InArt Phoenix Joker 1/6

[Aybaig]

THE COMMUNITY WILL SHOW INART WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A COLLECTOR. THEY WILL FEEL THE FIRE

Best of luck to IA. I do NOT wanna be in their position

 

[BrooklynWolf X]

Ew,
I dont like that - never been a fan of artificial scarcity to inflate prices, its why I no longer collect steelbooks or art prints regularly and its what I really dont like about the Hot Toys artisan and limited figure runs.
Just have pre-orders open so those who want one can order and to prevent scalpers... well, scalping.

Exactly. They know what they’re doing. It got so many people talking and was a direct message to IA.

IA’s like “i see your artisan line, I raise you our RH line.”….RH. Right Here. As in “deez n*tz Right Here? You can grab them…”






That’s what RH stands for…right?

 

[Wor-Gar]

That’s what RH stands for…right?

Elliot haz sadz he can't afford Joker.

 

[ironwez20]

We must not forget the state of the DCEU in 2017-2018. This ended up raking in a billion dollars with practically no marketing. Didn’t even release in China along with the rest of the world. It didn’t get the same push that BVS did but made more.

A comic book film without a single cape in sight.

It’s crazy isn’t it? I remember so many against this film saying it was going to cause “incel shoot outs” and “riots” they also said it was disturbing. Nothing happened and almost everyone loved the movie ,made a billion and got an Oscar and a sequel. The story behind this film and its success is hilarious. And this film was pre Covid . Literally a few months before it started .

 

[batfan08]

Wouldn’t be surprised if Todd and Joaquin were behind those decisions.

Personally, I don’t know how I feel about it. Joker is one of those films that has grown on me a lot with subsequent viewings, but I feel like it has more artificial/synthetic “prestige” than it actually warrants. It’s actually kind of pathetic just how manipulative that film is in how self-serious it tries to be. It’s a 2 hour Scorsese pastiche acting showcase that did what it set out to do (very well, I might add; Joaquin brought home his statuette, after all), but didn’t really bring anything new to the table. They plugged in an iconic genre character from an established IP, Mad Libs style and watched the sparks fly.

I’m actually really curious about Joker 2 because, to be completely honest, I’ll be amazed if it doesn’t turn out to be “The Rise and Imminent Fall of Todd Phillips.” Either way, I’m intrigued not just by the figure (despite my feeling the whole licensing thing is grossly overcomplicated) but by the possibilities of this line. It makes me wonder if it’s not a loophole that might allow them access to classic, but otherwise walled off licenses that historically haven’t been touched. Nicholson in The Shining is something my brain keeps coming back to.

 

[TheBatman]

Its just taxi driver but they changed it to appeal to the current superhero/comic book hype. Otherwise, most folks probably wouldn't watch it

 

[Bleah]

Its just taxi driver but they changed it to appeal to the current superhero/comic book hype. Otherwise, most folks probably wouldn't watch it

That's what I'm thinking. Keep everything the same with the movie and remove anything that's DC related, would it have sold as well as it did?

 

[Nick D]

I personally wish it had more Joker stuff in it with less Arthur, no need for a Batman.

This would help with subsequent viewings imo. The film takes off brilliantly as soon as he’s arrested at the Murray show. From there on out, it’s fantastic and left me wanting more. I’m worried this sequel will divert from that unfortunately.

 

[BrooklynWolf X]

Personally, I don’t know how I feel about it. Joker is one of those films that has grown on me a lot with subsequent viewings, but I feel like it has more artificial/synthetic “prestige” than it actually warrants. It’s actually kind of pathetic just how manipulative that film is in how self-serious it tries to be. It’s a 2 hour Scorsese pastiche acting showcase that did what it set out to do (very well, I might add; Joaquin brought home his statuette, after all), but didn’t really bring anything new to the table. They plugged in an iconic genre character from an established IP, Mad Libs style and watched the sparks fly.

