A revisionist history musical co-written by Roger Avery about how J6 was a friendly picnic where a bunch of patriots got tricked into insurrection by the FBI
I love how Tarantino is ridiculously in love with all aspects of film, he has to be one of the most passionate, knowledgeable, skillful, and perceptive artists. It's always awesome to see someone who lives and breathes everything about their field of art.
Not to be reductive toward Mr Tarantino, but it really sounds (especially around the end of this clip) like he enjoyed it because it was deliberately bad in a lot of ways to spite its audience, and he found that more interesting than a bad film that's just bad and has nothing to say. He was laughing at the dark scenes because he innately understood this was not really a movie anymore, it was Todd Philips having one big expensive meltdown about how much he hates all the kinds of people who liked the first film or gained any insight from it.
He probably has a hard time being critical of many films Since he is catalogging what worked over what didn't work. And can see the value in whatever the film maker was doing, or reaching for. Very constructive and very seasoned.
I bet your opinion would be different if all this noise wasn’t going on. The movie was NOT bad. People don’t like it because other people don’t like it. Perception becomes reality for the weak minded. Not calling you weak minded but I feel that’s the majority of the people on this “train”.
@@JamesBriar-x7t I'm as big a comic book nerd as they get, and I truly appreciated the film for what it was- a study in madness & toxicity sung in three acts. I grew up on 1970s Soft Rock/Lite FM songs and variety shows so they all resonated with me. Have people become so infantile that if they don't get their superhero v. supervillain movie they just turn off their brains and stomp their feet?
Everyone said it sucked, so I didn't watch it. Then I heard the beginning of this video and, before having it be ruined for me, I said "Ok, if it's arguably good, I'm going to give it a chance" and; I really liked it. It's a really good movie. I understand the point of the singing (obviously I heard there was a lot, so I was ready for it). Everything that Arthur did and what happened to him MADE SENSE. It was good. I think people were upset he wasn't a big anti-hero. He was a weak man, and the plight and redemptive quality of the first film is not at all negated by this film. In fact, the way the world stayed harsh and dim is exactly the point
As a sequel it did not live up to the bar set by the first as it's own thing it is too busy finishing off aurthor's final chapter to be a standalone movie of any other character Over all it is a mid film no where near as bad as people claim it is but not good on it's own or as a sequel imo it was likely setting up another sequel besides this film, but that won't happen now bc it bombed so bad but I think this movie would be looked at differently if there was a harly movie to prop it up more, or a son of joker as a proper villian of batman movie, or both imo it is at best mid 6/10 is the most I would give it and that is mostly bc of the performances, mostly the gary character stole the spolight in his court testimony scene over all it was just predicatable and depressing as a gritty and realistic final chapter for aurthor but I agree I think a lot of people went in with the expectation that it would be a bonnie and clyde tragic vigilante romance that is not this film and imo that would also be predictable but more action oriented when they anounced it was a musical I knew it would not be that though...so I was not disapointed in my head canon this is a ledger's joker prequel, and harly had aurthor killed so she could raise THE joker and she never wanted the son to see what his father really was
I was going to skip bc I knew essentially what it would be and I don't like musicals but I had to see what the fuss was so I skipped through the musical numbers imo if you can imagine how aurthor's story would play out irl, then you can skip this film if you liked the first and nothing else is on and you don't mind musicals or can skip them, it is worth watching for a few other things, but not a necessary viewing as author's story
Wow. That's good to read. Loved it the first time, I love the dialogue between the films and what it tells about how we make martyrs and forget about them as we just use them as cathartic projections of ourselves etc. Anyway. I'm sad that in a way people who loved it are often presented like stupid ones who really dont get what cinema is about lol.
@@acon2211 I feel like aurthor didn't even get to be a martyr in this movie that role goes more deservedly to the young prisoner that idolized him as joker
@@binoched9302As someone who likes musicals. Why did they make it a terrible one? Why did they opt for not making the singing good or have songs you wanna listen to?
I liked it a lot. It's hard to deny the artistry on the moment-to-moment basis of the film (Joachim is beyond hilarious in some insanely unhinged scenes). I believe it'll be retroactively viewed as a great film a decade from now, like Wind Waker is for Zelda
I actually totally agree with tarantino, which is a rarity. I think most critiques just reveal the fact that viewers are more interested in seeing what they want to see, then they are curious about what a creator wants to create. I hear two critics saying I was bored, and I needed more action, and it wasn't what I wanted. I hear tarantino say, take it for what it is and try to experience it the way it was intended. I could not agree more.
Def agree with you on that. People wanted classic Joker and Harley, but meanwhile… these films were NEVER about comics books. And the majority were so hung up on that fact they couldnt appreciate what the creator set out to do as you said.
If I go out of my way to craft a pile oh shit, and I perfectly execute my goal, with little hairs and everything…. Have I made something beautiful? You and Quentin would be staring at that shit with tears running down your face lol
Hideo Kojima and Quentin Tarantino, two of the most famous people that are known to be a cinephile and had watched god knows how many movies, liking Joker 2 is enough to convince me to watch it.
@@54032Zepol of course not, but having watched, say, 2000 movies is arguably a better indicator for a certain development of taste than a pool of 20 movies - as your horizon widens, your capability to differentiate certain qualities and patterns hopefully develops simultaneously. obviously it can't necessarily sharpen your mind to read between the lines and to capture every interesting and profound detail of a piece of art though.
Very sad that the general audience will probably never realize how much of a masterpiece joker 2 is. And as much as people hate it, they wont understand the hypocrisy and how much they prove todd’s point. “Its entertainment”. And he made art
The people who are commenting .... this is the majority. Sadly. No brain. Disturbing people who go to theatre to watch movies with their phone on. But its not about joker. Its a movie about Arthur.
