Jump to content

Joker Trailer and Discussion Thread


Guest

Recommended Posts

LAPD Says No Credible Threats apparent for Joker Opening

 

Quote

In the wake of several mass shootings in Gilroy, CA; Dayton, OH, and El Paso, Texas, there’s plenty of concern surrounding the opening of Warner Bros.’ The Joker on Oct.  4, particularly as it’s poised to bring in a record amount of moviegoers for an October release.

 

Some sources in distribution and exhibition believe these fears are over-heightened, especially with the LAPD issuing a statement tonight that they don’t see any credible threats in the Los Angeles area from the pic’s opening. Industry sources also tell us that the FBI and Homeland Security do not foresee any looming threats currently for the Todd Phillips-directed DC origin movie about the crazed Batman villain. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RedSoxFan9 said:

 

 

Hoo boy... that's a really tone deaf defense. John Wick doesn't take itself seriously AT ALL. It's as much a videogame as a cartoon and leans into that. I haven't seen Joker but the film seems to take itself very seriously and from what I've read and heard from people who have seen it, it seems to portray The Joker as an anti-hero almost which is... interesting. Comparing his film to John Wick seems kinda desperate and disingenuous to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want Joker to be a good film, and from what I hear from those who actually watched it, it is. The rest doesn't matter. Idiots have been misinterpreting art for all of history, recent great examples being The Matrix and Fight Club. This movie will be released all over the world yet a potential shooting is only likely to happen in America. That's not the movie's fault, in the same way The Dark Knight (another film that also took itself pretty seriously) wasn't responsible for the Aurora, Colorado shooting and was a great movie separately. 

 

I mean, it looks like Joaquin Phoenix is playing his character from The Master, and that was basically a version of this movie, a "Citizen Kane for incels" and yet no one had any issue with that film, which was also about loneliness and not being able to connect with other human beings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My main issue with that "defense" is that it's kind of a cop-out. If what you are trying to say is that ultimately modern society creates men like The Joker then stand by that message and have faith that the audiences will "get" that and go along with you for the ride. Don't diminish your own film by comparing it to a live action cartoon and saying "hurr-durr, why aren't people upset about THIS movie?" It's disingenuous as I said before and ultimately insulting to the audience because it assumes that audiences can't discern the difference. If you want to make an adult, character driven movie based on a comic book character, then you have to be adult enough to take what comes at you in defense of that. Walking out of interviews that ask difficult questions and comparing your film to films that it has absolutely NOTHING in common with shows a lack of faith in your vision to me.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you released Taxi Driver today, I can't even imagine how people would interpret it, but it wouldn't be the film's fault. I don't expect Joker to be Taxi Driver, and certainly Phillips is no Scorsese, but I'm not going to waste time worrying about how terrible people will interpret a film that I haven't seen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

My main issue with that "defense" is that it's kind of a cop-out. If what you are trying to say is that ultimately modern society creates men like The Joker then stand by that message and have faith that the audiences will "get" that and go along with you for the ride. Don't diminish your own film by comparing it to a live action cartoon and saying "hurr-durr, why aren't people upset about THIS movie?" It's disingenuous as I said before and ultimately insulting to the audience because it assumes that audiences can't discern the difference. If you want to make an adult, character driven movie based on a comic book character, then you have to be adult enough to take what comes at you in defense of that. Walking out of interviews that ask difficult questions and comparing your film to films that it has absolutely NOTHING in common with shows a lack of faith in your vision to me.  

 

 

 

I'm not defending his defense, comparing Joker to John Wick is completely tone deaf, I agree. My post was just speaking more broadly about all this drama and controversy around the film in general. Let's all see it first before anyone jumps to any conclusions. Early reviews say it's pretty great. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was a good comparison. John Wick glorifies gun violence, there was plenty of that even shown in the trailers. A super hyper violent movie yet no one says anything.

I don’t think I have even seen a gun in the Joker trailers I have seen yet suddenly seeing the movie will make you want to go on a murdering spree.

 

Basically people are dumb and this whole situation is fucked up. We shouldn’t even be having this conversation unless Joker was some sort of propaganda movie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

I thought it was a good comparison. John Wick glorifies gun violence, there was plenty of that even shown in the trailers. A super hyper violent movie yet no one says anything.

I don’t think I have even seen a gun in the Joker trailers I have seen yet suddenly seeing the movie will make you want to go on a murdering spree.

 

Basically people are dumb and this whole situation is fucked up. We shouldn’t even be having this conversation unless Joker was some sort of propaganda movie. 

 

It's not a good comparison because the tone of each film is wildly different. I think there is a conversation to be had separately that John Wick's violence is certainly disturbing (intentionally so) - John Wick 3 might be my favorite John Wick and I've seen the most violent movies out there and I left that movie feeling exhausted by the oftentimes realistic violence (but loved the movie for it, in part).

