DC cinematic universe thread.

Yeah, Phillips is full of shit here. Arthur was obviously never going to become "the" Joker under any circumstances, partially because he's so incompetent, but mostly because he's already middle-aged when the Wayne's are killed. This was clearly an Elseworlds story from the moment we first saw Thomas Wayne was still alive.

I think it'd be far more interesting if the Bruce from this universe took on the mantle of the Joker when he grows up, since this Gotham seems to be shitty because of politicians and rich assholes instead of monsters and flashy themed criminals. Let him conclude that his parents died because the 1% made Gotham so dangerous, then have him take on the appearance of something that scares him, reminiscent of the guy that once terrified the elite as well.

I saw "Joker : Folie a Deux" this past Saturday afternoon & found it to be VERY disappointing & lackluster


This utterly pointless sequel SHOULD'VE been titled "joker : folie a BLEW!"


"JOKER"(2019)'s the EPITOME of a movie that's a completely self contained & told story.


"JOKER"(2019) , like "Taxi Driver"(1976) is a movie that should have absolutely NO sequels , prequels , interquels or any other type of quel.


But unfortunately for us the utter craptacular "joker : folie a BLEW!" WAS made

I haven’t seen it. I may or may not have seen “Joker” (it sounds familiar and I think I remember the storyline or maybe I just remember the animated story the live action movie is based on), but it’s my understanding, the second movie is more about Harley Quinn’s origins. So, while it’s technically a sequel to Joker’s story, it’s really about Harley. Is that what the movie was about?

@Jenee , joker 2 introduces Harley & she's really just a supporting part of this flick's so called "story" , but I wouldn't say it's really about Harley per se at all.

This is what I can't get...
Let's for the sake of argument say that we're all wrong, and this movie is genius, and we're just too dumb to see it, and our great-grandchildren will get it.
Even allowing for all of that...Warners couldn't have possibly imagined this one would turn the profit part 1 did.
And they couldn't possibly have imagined it wouldn't piss people off, and generate negative buzz.
Fant4stic had radical reshoots by an uncredited director over way less.
Rogue One got a full overhaul for less.
Its a head scratcher.

Thanks. As I said, I hadn’t seen it.

The first film wasn't based on an animated story. Or any of the comics. It completely divorced Joker's origin from Batman (he's still a kid at the time of the film and his parents are alive - the film flirts with Bruce's dad also being Joker's, but that turns out to be a lie by Joker's mom).

The new film isn't really about the Joker we know either. The closest any story has come was the TV show Gotham where they teased that the initial character we think will become Joker merely inspires the actual one.

No-one's come right out and said it in any review I've read, but Joker in this seems to be an allegory for MAGA republicans - a rather pathetic individual who gained some notoriety and now has armies of "fans" who just want to use him as an excuse for their own antisocial behaviour. And when the character admits at the end that he isn't really that person, they turn on him.

Now that I've had more time to think about it, I think Arthur might really be one of Thomas Wayne's sons.

Thomas seems like just enough of an asshole to have knocked up some starstruck Wayne Enterprises secretary as a young man, and for his own parents to have covered it up to protect the family name. How was Arthur's mom supporting herself for so long? Early retirement or disability insurance payments from Wayne Enterprises made to keep her quiet. How did she get back custody of Arthur after she let her boyfriends abuse him? Wayne-adjacent lawyers making sure Arthur stayed in a household that would keep Thomas' secret.

Then when Arthur finally does act against the injustice he perceives in society, he uses an alternate persona to carry out the violence, just like Bruce does as Batman, just like the alternate universe Thomas Jr. does as Owlman.

I'm actually all but certain Arthur is a Wayne.

I remember before the first movie came out lots of were calling it "Black Panther for Incels," and predicting it would inspire all sorts of violence. This movie seems like an intentional response to that scenario, an effort to refute the violent cult of personality surrounding Joker. Only... what those people predicted didn't happen. Arthur was an object of pity.

Wasn’t it about Joker going insane? There absolutely was an animated story about that. It may not be the same story, but it was a story.

and if this wasn’t the same story then thanks for the clarification.

The Killing Joke was an animated movie where the B-plot is flashbacks allegedly showing the One Bad day that drove the Joker insane, at least from his perspective. More recent comics have retconned those flashbacks somewhat.

The two Joaquin Phoenix movies take place in a different universe than the mainstream Batman movies and comics. DC usually calls such stories Elseworlds.

Well this was certainly a post.

In the original Joaquin Phoenix Joker movie to the extent I remember it -- which may not be very well

Overall, the movie struck me as self-important and joyless, and I don't really have a desire to see it again. I probably would have eventually watched the sequel on Max, but given how it's being panned, I probably have better things to do than see a sequel that's also probably self-important and joyless.