I’m actually really curious about Joker 2 because, to be completely honest, I’ll be amazed if it doesn’t turn out to be “The Rise and Imminent Fall of Todd Phillips.” Either way, I’m intrigued not just by the figure (despite my feeling the whole licensing thing is grossly overcomplicated) but by the possibilities of this line. It makes me wonder if it’s not a loophole that might allow them access to classic, but otherwise walled off licenses that historically haven’t been touched. Nicholson in The Shining is something my brain keeps coming back to.

Mmmm, I agree with some points you made. There is the feeling that it was trying hard to be…”above” the source material.

But, it did accomplish a few things:

1- it took a character that is ALWAYS associated with The Batman and made a dark, unsettling but SOLID solo film…successfully too. It could’ve EASILY been a schlocky throw away movie. And it’s because it took itself seriously that Joaquin was able to act his *** off and get a prestigious award, NOT posthumously as well. It makes me think back to Ledgers award. Would he have been nominated had he not met his untimely passing? Comic book movies were NEVER an option during awards season…which that alone is stupid enough…but it does make you wonder.

2- it did bring attention to the failures of the American healthcare system for the mentally ill. I will sadly admit…it was never something I gave any consideration for…but after the movie it made me more aware of the flaws and wish we were better equipped to help those in need.

3- related to my 1st point: it took chances. MCU dominated the BO…but their movies were essentially the same. “Joke joke explosion joke joke explosion bam, we win.” I know it was crude and very dismissive of the MCU’s accomplishments…but personally the only movies I truly liked I can count on one hand.

-Joker showed us we can have movies separated from a connected universe and tell a…well, IMO, a compelling and interesting character study based off of a character that can kill someone with an electric buzzer.

4- it made us think and feel…conflicted?? I choose not to get into THAT convo at the moment. It’s gonna be long and we should focus on the figure itself

Its just taxi driver but they changed it to appeal to the current superhero/comic book hype. Otherwise, most folks probably wouldn't watch it

I think King of Comedy was also one of its influences too right?

 

[BrooklynWolf X]

That's what I'm thinking. Keep everything the same with the movie and remove anything that's DC related, would it have sold as well as it did?

….maaaaaybe? We had 2 movies that were original (barbie and Oppenheimer) and were able to out BO a Tom Cruise movie, when he was hot off the heels of Top Gun Maverick.

I also think curiosity played into Jokers success. Like…’what kind of movie are we gonna watch here? A solo movie on Batman’s arch nemesis??’

 

[BrooklynWolf X]

I personally wish it had more Joker stuff in it with less Arthur, no need for a Batman.

This would help with subsequent viewings imo. The film takes off brilliantly as soon as he’s arrested at the Murray show. From there on out, it’s fantastic and left me wanting more. I’m worried this sequel will divert from that unfortunately.

I felt a sequel wasn’t necessary. joker felt so “raw and real”…that when you bring in a ‘fantastical’ character like Batman…what kind of story can you tell? Will it fit? Are we gonna see any high flying kung fu acrobatics in THIS UNIVERSE?

The sequel we’re getting is apparently gonna be a musical. Todd and crew are taking ANOTHER risky chance again.

But if Joaquin signed up for the 1st movie because of the script and low budget…I’m confident this sequel will surprise us once more.

 

[Nick D]

Even though I don’t need a Batman in this universe, I absolutely loved the alleyway scene and felt it was tastefully done, I even like it better than Nolan’s rendition.

Speaking on Ledgers Oscar, he acted his ass off and had the most fun playing a character I’ve ever seen on film. The interwoven script and never ending checklist of plot building, one piece of info on top of another, completely ahead of everyone, all the time, even at the end when you think he’s lost, he’s won. It just makes it exceptionally well done. In a film with an entire star studded cast, he outperformed them all like he wasn’t even trying to act.

 

[MarkKing]

Unlike a certain Marvel movie than they claimed made 1billion, this one actually did.

It's odd that that movie didn't get a sequel.

This one is odd. I SUSPECT it's a political reason with the Joker. May it appealed to too much men is my theory. Yes....Hollyweird/WB are that deranged.

