Thoughts on Joker

[Apologiaphoenix]

Spoiler alert!

Link

[Christian3]

Spoiler alert!

Link

I agree with you that Joaquin Phoenix was terrific as the Joker. I also agree that it is a movie no child should see; I''m not even sure I should have seen it.

There is one part I didn't get and it was the letter he received in the mail. We couldn't read it all; just a few words.

What did it say? Who was it from?

[Adrift]

Went in expecting a King of Comedy/Taxi Driver style homage, and got exactly that. I thought the film was well done, especially the overall aesthetic and period-accuracy. Joaquin Phoenix was terrific, his physicality really adding dimension to the role.

Like its source material (not DC comics, but 70s/80s Scorsese movies), the film follows a very Travis Bickle/Rupert Pupkin character type. A pitiful sad sack who has clear mental issues and delusions of grandeur that are exasperated by the filthy, dangerous living conditions of pre-Giuliani NYC. Unlike the psychopath of comic book lore, this Joker does seem to genuinely care about some people, especially the non-judging, and those who show him kindness (children, a midget, the girl down the hall, and, at least initially, his mother). This is a character who has some conception of moral rightness. He appears to genuinely empathizes with, if not class distinctions, at least the cruelty shown the weak by the powerful. And throughout the film, the impression I got was that Aurthur Fleck's fits weren't really laughs as much as choked sobs. Phoenix mastered the art of making a laugh sound like an agonizing cry, or maybe a cry sound like an agonizing laugh. Either way, he goes into these fits when he witnesses injustice, and cruelty, and despair.

The big issue with the movie is that it wears its influences on its sleeve, and they're too hard to look past. If you're unfamiliar with movies like Taxi Driver and King of Comedy, Joker is going to seem absolutely groundbreaking in a world of superhero franchises and reboots. But if you know anything about gritty 70s/80s Scorsese-style street dramas, it's old hat. It progresses almost exactly as you'd expect. Not a scene in the film that's shocking or a reveal that's not expected, and I thought that was a bit unfortunate because I was hoping Phillips was going to take it to unfamiliar territory. I can't remember it exactly, but there's a saying that goes something like, 'an influence shouldn't be so obvious that it makes you wish you were watching that instead.' And while I was still entertained, I definitely felt that way about this movie.

I guess expecting something magical from the director of the Starsky and Hutch, and The Hangover films might have been asking too much. Todd Phillips did make a movie that ties well into the themes of this film; His first, a documentary on the filthy, disgusting, heroin using, feces throwing, heavily mentally disturbed punk musician G.G. Allin (Hated: GG Allin and the Murder Junkies), and we do see a little bit of Allin in Arthur Fleck, but thankfully (?) he never goes full Allin.


I think the most fascinating thing about the film for me was watching people bringing their children to the movie expecting a standard superhero flick and leaving confused and disappointed.


Some side notes: I think reading too much of the Joker mythology from the comics or other DC movies back into this film is a mistake. It seems to me that Phillips and Phoenix were less interested in making a comic book movie, and more interested in flipping expectations by creating an homage to the previously mentioned street dramas.

I suppose the audience can never be too sure, but I think the movie is pretty good at highlighting what is and isn't real. I don't think the final scene is too ambiguous. I think the implication is that he killed the new social worker in order to attempt an escape, which is why there's blood under his soles, and why he is then being chased by wards.

I suppose that's one way of looking at it, but I don't know if that was the intent of the film creators. Travis Bickle is someone we might empathize with at the beginning of the film, but by the end of the film, I think the audience is supposed to acknowledge that this guy has major issues. He's not like an ordinary person, he's a person who's completely snapped from reality. And I think the same is true of Arthur Fleck. We're not really suppose to empathize with him by the end of the movie.

[Adrift]

I agree with you that Joaquin Phoenix was terrific as the Joker. I also agree that it is a movie no child should see; I''m not even sure I should have seen it.

There is one part I didn't get and it was the letter he received in the mail. We couldn't read it all; just a few words.

What did it say? Who was it from?

