Jump to content
IGNORED

Movie Debate #79: Joker


Reed Rothchild

Rate it  

25 members have voted

  1. 1. Rate based on your own personal preferences, NOT historical significance

    • 10/10 - One of your very favorite movies of all time. Top 10.
    • 9/10 - Killer fucking movie. Everyone should watch it.
    • 8/10 - Great movie. You like to recommend it.
    • 7/10 - Very good movie, but not quite great.
    • 6/10 - Pretty good. You might enjoy the occasional watch, or tune in if you happen to catch it on cable.
    • 5/10 - It's okay, but maybe not something you'll go out of your way to watch.
    • 4/10 - Meh. There's plenty of better alternatives to this.
      0
    • 3/10 - Not very good.
      0
    • 2/10 - Not your cup of tea at all. Some people might like this, but you are not one of them.
      0
    • 1/10 - Horrible in every way.
      0
    • 0/10 - The Citizen Kane of painful experiences. You'd rather shove an icepick in your retinas than watch this.
    • Never seen it, but you're interested.
    • Never seen it, never will.


Recommended Posts

Events Team · Posted
11 minutes ago, JamesRobot said:

5th best cinematic Joker portrayal.

Caesar Romero>Mark Hammill>Jack Nicholson>Jared Leto>Joaquin Phoenix>Heath Ledger

Yeah, I think if you're a fan of the more goofy, over the top takes of the Joker (As you appear to be, based on your ranking there) I think you'd be less likely to enjoy this film.

Ranking Jared Leto above Joaquin though? Now THAT is a hot take, hahaha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Events Team · Posted
2 hours ago, ZeldaFreak said:

Yeah, I think if you're a fan of the more goofy, over the top takes of the Joker (As you appear to be, based on your ranking there) I think you'd be less likely to enjoy this film.

Ranking Jared Leto above Joaquin though? Now THAT is a hot take, hahaha.

Above all, Joker needs to be funny.  Joaquin's portrayal, while well acted, was more piteous than funny.  I actually enjoyed Leto's sick sense of humor and thought he was one of the more redeeming qualities of Suicide SquadJoker is the better film though.

Another "hot take," both Ben Affleck and Jared Leto should've continued their roles in the DCU.  Batffleck was actually pretty great.  He's perfect as flip billionaire Bruce Wayne (and has the best bat suit since Adam West).  Bruce's public persona is an act and is always portrayed as too righteous.  He should be kind of a dick.  Will Arnett's Lego Batman Bruce Wayne is right on the money.

Edited by JamesRobot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Events Team · Posted
58 minutes ago, JamesRobot said:

Above all, Joker needs to be funny.  Joaquin's portrayal, while well acted, was more piteous than funny.  I actually enjoyed Leto's sick sense of humor and thought he was one of the more redeeming qualities of Suicide SquadJoker is the better film though.

Another "hot take," both Ben Affleck and Jared Leto should've continued their roles in the DCU.  Batffleck was actually pretty great.  He's perfect as flip billionaire Bruce Wayne (and has the best bat suit since Adam West).  Bruce's public persona is an act and is always portrayed as too righteous.  He should be kind of a dick.  Will Arnett's Lego Batman Bruce Wayne is right on the money.

Yeah, I can totally see that. Different strokes for different folks, there's appeal to either approach to the character. And I'd say that's one of the great things about the Joker being such a popular character, you've got so many different interpretations that there's always gonna be a little something for everyone. If you don't like one portrayal, you might like another.

My only real counterargument to that "Joker needs to be funny" point is that (spoilers ahead, if it wasn't clear)

Spoiler

You don't well and truly see the Joker until the moment he draws that smile on his face with his own blood. The whole movie is about Arthur's transition from... well, Arthur, to the Joker. He's almost there the moment you see him in his full outfit, but I'd argue the moment he draws that smile is when he fully embraces it. For a large portion of the movie, we're spectating Arthur, not the Joker as we know him. I guess you could say the title of the movie describes the punchline, not the movie as a whole.

I do agree on Ben Affleck though. He was a fantastic portrayal of Batman in his later years, although I am looking forward to seeing what The Batman brings to the table. (They're really running out of Batman movie titles, haha.)

Edited by ZeldaFreak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great movie, and I don't understand all the flak it gets. Might have been better if it wasn't presented as a "joker" movie, and I think drawing the Wayne family into the story does it absolutely no favors. The movie isn't about the Joker at all.

Still, adding just a tiny bit of colorful comic book flavor to any serious story about classicism can actually work pretty well in the movie format, and I think it does just about right in this one.
It does such a good job at portraying a subtly suppressed lower middle class it made my eyes all teary by the end when the riot broke out. But I've also seen that aspect of the movie kinda lost of people who may be too privileged to recognize that at all? It's not exactly a deep or complex movie, though, everything is pretty much on the wall, and I think that's fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...