- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Messages
- 6,455
- Reaction score
- 1,065
Had no plans of seeing this, particularly now. This whole sequel situation reminds me of Rob Zombie's angry, resentful, mess of a sequel, "Halloween II".
Joker: Folie à Deux
- Thread starter The Buffinator
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
yeah that's a really excellent example. because that movie deals with trauma and mental health. yeah like that.
I read it all. This is not a movie I have any desire to see. I will likely never watch it.
I hope it tanks horribly. Serves as a sign post to Hollywood: don't try this insincere **** again with comic book characters
maybe the reason I don't have that much of a hatred or a problem for this movie is because I never really cared for the first joker. I didn't dislike it. but I never really cared that much.
I never saw these movies as real joker movies I never really rewatched it
I saw joker 1 once. never thought much about it.
so this movie didn't bother me as much. but for a joker fan it will definitely make you mad
I never saw these movies as real joker movies I never really rewatched it
I saw joker 1 once. never thought much about it.
so this movie didn't bother me as much. but for a joker fan it will definitely make you mad
I liked the first movie, didn't love it. I loved the Murray scene and everything that happened after that moment. To me, it was a great set-up to promising sequel potential. It reminded me of a lot of old 70's movies where the best part was the last 10 minutes, but those 10 minutes stuck with you.
I still say it would have been more interesting to see the Joker become a kind of real world terrorist of Gotham, fighting for "the unnoticed and undesirable"... the rabble... and how he misguides 'his people' for his own self-interest and sense of accomplishment.
I think that would have been more timely than a sad movie about a failed justice system in a world of cruel and despicable people. He played the victim card already... time to face your life with the possibility that you're NOT the victim, just a d***.
I still say it would have been more interesting to see the Joker become a kind of real world terrorist of Gotham, fighting for "the unnoticed and undesirable"... the rabble... and how he misguides 'his people' for his own self-interest and sense of accomplishment.
I think that would have been more timely than a sad movie about a failed justice system in a world of cruel and despicable people. He played the victim card already... time to face your life with the possibility that you're NOT the victim, just a d***.
DiostaR
Super Freak
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2019
- Messages
- 1,433
- Reaction score
- 2,890
Not true.
Spoilers ahead :
There's one guy that likes to hangout with him in the movie and he gets influenced by his Joker persona a lot during the trial especially when he goes on a rant and insult the guards (they are bullies to everyone in the prison).
After that episode in the trial when Arthur comes back he gets beat up by the guards and once they bring him in his cell the younger "inmate" start protesting and chanting "When the saints go marching in" which makes the main guard angry, so angry that he asks the other guards to open his cell and he strangle him to death.
That makes Arthur realise that his persona is a bad thing and that he has a bad influence on his "fans" that idolise him.
That's why he drops it, not because he got "raped"...
The rape is only an interpretation from viewers, it might be implied that they sexually assaulted them in a way, personally I didn't see it as rape.
Last edited:
you might wanna defend the movie
but it did happen, it's pretty clear.
R_R_X
Super Freak
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2018
- Messages
- 3,045
- Reaction score
- 8,912
@batfan08 Mean spirited is also how I'd describe this film... It is well shot, well acted for the most part (Harvey Dent was bad) and some small parts show the potential this sequel had, unfortunately it seems like this was created almost out of spite, actively tearing down everything they achieved with the first one.
Hell I was actually enjoying it up until the moment Joaquin Phoenix started singing and then it all just kind of went down hill from there.
First of all, everyone is correct, Arthur's character arc into becoming the Joker is completely undone in this, rendering the first one, pointless.
The beautiful soundtrack from the first one is reused in some spots but never in a way that makes sense, the new tracks are forgettable and there's nothing like the bathroom scene here.
Making this a musical was a huge gamble and one that didn't pay off. They try to make it so that the music is what connects Arthur to Gaga's Harley, who was shockingly underused, but pretty much all of the musical numbers add nothing to their story, since they're just incoherent figments of Fleck's imagination and not very well done either.
Some of the court bits were well done but it took up too much of the movie's runtime. I was expecting the court to be like the first act or ending of the second one leading into Arthur embracing his true self, the Joker, like we saw in the first film.
