Movie Debate #79: Joker

[Reed Rothchild | 9,588]

 

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

I would say an easy 9 for me. Really solid movie overall, and a very interesting take on the many, many different stories about the origins of the Joker. And they do the right thing of having an unreliable narrator, which I would argue is a borderline requirement for anyone attempting to tell an origin story for the Joker. They do a fantastic job of legitimately making you feel empathy and, to a certain extent, almost rooting for someone who is, objectively, an absolutely horrid person. And, without spoiling anything in case anyone hasn't seen it, the ending has multiple strokes of genius I think.

Normally I don't always agree with the actual descriptions of the ratings in polls like this. I might give a movie a 9 but not necessarily say everyone should watch it, for instance, but I would say this movie was good enough in my eyes that I absolutely would recommend anyone to watch it if they haven't.

I was very glad to see it in theaters, one of the last I saw in theaters actually before COVID. I think it was this, The Lighthouse, 1917, and then Parasite just before COVID hit, and I thoroughly enjoyed all four movies. 2019 up to early 2020, damn good time for movies.

[TDIRunner | 2,777]

Still haven't gotten around to seeing it, but I absolutely want to.  

[Jeevan | 8,948]

0/10, horrible in every way!  No kidding either, check the vote.  Did not enjoy the movie at all.

[Californication | 1,490]

23 minutes ago, ZeldaFreak said:

 I think it was this, The Lighthouse, 1917, and then Parasite just before COVID hit, and I thoroughly enjoyed all four movies. 2019 up to early 2020, damn good time for movies.

Three of those will def. be classics. I thought 1917 was kind of silly. 

[Jeevan | 8,948]

Honestly, @ZeldaFreak, since you wanna roll thine eyes at me, the incessant laughing was so FUCKING annoying, I honestly couldn't get passed it!   

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

19 minutes ago, Californication said:

Three of those will def. be classics. I thought 1917 was kind of silly. 

I loved 1917. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on it, and why you perceived it as "silly" in particular, but I don't want to immediately derail what this thread is about, haha.

Either way, even if you didn't personally enjoy it, I do think 1917 is going to be remembered years down the line. And the other three are of course all going to be classics in their respective genres for sure, no objections there.

[Jeevan | 8,948]

I'll tell ya another secret too........My wife likes most movies, shitty or not, and she hated this one as well   Finally, something we could agree on

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

Just now, Jeevan said:

Honestly, @ZeldaFreak, since you wanna roll thine eyes at me, the incessant laughing was so FUCKING annoying, I honestly couldn't get passed it!   

I have a feeling you wouldn't be a good therapist, let's put it that way, hahaha. Perhaps you need to work on your empathy skills a bit

Also, it was partially due to you literally giving it a 0/10. Even if you didn't personally enjoy it, I have a hard time believing you would honestly rank it a 0/10. Honestly, even the fact that technically it's well made should at least make it deserving of a 1/10. In my eyes, a 0/10 is reserved for movies like Troll 2 and The Room (Although The Room is a 10/10 for entirely different reasons, hahaha.)

[Jeevan | 8,948]

Just now, ZeldaFreak said:

I have a feeling you wouldn't be a good therapist, let's put it that way, hahaha. Perhaps you need to work on your empathy skills a bit

Also, it was partially due to you literally giving it a 0/10. Even if you didn't personally enjoy it, I have a hard time believing you would honestly rank it a 0/10. Honestly, even the fact that technically it's well made should at least make it deserving of a 1/10. In my eyes, a 0/10 is reserved for movies like Troll 2 and The Room (Although The Room is a 10/10 for entirely different reasons, hahaha.)

Na, if anything this movie deserved a -5/10

Like seriously, did not like it in the least........

You'd rather shove an icepick in your retinas than watch this. <--- This is light in comparison as to what i would do to myself if i had to watch it again.  

I seriously gave it a shot and watched the whole movie too.  Wish I could get that time back.......

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

Just now, Jeevan said:

Na, if anything this movie deserved a -5/10

Like seriously, did not like it in the least........

You'd rather shove an icepick in your retinas than watch this. <--- This is light in comparison as to what i would do to myself if i had to watch it again.  

I seriously gave it a shot and watched the whole movie too.  Wish I could get that time back.......

OK well then you just have bad taste in movies my guy, what can I say

Putting myself in your shoes (and not over-exaggerating everything to an extreme degree) if I honestly just hated every second of watching this movie... the colors were done very well, the cinematography was excellent, the music was very well done... all these things in mind, I would at least give it a 2 or 3/10, since I could recognize these things about the movie that are objectively done well, even if I personally hated the movie as a whole.