The letter was one his mother wanted him to send to Thomas Wayne which explained that she and their son were suffering (implying that she thought that Arthur was Wayne's son), and asking for help. That seemed pretty hackneyed to me, as did the later explanation that the mother was delusional, so that it was all a lie (or was it). I didn't really care for that "twist" in the movie.

[KingsGambit]

There were a number of concerns raised on Reddit that the title character would be some sort of hero for incels, even with some people afraid of real life violence, and with some military official even warning soldiers who wanted to attend the movie. To be honest, I viewed these concerns as hysterical and completely unlikely. But do those of you who have seen the movie think that those in the incel subculture might identify with the title character?

[Adrift]

There were a number of concerns raised on Reddit that the title character would be some sort of hero for incels, even with some people afraid of real life violence, and with some military official even warning soldiers who wanted to attend the movie. To be honest, I viewed these concerns as hysterical and completely unlikely. But do those of you who have seen the movie think that those in the incel subculture might identify with the title character?

Yeah, I think that's possible. For some reason, certain villains and anti-heroes like the Joker (and Harley Quinn) tend to attract a certain...type. Usually the social misfit/outcast type who see themselves as the quirky (anti) hero of their internal head-canon, but everyone else sees as the slightly awkward kid who holds a stare for a few seconds past comfort. Oh, and Juggalo types. Maybe it's the clown thing, I don't know.

I didn't even think about it as an issue when I went to see the movie though. If Taxi Driver were released today, I think people would be saying the same thing. Maybe it wouldn't get the attention, because we seem to be a society obsessed with superhero kid stuff (I say that as a long time adult comic book collector), but it has many of the same themes, with an even more justified protagonist. The social climate today is so much different than it was back then, though. In many ways the world is a better safer place, and in other ways we've seemed to have grown soft, and society seems to be creating troubled people who feel trapped in their heads, and pushed to extremes. The media is part of that, as is the internet. A movie like Joker isn't going to create a person like that, but any film can exasperate a pre-existing condition. But no one is calling on a ban on Taxi Driver yet, so I have a hard time believing the hand wringing over Joker is justified.

[Christian3]

The letter was one his mother wanted him to send to Thomas Wayne which explained that she and their son were suffering (implying that she thought that Arthur was Wayne's son), and asking for help. That seemed pretty hackneyed to me, as did the later explanation that the mother was delusional, so that it was all a lie (or was it). I didn't really care for that "twist" in the movie.

But, it came in the mail to Joker???

[Adrift]

But, it came in the mail to Joker???

I don't recall him ever getting a letter. Every time he checked the box it was empty. He was given a letter to send to Thomas Wayne by his mother, but that's the only letter I recall him reading.

[Christian3]

I don't recall him ever getting a letter. Every time he checked the box it was empty. He was given a letter to send to Thomas Wayne by his mother, but that's the only letter I recall him reading.

I thought she said it came in the mail. It was in an envelope and he opened it.

[Adrift]

I thought she said it came in the mail. It was in an envelope and he opened it.

Yep, if I'm remembering correctly, that's the one she handed to him to be mailed. He opened the letter that she wanted him to mail to Thomas Wayne.

[Christian3]

Yep, if I'm remembering correctly, that's the one she handed to him to be mailed. He opened the letter that she wanted him to mail to Thomas Wayne.

OH, thanks.

[KingsGambit]

Russell Moore wrote an interesting op-ed about his refusal to see the movie. He said there were multiple reasons, but the main one he focused on was his disapproval of the anti-hero motif in movies. (Link: https://www.russellmoore.com/2019/10...e-joker-movie/ )

I rarely disagree with anything he says, but this time I'm going to. I don't think there's any reason viewers should be led to uncritically endorse all actions an anti-hero takes. Reality is usually a lot messier than "one person is clearly good, one person is clearly bad", and if not constructed in the manner it is, the film would not be able to address the issues the way Nick's review describes them (I haven't seen the movie, so I'm just going off his plot description).

[ReformedApologist]

In my view The Joker seems to symbolize Nihilism and the Existential crisis faced by both Nietzsche and Sartre.