 

But comparing the two is silly. Joker is a very different film. It's like saying: "people didn't have a problem with Mandy, but do over Joker". Yeah, that's because one's a horrific psychedelic revenge horror film and Joker is a (seemingly realistic, grounded) version of something very different. 

 

Either way, depiction isn't endorsement in art so the whole thing is stupid. :p 

 

I remember the big stink over Zero Dark Thirty "endorsing" torture and when you watch the movie it essentially does the opposite - the film is pretty clear torture doesn't really work, even if it does gain them a small tidbit of information at one point during the entire 2.5 hour film. Who knows what Joker says about anything until we see it? Early critics clearly didn't have problems with it and aren't they libtards who intentionally boost the reviews of films like The Last Jedi and Wonder Woman? They would be the most ready to dislike the film yet they didn't (same with Zero Dark Thirty). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The comparisons to John Wick are (assuming Joker ends up being what it appears to be in the trailers) dumb because almost 100% of the world building in John Wick movies establishes that just about everyone who engages in its violence is a willing participant in a world that goes out of its way to be separate from normal society. There are of course things to say about any protagonist who engages in mass shootings / mass murder as a means of achieving his ends. But shit, literally the whole hook in most of John Wick has been that John got out and would have stayed out if Theon didn't break one of the two rules that seems to govern their slice of the world.

 

Joker's angle seems to be, "what if a misunderstood, socially outcast, and mentally unstable white man engaged in wanton public violence because of those personality traits?" It's 2019, of course that's going to get more scrutiny than John Wick. Phillips's comparison is bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

It's not a good comparison because the tone of each film is wildly different.

 

But why are people saying this is going to incite violence. Is it purely from the tone?

I think most people think that it's related to batman, there was a shooting at a batman movie, joker is a bad guy who kills with guns (i guess) and that's about it. You're a smart guy so you'll say this and that but people are dumb and I think they're just saying, "Oh guns, now other people will copycat this character"

Keep in mind that John Wick came out before the string of mass shootings in Texas and Ohio. It's possible if John Wick was released today people would be worried about the gun violence in the movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

The comparisons to John Wick are (assuming Joker ends up being what it appears to be in the trailers) dumb because almost 100% of the world building in John Wick movies establishes that just about everyone who engages in its violence is a willing participant in a world that goes out of its way to be separate from normal society. There are of course things to say about any protagonist who engages in mass shootings / mass murder as a means of achieving his ends. But shit, literally the whole hook in most of John Wick has been that John got out and would have stayed out if Theon didn't break one of the two rules that seems to govern their slice of the world.

 

Joker's angle seems to be, "what if a misunderstood, socially outcast, and mentally unstable white man engaged in wanton public violence because of those personality traits?" It's 2019, of course that's going to get more scrutiny than John Wick. Phillips's comparison is bad.

 

That's the thing right? The most redemptive characters in the entire John Wick franchise are the dogs. Everyone else has done horrible stuff and everything everyone does is horrible because they're all horrible people that make a living off murder. John Wick uses that horrible people angle to allow its protagonist to wantonly go on a murder spree. You empathize with John because all of these individual people are ugly. His choices are kill or be killed when he's rather just be at home, watching TV.

 

If the Joker is what the trailers make it out to be, and I have yet to hear anyone dispute that, we're looking at a movie that paints society as ugly. The big question then is if the movie asks us to empathize with a man that attacks the ugly society by murdering its innocent victims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

But why are people saying this is going to incite violence. Is it purely from the tone?

I think most people think that it's related to batman, there was a shooting at a batman movie, joker is a bad guy who kills with guns (i guess) and that's about it. You're a smart guy so you'll say this and that but people are dumb and I think they're just saying, "Oh guns, now other people will copycat this character"

Keep in mind that John Wick came out before the string of mass shootings in Texas and Ohio. It's possible if John Wick was released today people would be worried about the gun violence in the movie.

 

People are worried about the message because many of our current spate of mass shootings were perpetrated by men that feel they were either shunned or unhappy with society...which is very close to what Joker is preaching. It has absolutely nothing to do with the violence of the film. Nobody is going to complain about the upcoming Saw reboot. Nobody complained about John Wick 3 or Brightburn or Child's Play or It 2 or Us or whatever. This is purely a message problem. Todd Phillips comparing his movie to John Wick is about as tone deaf as it comes in that regard.

 

I hope this movie is good, even if I think the idea of a Joker origin movie is weird, right from conception. I just totally get people's uneasiness with the subject matter in 2019.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

People are worried about the message because many of our current spate of mass shootings were perpetrated by men that feel they were either shunned or unhappy with society...which is very close to what Joker is preaching.