 

[TheBatman]

So, about Joaquin Joker...

 

[BrooklynWolf X]

Even though I don’t need a Batman in this universe, I absolutely loved the alleyway scene and felt it was tastefully done, I even like it better than Nolan’s rendition.

Speaking on Ledgers Oscar, he acted his ass off and had the most fun playing a character I’ve ever seen on film. The interwoven script and never ending checklist of plot building, one piece of info on top of another, completely ahead of everyone, all the time, even at the end when you think he’s lost, he’s won. It just makes it exceptionally well done. In a film with an entire star studded cast, he outperformed them all like he wasn’t even trying to act.

Yeah Ledger literally got absorbed into the role…for better or worse.

I recently re-watched “A Knights Tale”…

His death still hurts.

 

[batfan08]

Mmmm, I agree with some points you made. There is the feeling that it was trying hard to be…”above” the source material.

But, it did accomplish a few things:

1- it took a character that is ALWAYS associated with The Batman and made a dark, unsettling but SOLID solo film…successfully too. It could’ve EASILY been a schlocky throw away movie. And it’s because it took itself seriously that Joaquin was able to act his *** off and get a prestigious award, NOT posthumously as well. It makes me think back to Ledgers award. Would he have been nominated had he not met his untimely passing? Comic book movies were NEVER an option during awards season…which that alone is stupid enough…but it does make you wonder.

2- it did bring attention to the failures of the American healthcare system for the mentally ill. I will sadly admit…it was never something I gave any consideration for…but after the movie it made me more aware of the flaws and wish we were better equipped to help those in need.

3- related to my 1st point: it took chances. MCU dominated the BO…but their movies were essentially the same. “Joke joke explosion joke joke explosion bam, we win.” I know it was crude and very dismissive of the MCU’s accomplishments…but personally the only movies I truly liked I can count on one hand.

-Joker showed us we can have movies separated from a connected universe and tell a…well, IMO, a compelling and interesting character study based off of a character that can kill someone with an electric buzzer.

4- it made us think and feel…conflicted?? I choose not to get into THAT convo at the moment. It’s gonna be long and we should focus on the figure itself



I think King of Comedy was also one of its influences too right?

I agree with all of your points, actually. Like I said, the gambit paid off and Phoenix’s performance was stellar. I think my line of thinking is more directed at Phillips seemingly trying to reinvent himself as an auteur when, like I said, we’re not really covering new territory here. The lost American Everyman falling between the cracks has been a tried and true archetype in cinema for a long ass time. You had your Travis Bickles and Rupert Pupkins in the ‘80s, Michael Douglas’ D-Fenz in the ‘90s, and now Arthur today, and I’m sure tons of others that I’ve forgotten.

Phillips made a very good film, no doubt about it. It looks good, the performances are good, the writing’s pretty solid, but it’s also a very safe film. Yeah, Phoenix won. Of course he won. There was no universe where he didn’t win because that movie genuinely felt like, to characterize it differently, an acting reel someone would submit to get into drama school. It was almost calculated in how central to everything Arthur was. Everybody else was good, but existed within the confines of the periphery and, thematically, it works because you’re seeing the world through Arthur’s eyes. Nevertheless, it was two-hours of film stock Todd Phillips gave Joaquin and told him “chew it up and spit it out.”

I think it was very much a film that sort of enthralled audiences and was very much of the zeitgeist. You had the element of “how can a Joker movie work without Batman” and that capitalization on the popularity of comic book movies, you had the controversy of “is this going to inspire a contagion effect in incels and angry young white men to commit mass shootings (frankly, I don’t think that would’ve even been a thought had it not been for James Holmes shooting up an actual Batman movie in 2012),” and then, you had the social commentary that was very relevant with, like you said, mental health and inequality and class.