Instead I was treated to one of the most disgusting, pathetic, miserable and spiteful endings imaginable. To make matters worse, Todd Philips decided to remind the audience of a vastly superior interpretation of the character right at the end.
It's a damn shame, if they just left the first one alone Phoenix's Joker would've remained transcendent right along Ledger's. Now he's just a joke, and was it a joke on the audience, the studio? I don't know but I can tell you, it wasn't a very good one.
Hell I was actually enjoying it up until the moment Joaquin Phoenix started singing and then it all just kind of went down hill from there.
First of all, everyone is correct, Arthur's character arc into becoming the Joker is completely undone in this, rendering the first one, pointless.
The beautiful soundtrack from the first one is reused in some spots but never in a way that makes sense, the new tracks are forgettable and there's nothing like the bathroom scene here.
Making this a musical was a huge gamble and one that didn't pay off. They try to make it so that the music is what connects Arthur to Gaga's Harley, who was shockingly underused, but pretty much all of the musical numbers add nothing to their story, since they're just incoherent figments of Fleck's imagination and not very well done either.
Some of the court bits were well done but it took up too much of the movie's runtime. I was expecting the court to be like the first act or ending of the second one leading into Arthur embracing his true self, the Joker, like we saw in the first film.
Instead I was treated to one of the most disgusting, pathetic, miserable and spiteful endings imaginable. To make matters worse, Todd Philips decided to remind the audience of a vastly superior interpretation of the character right at the end.
It's a damn shame, if they just left the first one alone Phoenix's Joker would've remained transcendent right along Ledger's. Now he's just a joke, and was it a joke on the audience, the studio? I don't know but I can tell you, it wasn't a very good one.
I would assume anyone who watched the first movie would have clued into the fact this wasn't your standard comic book Joker. So the fact this sequel charts its own path once again doesn't bother me in the least.
But if this movie really does retell the exact same character arc again, but in a different setting, then that does seem like a problem. Because you still want to see some kind of progress or development in the character.
$60M --> $200M
Yes, some bilking was had here.
Yes, some bilking was had here.
jye4ever
Broke and happy
Frenchy
Super Freak
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2017
- Messages
- 659
- Reaction score
- 977
So in the film the Joker is manipulated by Harley ?as described in this article :
https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/joker-2-ending-explained-arthur-fleck-death-spoilers/
Do the guards really force Arthur to kiss another inmate in one scene?
https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/joker-2-ending-explained-arthur-fleck-death-spoilers/
Do the guards really force Arthur to kiss another inmate in one scene?
Frenchy
Super Freak
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2017
- Messages
- 659
- Reaction score
- 977
R_R_X
Super Freak
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2018
- Messages
- 3,045
- Reaction score
- 8,912
So in the film the Joker is manipulated by Harley ?as described in this article :
https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/joker-2-ending-explained-arthur-fleck-death-spoilers/
Do the guards really force Arthur to kiss another inmate in one scene?
Pretty much, even after his lawyer reveals that she's been lying to him about everything, she still manages to keep him on her side by telling him she's pregnant with his child and then breaking into song. No I'm not joking. It's hard to say whether she's lying about that or not since there's a sex scene between Fleck and Lee but it's also not exactly confirmed if it's one of Arthur's hallucinations or not.
They do and he kisses him nonchalantly and then walks over to them and asks for a cigarette. The guards pretty much bully him into telling jokes and being the butt of jokes so they can reward him with cigarettes. It's heavily implied Brendan Gleeson's character is a closeted gay man who has some sort of weird obsession with Arthur and then they double down on that with the ending.
They do and he kisses him nonchalantly and then walks over to them and asks for a cigarette. The guards pretty much bully him into telling jokes and being the butt of jokes so they can reward him with cigarettes. It's heavily implied Brendan Gleeson's character is a closeted gay man who has some sort of weird obsession with Arthur and then they double down on that with the ending.
Why do so many entertainment reporters insist on describing films and TV shows that are almost universally reviled as "polarizing?" 
Otomofan
Super Freak
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2009
- Messages
- 5,258
- Reaction score
- 4,125
Similar threads