A 0/10 would imply it had literally no redeeming qualities, and I don't care about how much you didn't personally enjoy it, saying the movie has literally nothing good about it is objectively wrong I'd be willing to argue. As I said, on a technical level it is incredibly well made.

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

Also, I will quickly add in regards to the laughter... what were you honestly expecting going in to a movie titled "Joker"?

Just saying, hahaha.

[Jeevan | 8,948]

1 minute ago, ZeldaFreak said:

OK well then you just have bad taste in movies my guy, what can I say

Putting myself in your shoes (and not over-exaggerating everything to an extreme degree) if I honestly just hated every second of watching this movie... the colors were done very well, the cinematography was excellent, the music was very well done... all these things in mind, I would at least give it a 2 or 3/10, since I could recognize these things about the movie that are objectively done well, even if I personally hated the movie as a whole.

A 0/10 would imply it had literally no redeeming qualities, and I don't care about how much you didn't personally enjoy it, saying the movie has literally nothing good about it is objectively wrong I'd be willing to argue. As I said, on a technical level it is incredibly well made.

Refuting thine opinion

It had ZERO redeeming qualities!

I dont know man, I don't look at movies like you I guess.  If it is not enjoyable, who gives a crap if it was a technical marvel.  Just my thoughts.  If i didnt enjoy the movie, I don't care how well it is done because it all goes out the window the second I start hating it.  

I don't watch a movie to enjoy the colors, or the cinematography, I watch a movie to be entertained.  I had the same conversation with a co worker, who is the one who tricked me into wasting my time watching it btw, and he was the same as you.  Said it was so technically done, etc.  But what is the point if you don't enjoy it?

[Jeevan | 8,948]

1 minute ago, ZeldaFreak said:

Also, I will quickly add in regards to the laughter... what were you honestly expecting going in to a movie titled "Joker"?

Just saying, hahaha.

Jack Nicholson wasn't constantly laughing.......

[Brickman | 4,017]

Already an interesting debate has unfolded!

I haven't seen it but I will say that I can believe someone giving a movie a 0 simply for the fact that the reading for 0 is exactly how I felt watching Citizen Kane, it's like Reed was reading my mind. That movie is technically beautiful, won awards, seen as the best movie ever (bullshit) etc. etc. but I seriously would rather shove an ice pick into my retinas haha.:

"The Citizen Kane of painful experiences. You'd rather shove an icepick in your retinas than watch this."

 

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

8 minutes ago, Jeevan said:

Refuting thine opinion

It had ZERO redeeming qualities!

I dont know man, I don't look at movies like you I guess.  If it is not enjoyable, who gives a crap if it was a technical marvel.  Just my thoughts.  If i didnt enjoy the movie, I don't care how well it is done because it all goes out the window the second I start hating it.  

I don't watch a movie to enjoy the colors, or the cinematography, I watch a movie to be entertained.  I had the same conversation with a co worker, who is the one who tricked me into wasting my time watching it btw, and he was the same as you.  Said it was so technically done, etc.  But what is the point if you don't enjoy it?

Well the point I'm trying to make is... it seems like your thought process is, if it isn't above a 5 out of 10, it's a zero out of ten. It seems like you kind of skipped 1 through 4 there and went straight to zero, despite the fact that it seems like the main criticism you had of the movie is you found the laughter annoying, which is only one aspect of the film.

[Jeevan | 8,948]

1 minute ago, ZeldaFreak said:

Well the point I'm trying to make is... it seems like your thought process is, if it isn't above a 5 out of 10, it's a zero out of ten. It seems like you kind of skipped 1 through 4 there and went straight to zero, despite the fact that it seems like the main criticism you had of the movie is you found the laughter annoying, which is only one aspect of the film.

I didn't have a reason to stop at 1-4, the only reason I stopped at 0 is because it is the lowest I could give it

You know me though, the only good comic book movie is the one that wasn't made   

But ya, anyway, my opinion is this movie was honestly the worst movie I have seen ever.  I would rate it with the twilight movies, but I can't rate them as I have never seen them

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

9 minutes ago, Jeevan said:

Jack Nicholson wasn't constantly laughing.......

Neither was Joaquin Phoenix after fully completing his transformation, you'll notice

OK, well I'll get in to some spoilers here to facilitate this discussion, so avert your eyes if you haven't seen the film:

Spoiler

You'll notice that, in the beginning and middle of the film, Joaquin's laughter is forced upon him due to his condition (which is a totally real condition, by the way, portrayed very close to reality in the film itself) but, as the film goes on, and particularly after the scene in which he shoots Murray... he starts genuinely laughing. Immediately after he shoots Murray is the first, honest to god time you hear him laugh without it being forced upon him by his condition. I would argue that's the exact moment he fully embraces the whole "Joker" persona. After that, if memory serves, the only other time he laughs is in the back of the police car, and it's barely even audible. But again, genuine laughter rather than it being forced upon him.

