the eye can see.
Even his leaving of the clown job was symbolic, as he left the grimy dirty place with ugly people behind, and kicked open the door upon a bright and shiny new world.
As for the study of the film, he was absolutely looking for validation and acceptance above all. His first fantasy sequence was of him being honored by his idol and praised by the audience for the sacrifices he has made, and the good he has accomplished.
I did know that his GF was not real due to spoilers, but I would have had my doubts as to their relationship being real. Stalking is never charming. When she invited him over sometime after accusing him of following her all day (with her kid), I am pretty sure I would have thought that something was up.
In any case, his delusion of his GF was once again all about validation. It wasn’t about sex, it was about companionship. He was bombing at the comedy club until he “saw” her in the audience, approving of him. (It sounds like he bombed after too, just didn’t realize it as he concentrated only on someone who wasn’t actually there.)
His playing with the gun was a demonstration of his desire for power. He was powerless and picked on, made fun of in a cruel world. The first thing he does with the gun is fantasize about killing a potential rival for an undefined woman’s affections.
Then there was the murdering. The first two guys on the subway were self defense. Even as someone who isn’t a lover of guns, I’d absolutely give him that (according to what we see through his perception of events, the whole scene may have actually played out entirely differently). The third guy though, that was an execution. That was because he found his power, and wanted to exercise it.
Yadda Yadda Yadda, I’m not giving a movie review or book report, let’s skip to the end. All the stuff about Wayne and Batman tie ins were shoed in anyway. But sure, lets add in being rejected by his father and finding out about his past. All just more misery for the pathetic excuse of a human he has become.
I’m going to spoil this, just in case, but I don’t think it really needs it.
He actually has an opportunity here, to actually clear his name a bit. If he had said in the interview that he killed those guys in self defense, if he said that they were assaulting him at the time, maybe people would have believed it, maybe not, but instead he went on a whiny rant about how mistreated he is by the world. The host very rightly condemns him for both his acts and his excuses.
He gets the validation that he has wanted from the beginning of the movie. In a different way, of course. He isn’t patted on the back and congratulated by the host, but he still gets the last word in. He isn’t applauded by the audience, but they are paying attention.
Then, in what I am not sure was real of another dream sequence, is the most “problematic” part of the movie. While being transported, he takes pride in the destruction that he has caused. He then is rescued and acclaimed by the peers who he has been searching for all this time. These people have been here the whole time, feeling just like him, and just waiting for someone like him to come along and lead them to get even with society.
He talks about society getting what it deserves. That he wants his death to make more “cents” than his life.
His triumph of validation comes from the incitement of violence and destruction.
So, was Joker about an incel? Yeah, I actually think so. He had other mental problems, but he did have the attitude of believing that the world owed him something in return for him being nice to it. When the world did not offer that, he then punished the world, and claimed that it was what was deserved. However, I can see other opinions on that.
Second question, does the Joker resonate with incels? In this, yes, absolutely. It’s all about vindication and validation of inappropriate views of the world. It’s about blaming the world for your problems, and giving it what it “deserves” in return. It’s about knowing that there are so many others out there like you, who would follow your lead and applaud your actions, if only they were free from the oppression that society puts them under.
Is this movie going to cause a violent act? Probably not. Can this movie cause people walking down the wrong path to find validation in their externalizing of faults? Probably. I don’t think it’s going to cause terrorists, just toxic, lonely people.
The me from 15+ years ago who headed a bit down that path definitely resonated with the movie. There was a bit of me that did think that everyone he harmed deserved it, for treating him so poorly, or allowing him to be treated that way. I’ve long gotten past that, but if I had seen this movie at that time, I may have found myself thinking that such attitudes are more mainstream, acceptable, and healthy than they really are.
No, the blame society. Incels resent the women who reject them, but they hate the “Chads” who get them even more.
But, there is also not one thing that is normal or healthy about the world that he seems to live in.
As far as the social commentary, I can’t disagree. We do not treat the mentally unwell with the empathy and care that they do deserve. As he wrote in the movie, and as I’ve seen expressed elsewhere, “The worst part of having a mental illness is that people expect you to behave as though you don’t.”
I can understand the disconnect of someone being told that they cannot get the treatment and medication that they need because the city cannot afford cops and firemen, while people like Wayne, running for mayor, live on palatial estates.
I did get more of an 80’s vibe, though partly because that is when we de-funded the mental health services in our country, leaving people like Arthur in the cold. He even said at the beginning, one of the first lines, that he thought he was happier when he was still an inpatient in the facility.
That’s pretty interesting, I didn’t notice that. It’s not the type of movie I would watch twice, but now I think I’m going to eventually just so I can see those types of things.
To one of k9b’s points…
Throughout the movie the fantasy sequences were pretty obvious to me, until this last one. In fact, I thought back-and-forth about it for a a while, and reached the realization that if this were not an origin story - if, say, the movie were FLECK - I would have been 100% certain that the last “validation” sequence was imaginary. Given that, that’s where I landed, but if someone told me that part of the DC universe was Joker creating a lot of mayhem like that, I would accept that.
I found the movie very interesting because, as a child, he exhibited no sociopathic traits. It was only after suffering so much personal pain that he was warped into “The Joker”. The movie provided an answer to the often asked question, “What could make a person that way?”
Get woke go broke. Woke is a shit term for you being “aware” of your surroundings. Your “progressive”. For instance all the main companies like Nike, Apple, etc, are woke because they bend the knee to screaming Democrats because women, gays, blacks, are still "oppresed slaves " to this day.
Thank you for sharing your constructive and helpful opinions.
Out of curiosity, what’s the preferred term for being proudly ignorant of your surroundings? ‘Comatose’ or something?