 

But the film doesn’t preach it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

But the film doesn’t preach it.

 

And that's perfectly fine. That's why I said the messaging was tone deaf. Most people with concerns are going off trailers and what they know of Joker as a character. If Todd Philips had come out and said "people should watch the movie first to really understand what I'm trying to say here". That would be one thing. Instead, he's leaning on "but look at how violent John Wick is", which is entirely not the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

But why are people saying this is going to incite violence. Is it purely from the tone?

I think most people think that it's related to batman, there was a shooting at a batman movie, joker is a bad guy who kills with guns (i guess) and that's about it. You're a smart guy so you'll say this and that but people are dumb and I think they're just saying, "Oh guns, now other people will copycat this character"

Keep in mind that John Wick came out before the string of mass shootings in Texas and Ohio. It's possible if John Wick was released today people would be worried about the gun violence in the movie.

 

I think the worry is the tone and the way people are assuming the film will play out is putting alt-right/incel adult white men as being dealt a bad hand in life and is thus justified to rage against society - which is true of a lot of alt-right/incel adult white men in real life, and people are worried the film will already play into a dangerous narrative this group of people already believes and will inspire them to action.

 

I doubt the film endorses the Joker ultimately, but people are worried the film will be misinterpreted, like The Matrix (Columbine) and Fight Club (people think Tyler Durden is the hero of the film one should emulate 100%). I say make art - this concern may be real but that's not the film's fault one way or the other. I plan to judge the film on its own merits as a movie. 

 

43 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

People are worried about the message because many of our current spate of mass shootings were perpetrated by men that feel they were either shunned or unhappy with society...which is very close to what Joker is preaching. It has absolutely nothing to do with the violence of the film. Nobody is going to complain about the upcoming Saw reboot. Nobody complained about John Wick 3 or Brightburn or Child's Play or It 2 or Us or whatever. This is purely a message problem. Todd Phillips comparing his movie to John Wick is about as tone deaf as it comes in that regard.

 

I hope this movie is good, even if I think the idea of a Joker origin movie is weird, right from conception. I just totally get people's uneasiness with the subject matter in 2019.

 

This is partly the concern, exactly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

And that's perfectly fine. That's why I said the messaging was tone deaf. Most people with concerns are going off trailers and what they know of Joker as a character. If Todd Philips had come out and said "people should watch the movie first to really understand what I'm trying to say here". That would be one thing. Instead, he's leaning on "but look at how violent John Wick is", which is entirely not the point.

EXACTLY.

 

1 hour ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

That's the thing right? The most redemptive characters in the entire John Wick franchise are the dogs. Everyone else has done horrible stuff and everything everyone does is horrible because they're all horrible people that make a living off murder. John Wick uses that horrible people angle to allow its protagonist to wantonly go on a murder spree. You empathize with John because all of these individual people are ugly. His choices are kill or be killed when he's rather just be at home, watching TV.

 

If the Joker is what the trailers make it out to be, and I have yet to hear anyone dispute that, we're looking at a movie that paints society as ugly. The big question then is if the movie asks us to empathize with a man that attacks the ugly society by murdering its innocent victims.

 

Not only that, but that society creates men like The Joker. That's why the whole premise of a Joker movie is weird to me without Batman to balance out his point of view. The whole thing that makes The Joker interesting as a character is that he's the polar opposite to Batman and represents not only everything that Batman is fighting against, but everything that Batman himself could become. It's why currently in the comics Batman's deadliest enemy is no longer The Joker but The Batman-Who-Laughs, an evil Bruce Wayne from another reality who has all of Batman's training, resourcefulness and drive, but with The Joker's insanity. I'm curious to see who will be Joker's moral and philosophical opposite in this film... or if anyone even fills that role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

It's not a good comparison because the tone of each film is wildly different. I think there is a conversation to be had separately that John Wick's violence is certainly disturbing (intentionally so) - John Wick 3 might be my favorite John Wick and I've seen the most violent movies out there and I left that movie feeling exhausted by the oftentimes realistic violence (but loved the movie for it, in part).

 

But comparing the two is silly. Joker is a very different film. It's like saying: "people didn't have a problem with Mandy, but do over Joker". Yeah, that's because one's a horrific psychedelic revenge horror film and Joker is a (seemingly realistic, grounded) version of something very different. 

