I saw it and enjoyed it. Not sure if I’d ever re-watch it.
A couple of things:
As much as everyone is calling this a comic movie, I don’t recall seeing the typical “DC Comics” movie montage intro. It was the “retro” Warner Brothers intro from the 80’s (which was probably a creative choice from Todd Phillips)
I’m not that bothered regarding the Gary Glitter controversy. I think that song choice worked for the movie. Now the fact that GG will make royalties doesn’t really bother me. Could another song have been used? Probably, but I can’t think of one off the top of my head (and yes i understand there are probably literally hundreds of songs that could have been use instead of that one, I just can’t think of one)
I was curious if Todd would have slipped “The Dan Band” into this movie. They are usually a staple of his movies. He could have had them be one of Murray’s acts on his talk show I guess. But my guess is Todd wanted to create an Oscar quality movie, and that wouldn’t include “The Dan Band”.
I remember Rock & Roll Part 2 being in the movie but now I can’t place the timing of it. Was it playing as he was making his way to The Murray Franklin Show? The timing of when played it could have some ominous implications.
I saw it today. I can’t say I “enjoyed” it, because I don’t really consider it the kind of movie one can “enjoy,” but I thought it was well done and I was more positive toward it than I expected to be.
I wonder about the political statement thing, too. Thomas Wayne seemed more than a bit Trumpian to me, and Bruce reminded me a little of Barron (especially in the still shot of the family together). Was Thomas Wayne always that much of a rich-guy dick in the comics, or was that added for the movie?
I thought they did a nice job of invoking Johnny Carson Show vibes from the Murray Franklin show. His sidekick was a dead ringer for young Ed McMahon, and they even had a “Dr. Ruth” clone!
I had a feeling after the movie that everything after being chased by the two detectives was a delusion. They caught him and he’s in Arkham after that point. I’m sure that on a rewatch, there will be details that invalidate my theory, but that’s what I thought immediately after.
Phoenix was great in this movie, and he deserves an Oscar. The movie itself, not so great.
Not worthy of the hoopla.
[spoiler]Can you imagine ‘Batman’ in this universe? Joker as a stand alone, misses it’s Mark in my opinion. I don’t think the three rando killings on the sub would lead to people acting that way[, and I find it hard to believe how he made it on a show he’s always wanted to be on without trying.
The movie try so hard to be ‘Taxi Driver’.
I did like the aspect what it might be like for a man living with a neurological disorder like that.The whole story just didn’t play out the way I would have liked it to.[/spoiler]
The instant I heard that song in the movie, I assumed that they deliberately used it because it’s controversial. It would fit with every other thing about the movie.
I really don’t get the controversy. It has to be an immensely foolish person who thinks that this movie supports Incels
Apparently the script went a rewrite and
Originally Sophie did date Arthur out of pity. Until she broke up with him and he did a misogynistic rant ™.
Much better they way the showed it. More realistic . Probably the best portrayal of “toxic masculinity” I have seen..
FYI, you might find this amusing; it’s a parody of Joker from Saturday Night Live last night. Instead of Joker from Batman, it’s the dark, gritty origin story of Oscar the Grouch from Sesame Street.
Saw it last night. Wow, it doesn’t get much darker than that. Dark and terribly sad. I found Arthur a very sympathetic character, perhaps more so than the director intended. (Obviously in the real world, a brutal killer is not to be sympathized with but in this universe the people that he killed were pricks so I almost got a “they had it comin’” vibe.)
I agree with just about every observation that’s been made here and add my vote with the folks that think Arthur did not kill Sophie.
The last scene suggests that he killed the doctor but it was very stylized, with perfect bloody footprints that almost reminded me of the stops you’d see in an old time dance studio. Then the orderly chasing him in cartoon style. That seems like it could not have happened but I’m not sure :o
Not to take the discussion too far afield but has anyone heard about anyone in the PBA (the disorder he has that makes him laugh involuntarily) community coming out against this film? I think it is a necessary and extra tragic aspect to Joker’s persona but I could easily imagine some folks getting up in arms about it.
I’ve always found Joaquin to be quite handsome in a non traditional way but holy cow, it was hard to look at him (intentional, I realize). He was like combination of Ty Burrell on a very bad day and Christian Bale in The Machinist.
I too watched the movie and loved it, and after seeing it I realized that Joker reminded me of another cult classic: Fight Club
Both characters have mental health issues
Both characters start the movie while being somewhat anchored in society, but live as societal outcasts very early on.
imaginary relationships
an anti-capitalist and anti-system message
each character becomes the driving force of a revolution
There are differences of course, but the basic story structure of each is so wildly similar it’s impossible for Todd Phillips not to have kept Fight Club as a close inspiratiob
Funny, I thought it was going to be a lot darker than it was. I assumed Sophie, her daughter, and all the kids in the children’s hospital were going to die, probably horribly. Restricting the killing to people who had wronged him (besides the psychiatrist at the very end) made it much less Joker-ish. I think they chickened out in leaving it ambivalent what happened to Sophie.
BTW, was the chubby British guy who talked to him through the gate at the Wayne estate Alfred?
I saw it last night. There’s no faulting the performances. Phillips got lucky: Phoenix took a thin, unoriginal script and made it one of the most powerful movies of recent years.
I enjoyed the film-buff Easter eggs. And I get that the nearly unalloyed derivativeness was its own kind of homage. But I didn’t feel like it was enough to support the lead performance.
He was still Fleck until he killed the talk show host, which is interesting because it’s the part of the film which takes the most from a specific comic book, as I mentioned above: It’s similar enough to the Joker going on Letterman in The Dark Knight Returns that it can’t be a simple coincidence. The Dr. Ruth knock-off who Joker kisses is the big tell. So it makes sense that Fleck wouldn’t kill randomly, and it makes sense that Joker would kill someone on live TV.
This is what was thrown at me when I saw that his same therapist who was cut due to budget cuts just happens to also be his Arkham therapist. I think he may have even been arrested when the detectives first found him at the hospital.
I also found it a little incredible that he was able to murder his friend, let the other one go and still make it to the Murray show. Plus, it went on waaaaaaay to long (his guest spot on the show.) They probably would’ve cut to commercial just after he tried to tongue Dr. Sally. So seems more like he imagined the whole thing too.
Plus, it seemed odd that he would just be able to steal a bellhop suit and get some alone time with Thomas Wayne. Thomas was NEVER an asshole is the comics as I remember. But he was that way to Arthur? Wayne could’ve called in his little incident at the gate to Gotham police and they would’ve nailed him. So maybe some more evidence to the whole imagined thing.
I’ve been thinking about it quite a bit since I saw it and the more I think about it, the more confused I am about what’s real and what’s in Arthur’s mind. Some of his imaginings are made very obvious but some things, like those that you’ve pointed out are completely implausible. At the same time, this is based on a comic book character (albeit an unconventional version) so I wonder if we’re meant to put credibility on hold. I don’t particularly want to watch it again, at least not yet, but I wonder if I might get a better sense of it on a second viewing.