Not high art, but refreshing to see actual acting in a comic book movie.
Especially after they made an entire island of warrior women do Israeli accents just to paper over the fact that their lead actress can't fake a different one.
This is a community for entertainment industry news and general discussion about movies and TV shows.
Rules:
Not high art, but refreshing to see actual acting in a comic book movie.
Especially after they made an entire island of warrior women do Israeli accents just to paper over the fact that their lead actress can't fake a different one.
So... You've seen Scarface, then? Or Snatch? π€·πΌββοΈπ€£
What is this supposed to mean relevant to the comment you're responding to?
Specifically, Pacino's "Cuban" accent was so bad that actual Cuban cast members were trained to mimic it just to help it be less glaring. Additionally, Pitt's "pikey" was so nonsensical, the other actors couldn't even begin to approximate it and the disconnect is visible onscreen in their reaction time to his lines.
and the disconnect is visible onscreen in their reaction time to his lines.
I thought that was intentional, like part of his character, that he speaks nonsensically.
Heβs saying that his bar for high art is higher than βother comic book moviesβ but still pretty low.
To use the metaphor from the meme, heβs swam in a lake, but still not the ocean.
I just didn't watch this movie for years because I was thinking just like the reviewer here. This year I finally watched it and... it was ok. The biggest reason to see it was because I really like Joaquin Phoenix and I wanted to see the movie from which he won his Oscar.
There's a lot of things in his Joker performance worth a revisit: how he talks, and how he moves, is really unique and definitely worth the victory. I just wish he would've got his Oscar from The Master, which for me is a groundbreaking movie and has one of the best scenes of all time with Joaquin and Philip Seymour Hoffman in the jail cell.
But he got it from the Joker, and I'm glad he got the recognition.
Joaquin carried the fuck out of Joker and his performance, as usual, was spectacular. Unfortunately, for me at least, that's where the merits of the film ended. I get that it resonated with a lot of people so maybe I am just not in the right headspace to truly appreciate the message, but ultimately I share the thoughts of the reviewer in the OP on this one.
It was a Taxi Driver remake that licensed a DC character instead of paying Scorsese. It was solidly okay.
But Phoenix 100% earned the Oscar with it.
Good movie IMO, solid 7/10.
Worth the watch then? Looking to add some new movies to my collection
Yes, worth the watch.
Just keep expectations neutral, this one is also unique in that it focuses more on decline of society, dark movie.
It's a suspenseful movie showing miserable things. If that's your thing then it's worth the watch.
It is Taxi Driver set in the DC universe.
Maybe for the first half, but their character development diverges at the end. Travis Bickle attempted to do something good, however misplaced, but the joker just wanted to watch the world burn.
The way I see it, Travis thinks he's doing something good, and succeeds in becoming a 'hero' purely by accident.
For me, I thought it was one of the greatest films Iβve ever seen in my life.
I had someone tell me that, and was incredibly let down. Maybe I just didn't get it.
I mean no offense to the previous poster but I feel like it was fine. A lot of people talked about Joaquin Phoenix being amazing but I felt like they just haven't seen his amazing performances haha.
Thatβs fair, Iβd argue that a viewer being able to closely relate to the protagonist or a character in the film is what changes their view of the film.
For example, Iβve heard a lot of people love the Black Panther movie and the antagonist. I personally never liked the movie, nor relate to the movie at all, but I can understand someone relating to being an oppressed minority in American urban cities and the desire to rise up.
I didn't relate to anyone in the movie (that I can remember) and I still loved it.
I really enjoyed it because of the immersion. I just thought it was good story telling and excellent acting.
I didn't really take the movie to have any deeper meaning. To me it was the telling of one version of the joker's origin story, one that is more grounded and realistic.
I thought it was pretty good for a King of Comedy/Taxi Driver remake
I saw it in the theater and glad I did. What I saw on the screen was a reflection of my own mental problems. A lot of people didn't see themselves up there, and that's totally cool. But it's pretty disingenuous to wave the movie off like it had zero meaning.
And that werewolf scene is classic cinema.
Why does every piece of media need to be the deepest thing ever? Or why do we have to assume media is trying to be? This to me sounds like when people call music pretentious simply because it's a combination of something they don't like and also not like things normally on the radio. It's even weirder in a case like this when the movie is a blockbuster film and not some indie joint.
In the case of this movie a lot of people were saying it was an important and deep move. So this review is more a reaction the tremendous over hype joker got from some groups of people.
You guys are crazy! Joker is a nuanced and thoughtful study on the ripple effects of sustained trauma and Joaquin Phoenix's performance is perhaps the best of his carrier. No, wait, sorry I was thinking of "You Were Never Really Here" (2017)
Anybody notice the Batman villain as social anxiety trend? Leger's Joker channeled Islamic terrorists, Phoenix's channeled lone wolf shooters, while Dano's Riddler was an incel.
Edit: i made a change
The truly outstanding thing about Joker was the OST by Hildur GuΓ°nadΓ³ttir. Other than that, it was...fine.
I like the movie a lot π€·ββοΈ