I'm not trying to change your opinion on the film by the way, I know I won't, I just enjoy discussions like this with polar opposite opinions on things, and since you're a good bud of mine, I feel more comfortable having these discussions

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

3 minutes ago, Jeevan said:

But ya, anyway, my opinion is this movie was honestly the worst movie I have seen ever.

You have not seen enough movies, hahaha. I could learn ya' a thing or two about bad movies.

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

9 minutes ago, Shmup said:

Already an interesting debate has unfolded!

I haven't seen it but I will say that I can believe someone giving a movie a 0 simply for the fact that the reading for 0 is exactly how I felt watching Citizen Kane, it's like Reed was reading my mind. That movie is technically beautiful, won awards, seen as the best movie ever (bullshit) etc. etc. but I seriously would rather shove an ice pick into my retinas haha.:

"The Citizen Kane of painful experiences. You'd rather shove an icepick in your retinas than watch this."

 

Like I said, me and Jeevan know each other fairly well, so that's why I'm OK with having this discussion with him, although we have briefly talked about our individual thoughts on the film before. That explains some of my jabs at him, I wouldn't actually do that if I was having this same discussion with you, for instance, haha.

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

21 minutes ago, Jeevan said:

Jack Nicholson wasn't constantly laughing.......

Oh yeah, and another counterpoint to this: That film was called Batman, not Joker

Also to be fair, he definitely has his fair share of laughing fits in that movie as well.

[Californication | 1,490]

11 minutes ago, Jeevan said:

You know me though, the only good comic book movie is the one that wasn't made   

This one plays less like a comic book movie and more like social commentary like the Watchmen.

SPOILERS

Spoiler

You seriously didn't like the part where Joker kills his old co-worker and the audience is waiting to see if he kills the little person.

And then the irony of when the little person couldn't reach the lock to escape. As if to say even now, your limited height is going to shape the end of your life as it has shaped your whole life. Meaning for a split second every decision this guy made is irrelevant; whether he was a good person, whether he took care of his parents, etc. all of it is irrelevant because life randomly decided that he would be short. But then Joker remembers the little person was kind. And the decisions and character of the little person do matter his decisions did have power because Joker lets him live. Life has meaning, not intrisically, but through societal relationships.

 

Edited July 19, 2021 by Californication

[Jeevan | 8,948]

4 minutes ago, ZeldaFreak said:

Oh yeah, and another counterpoint to this: That film was called Batman, not Joker

I haven't seen the joker in the batman returns, but that doesn't mean that he can't laugh etc. in the original batman movies from the 90s........It doesn't matter what it is called because of the fact that he was the main villain, so it was about 50% about him........or at least iirc.

3 minutes ago, Californication said:

This one plays less like a comic book movie and more like social commentary like the Watchmen.

  Reveal hidden contents

You seriously didn't like the part where Joker kills his old co-worker and the audience is waiting to see if he kills the little person.

And then the irony of when the little person couldn't reach the lock to escape. As if to say even now, your limited height is going to shape the end of your life as it has shaped your whole life. Meaning for a split second every decision this guy made is irrelevant; whether he was a good person, whether he took care of his parents, etc. all of it is irrelevant because life randomly decided that he would be short. But then Joker remembers the little person was kind. And the decisions and character of the little person do matter his decisions did have power because Joker lets him live. Life has meaning, not intrisically, but through societal relationships.

 

Maybe, but I don't know what the watchmen is........Also, my buddy told me this was a remake of a movie that was not about the comic world.......I honestly don't know but I guess it was

also to your hidden comment, meh

[DefaultGen | 5,436]

9/10. I will take comic book movies that rip off classic films over green screens and explosions 10/10 times.

One thing that made me cringe was when it’s revealed

Spoiler

Arthur and Sophie’s relationship is imaginary

they play a little Saw montage to make it crystal clear for like 2 minutes longer than they need to because it’s a movie for dummies. But I still love it. 

Edited July 19, 2021 by DefaultGen

[ZeldaFreak | 3,619]

3 minutes ago, DefaultGen said:

they play a little Saw montage to make it crystal clear for like 2 minutes longer than they need to because it’s a movie for dummies. But I still love it. 

Hello, I'm one of those dummies that needed to have it spelled out for me to get it, hahaha.

In my defense, I was very tired when we saw it in theaters.