He was a failed comedian in "The Killing Joke" too, but we never see his act in that one.
"Joker" is a Tuvix-ing of "Killing Joke" "Taxi Driver" "The King Of Comedy" and Andy Kaufman on David Letterman.
And I'm fine with it. I liked the result.
Star Wars is a mashup of stuff for crying out loud.

I liked the first movie. It wasn't a pleasant watch, but I think it worked as a mashup of Taxi Driver, Fight Club, and Falling Down. I ended up sympathizing with Arthur and similarly hopeless people that end up resorting to violence even when they know it won't accomplish anything, even if I don't support the violence itself. I finally got around to watching it during covid lockdown, it felt especially timely when so many people in the fringes of society were (and still are) getting left behind.

As soon as I heard the second movie would be a musical I lost any and all interest in ever seeing it. Why would you turn The Joker into a musical? Maybe as a short joke, but who the fuck wants to see such a statement movie in musical form? It would take away from everything the first movie was trying to do.

If you want to make a batman musical I would suggest the batman and robin movie with Mr. Freeze. Go musical with the campy thing.

What the fuck is it with the millenial habit of having to make everything a god damned musical?

Anyway, The Joker could not be good as a musical. I cannot conceive of a way that I would go into that universe again and be happy with musical numbers. I was vcery interested in seeing how they would bring Harley into that world with a relationship with Arthur, but the moment a musical number would come in it would be a bad joke.

I guess bad joke is what they were going for?

Joker 2 bombing is what they get for killing Coyote vs Acme.

I mean... they made an American Psycho musical. Matt Smith played Patrick Bateman!

But seriously, since the first movie established that Arthur is delusional and suffers from hallucinations, making the sequel a musical could have been an opportunity to get really weird with it. Or to go really dark without getting so graphic that the film can't be shown in theatres. A lot of Harley Quinn media already does this, showing us how Harley romanticized her times with the Joker, then showing the ugly reality of it.

That is not within the theme or mood of the first movie at all. If Arthur was having halucinations of being a singer instead of a stand up comedian I could see it, but he wasn't. Also, making something into a musical is not the same as making the movie a musical first. If they want to turn joker into some dark musical I do not care, but making the movie a musical to begin with, and pretty much leaving it out of the trailers so you trick the audience into buying a ticket for it without knowing that is a pretty dick move.

I have never asked for my money back no matter how bad the movie has been, but if I had gone to see this based on the trailers and had not heard from others it was a musical I would have had urges to burn the entire movie theater down joker style. It was not going down the musical path, and maybe you could throw in a musical number for the joke that it is all in his head, but one song and be done with it. The idea that there are multiple musical numbers says you are radically going away from the original source and you lose me because I do not want musical numbers in my dystopian psychotic headpiece.

I heard that this movie didn’t have the DC logo and I’ve heard that DC is trying real hard to distance this movie from James Gunn’s NuDCMU.

I haven’t seen this yet, but I’m fully spoiled and don’t care. I think there a few ways to make this movie work would be A) make a Bonnie and Clyde type movie where Harley breaks him out and they go on a crime/murder spree, B) Harley is a figment of his imagination or C) and this is my idea, the state wants to put him on trial, but at least two psychologists can’t determine if he’s sane enough then Harley shows up as an inmate at Arkham and befriends him and over time they pull a Shutter Island type situation where it’s revealed that Harley is actually a psychologist and tricks him into admitting that he’s not insane. Then have and ending scene where Harley is assigned to a guy who is the real Joker. Fade to black.

I really liked the first one too. An interesting story beautifully shot. I think in any other year it probably wins the Oscar for Best Cinematography but based on degree of difficulty alone, 1917 got it instead.

Joker still won some Oscars. Tod Phillips is a good director, but just isnt good with sequels.

Well, now you can blame Joker 2 on either Joaquin Phoenix's brain chemistry, or Morpheus.
The idea came to Phoenix in a dream, and he brought it to Philips.

https://comicbookmovie.com/batman/j...iling-cast-and-crew-paydays-a213822#gs.gdhg9d

It had to be deconstructed. Too many CHUDS enjoyed the first one.

See, this is what I mean about you've made this crap your personality.

Well, Phoenix always was a bit butt-hurt it had anything to do with DC and Joker, and wasn't just an indie film about Arthur.
This kinda makes some semblance of sense now.

Easy to see it that way when the internet is your entire existence, rather than a passing diversion.

Okay, so you just confessed that you're a troll persona.
Congrats.

So … casual browsing and commenting is trolling?

Dude. Get dressed and go outside!