 

Either way, depiction isn't endorsement in art so the whole thing is stupid. :p 

 

I remember the big stink over Zero Dark Thirty "endorsing" torture and when you watch the movie it essentially does the opposite - the film is pretty clear torture doesn't really work, even if it does gain them a small tidbit of information at one point during the entire 2.5 hour film. Who knows what Joker says about anything until we see it? Early critics clearly didn't have problems with it and aren't they libtards who intentionally boost the reviews of films like The Last Jedi and Wonder Woman? They would be the most ready to dislike the film yet they didn't (same with Zero Dark Thirty). 

 

This is the key point and he should be brave enough to stand by that message, i agree 100%. If the Joker massacres a whole audience full of people (something that would be completely in character for him to do) it doesn't mean Phillips thinks that's something someone should do. He should trust that the audience knows that and lean on that. Not offering weak straw man defenses of his film. I've heard it's good too but I've also heard that it's somewhat muddled and confused by what its trying to ultimately say. Hearing stuff like this from Phillips lends credence to that...that said, I fully intend to see the movie with an open mind and make my own judgement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said:

 

This is the key point and he should be brave enough to stand by that message, i agree 100%. If the Joker massacres a whole audience full of people (something that would be completely in character for him to do) it doesn't mean Phillips thinks that's something someone should do. He should trust that the audience knows that and lean on that. Not offering weak straw man defenses of his film. I've heard it's good too but I've also heard that it's somewhat muddled and confused by what its trying to ultimately say. Hearing stuff like this from Phillips lends credence to that...that said, I fully intend to see the movie with an open mind and make my own judgement. 

 

Yeah, I think WB realizes that he's not doing a very good job of explaining himself or selling this movie..

 

https://variety.com/2019/film/news/joker-premiere-red-carpet-journalists-1203352046/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The press tour to this movie has been a parade of people stepping up to the plate of a tee ball game and whiffing at the air.  Not since the Sex and the City movies has there been a group of people so incapable of reading the cultural moment, and it's weird to see the people who made this thing so confused by completely predictable questions.  If the movie ends up being good, it will be like a hurricane blowing through a junkyard and accidentally assembling a cherry '67 Nova.  

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2019 at 9:36 PM, LazyPiranha said:

The press tour to this movie has been a parade of people stepping up to the plate of a tee ball game and whiffing at the air.  Not since the Sex and the City movies has there been a group of people so incapable of reading the cultural moment, and it's weird to see the people who made this thing so confused by completely predictable questions.  If the movie ends up being good, it will be like a hurricane blowing through a junkyard and accidentally assembling a cherry '67 Nova.  

 

😂 that’s an amazing analogy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TwinIon said:

While the online conversation around this movie has been bizzare and poorly handled, I don't think it's going to amount to much. 

 

It's currently tracking for an October record $82M debut, which I don't doubt at all. After winning Venice, I expect that even after all the op-eds, it's going to end up with a good, if not great RT score.

 

I just saw that it's tracking for a 155 million debut worldwide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2019 at 3:08 PM, skillzdadirecta said:

 

This is the key point and he should be brave enough to stand by that message, i agree 100%. If the Joker massacres a whole audience full of people (something that would be completely in character for him to do) it doesn't mean Phillips thinks that's something someone should do. He should trust that the audience knows that and lean on that. Not offering weak straw man defenses of his film. I've heard it's good too but I've also heard that it's somewhat muddled and confused by what its trying to ultimately say. Hearing stuff like this from Phillips lends credence to that...that said, I fully intend to see the movie with an open mind and make my own judgement. 

I don't even think he needs to be brave, he just needs to have a clear vision, which if it truly is muddled and confused may just simply not be the case and here he is telling you. 

 

Taxi Driver, seeing how it's come up a few times, was accused of being racist by quite a few critics upon release apparently and Scorsese was quick to shoot it down simply by explaining exactly what you and GreatOne said, that the film depicts the viewpoint of someone who among other things harbors racist paranoia. It would've been that simple. 

 

PS: Just to be clear, emphasis in that first sentence is on may. I don't know anything but what I read here about this flick and couldn't care less about seeing it but find the conversation around it interesting. In short, I don't have an opinion on the potential quality of his directing and/or film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd Phillips has always been an underrated director. I always felt he could direct a potentially very good Joker film after he surprised me with War Dogs, which was much more dramatic material from him. 

 

But even with the Hangover films there's a mean streak in Todd Phillips and the way his films have gotten increasingly well shot indicates to me a once comedic director becoming something more, like with Adam McKay and The Big Short and Vice. 

 

I essentially expect Scorsese-lite: particularly a combination of Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy. If it's better than that I'll be pretty impressed. 

 

Interesting tidbit: the guy Todd Phillips co-wrote the film with, Scott Silver, his main previous writing credits are that he wrote biopic 8 Mile and co-wrote biopics The Fighter and The Finest Hours. This alone reveals Todd Phillips' intentions from the start as something akin to a grounded biopic feel more than anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...