It’s really interesting to me, though, how filmmakers like Todd Phillips and Adam McKay made the leap from movies like Old School and Anchorman to Joker and The Big Short. On paper, you don’t really understand it, but then when you take a step back, it sort of makes perfect sense. Old School, The Hangover, Talladega Nights; they’re all very “bro-y” movies and the dynamics of, like, Joker and The Big Short are sort of the dark side of that “bro-y” dynamic. The whole Andrew Tate incel thing is very much of that culture of podcasts and entitlement and, in the case of The Big Short…actually, I retract that. There’s nothing “bro-y” about Wall Street, whatsoever.

Anyway, I’ve effectively talked myself in a circle and contradicted myself along the way (I’m presently like, “huh, maybe it had more to say than I thought.” ), but I’mma post it anyway cause it’s fun.

 

[lordnastrond]

I'm really looking forward to the sequel - I have a feeling it will be something pretty different, like the first one was, but in its own way again.
Gaga Harley looks good from the behind the scenes stuff I've seen so far - and I can see a lot of people wanting her as a 1/6 figure if her character is received well.

 

[BrooklynWolf X]

I agree with all of your points, actually. Like I said, the gambit paid off and Phoenix’s performance was stellar. I think my line of thinking is more directed at Phillips seemingly trying to reinvent himself as an auteur when, like I said, we’re not really covering new territory here. The lost American Everyman falling between the cracks has been a tried and true archetype in cinema for a long ass time. You had your Travis Bickles and Rupert Pupkins in the ‘80s, Michael Douglas’ D-Fenz in the ‘90s, and now Arthur today, and I’m sure tons of others that I’ve forgotten.

Phillips made a very good film, no doubt about it. It looks good, the performances are good, the writing’s pretty solid, but it’s also a very safe film. Yeah, Phoenix won. Of course he won. There was no universe where he didn’t win because that movie genuinely felt like, to characterize it differently, an acting reel someone would submit to get into drama school. It was almost calculated in how central to everything Arthur was. Everybody else was good, but existed within the confines of the periphery and, thematically, it works because you’re seeing the world through Arthur’s eyes. Nevertheless, it was two-hours of film stock Todd Phillips gave Joaquin and told him “chew it up and spit it out.”

I think it was very much a film that sort of enthralled audiences and was very much of the zeitgeist. You had the element of “how can a Joker movie work without Batman” and that capitalization on the popularity of comic book movies, you had the controversy of “is this going to inspire a contagion effect in incels and angry young white men to commit mass shootings (frankly, I don’t think that would’ve even been a thought had it not been for James Holmes shooting up an actual Batman movie in 2012),” and then, you had the social commentary that was very relevant with, like you said, mental health and inequality and class.

It’s really interesting to me, though, how filmmakers like Todd Phillips and Adam McKay made the leap from movies like Old School and Anchorman to Joker and The Big Short. On paper, you don’t really understand it, but then when you take a step back, it sort of makes perfect sense. Old School, The Hangover, Talladega Nights; they’re all very “bro-y” movies and the dynamics of, like, Joker and The Big Short are sort of the dark side of that “bro-y” dynamic. The whole Andrew Tate incel thing is very much of that culture of podcasts and entitlement and, in the case of The Big Short…actually, I retract that. There’s nothing “bro-y” about Wall Street, whatsoever.

Anyway, I’ve effectively talked myself in a circle and contradicted myself along the way (I’m presently like, “huh, maybe it had more to say than I thought.” ), but I’mma post it anyway cause it’s fun.

Nah man, I love EVERYTHING about your post. Excellent points all the way through!

I have some more I wanna touch on…but uh…talk about “The Batman” movie in the “1/6 The Batman” thread was forbidden…

 

[jye4ever]

I just returned from the year 2026.

A single HT cost $5,000.

Milk was $45 a gallon.

Don’t ask about Inart!

 

[BrooklynWolf X]

I'm really looking forward to the sequel - I have a feeling it will be something pretty different, like the first one was, but in its own way again.
Gaga Harley looks good from the behind the scenes stuff I've seen so far - and I can see a lot of people wanting her as a 1/6 figure if her character is received well.

Never thought I’d see the day where I look forward to owning a 1/6 Lady Gaga…