I watched Joker 2 today and I was expecting an absolute train wreck of a film with the way all the reactionary reviewers of the film were talking about it but honestly I enjoyed it. Was it the greatest movie ever made no but it wasn't the worst movie ever made either. I thought it was well directed and well acted at times it dragged but I was still engaged in the story. I might be in the minority with this opinion but I liked Joker 2 not as much as I liked the original but I did like it.
I agree. And I think its a work of art that they made for its own sake as all art should be....which is brave considering the cost. But this not a Batman/Joker/DC type movie. Its unique.
What you liked about the first is literally diminished with the sequel though. Regardless of whatever anyone says, it was literally a character assassination. I liked the idea of the sequel being a stand alone movie set around a different character. They did not intend for people to sympathize with Joker so they had to retcon their own story.
I see the ending as a metaphor for how everyone always want more and more Joker (sequels) but are never satisfied. Any slight difference and they are ready to move on to the next, while using Heath Ledger (nostalgia) as the standard. The film is a criticism of sequels, the studios, & the audience.
@@king_vision4085 Fast and Furious movies are ridiculous but fun to watch if you just chill. Joker is not fun to watch whatsoever. The Musical pieces are horrible.
People need to realize, Tatantino is not ur average "film enjoyer". Even back in his formative years as a filmmaker, he was always a film enthusiast first, who often enjoyed films from the perspective of other film critics. You should hear how he would glaze the old school film critics who themselves extracted films through a post modern lens. So if you hear him reference some obscure novel or a film/art movement(surrealism/neo-realism etc) or hype some off kilter pulp movie, realize, that that's just the "referential" aspect of post modernism. That's what most of them do, all the damn time, i.e. be edgy, deconstructive and "I'm different than you normies" sometimes just for the sake of it. And if I'm being honest, a lot of them(PoMos) have nursed this pov to such a degree and for such a long time that they don't know when they're being genuine or just being reactionary. 😂 Tl;dr - you do not need to take Tatantino seriously, your like or dislike of Joker 2 is just as valid as his because he likes it for some very uber-subjective reasons that you don't need to subscribe to.
I see a lot a people throwing temper tantrums because they didn't get the rock'em sock'em superhero v. supervillain movie they were promised. That disappoints me, but whatever.
@juniorjames7076 sure, you can be disappointed by their non acceptance of Joker 2's deconstruction and they can be disappointed by the fact that they never got the classical archetypes and grand metanarratives of a pulp staple(comic books). Who's to say who's opinions are "more valid".
If Tarantino was your average film enjoyer, he wouldn't have made any of the movies that he did. We wouldn't have Pulp Fiction or Kill Bill or Inglorious Basterds. He liked the movie because it's different and bold and he also found it enjoyable moment to moment. There's a lot of cope in your comment trying to downplay his experience with the film as "uber-subjective." Everyone's opinion is subjective but you're just being patronizing toward his take.
Just because the guy cuts a smile doesn’t mean it’s ledgers joker. I don’t think it is at all and it’s just an assumption. You can’t state that as a fact
Think I heard this originally from Penguinz0 "review" and ever since then people have been peddling the Heath Ledger thing. At most you could say it's a reference but hardly a direct connection
Tod Phillops actually did a documentary on GG Allen, and it shows in Joker 1 and 2. That whole punk attitude is so present and so is the "fuck you" to the masses as it is sprayed everywhere in these movies. Loved both tbh
Man, not enough people who want to want to speak loudly about Todd Phillips get what that GG thing means. He pursued that project for a reason. I usually mention this (and then have to explain who the last of the late great s--t eaters was, ha ha) to anyone who asks me what I think about him as a director. What threw me for a while was that most of his movies were really pedestrian. But I think the punk was there the whole time.
I had no idea Tod made a GG doc. Thank you, I'll have to check it out. I couldn't really explain why I enjoyed Joker 2 so much, the fact that it was a big "fuck you" to masses probably had a lot to do with it.
Subversion at a massive level is a diagnostic that Freddy got Fingered could also receive. A QT breakdown of that magnum opus would definitely stand out
I didnt care about critics, just watched it by myself and l liked it too. Its dark but realistic in how it concludes Flecks story. The music elements controling his psyché like dancing without hearing music were already present in the first movie and in this movie he went full mad by being in love, therefore his voices in his head became a full blown musical but in the end he finally managed to snap out of it and confront his reality and the dumb masses who glorify him for wrong reasons.
It doesn't "conclude Fleck's story" it merely backtracks on what was told in the first movie, it's basically a retcon, not a continuation of the story. And the musical aspect was poorly planned and poorly executed, all songs are just "love love love" instead of exploring different themes and progressing the story like any good musical does.
@@dookie3453 It reverts Arthur back to what he was at the beginning of the first movie. If the movie started with him as the Joker and then showed his transformation back into Arthur that could have worked (I don't think it would have been a good idea, but at least it would have been consistent) but instead we have little meek Arthur again trying to transform into the Joker and failing. It renders the first film pointless by erasing his character arc. Which maayybe could have worked as a stand-alone film, but again it is supposed to come after the first one and this merely redoes part of its plot. It just shows Arthur creating "the Joker" but rather than assuming this persona himself he inspires others to do the same... we already got that (and so much more) in the first film! Also it betrays the original idea from the comics that the Joker's story is "multiple choice", which the original film was able to convey by keeping us guessing how much of it was real, how much of it was Arthur's delusions, and how much of it was him making it up to the psychiatrist. This time it's unambiguous: it is all real, except the musical numbers which are all in his head... and they are not even interesting fantasies, they are just him singing old songs They could have literally done a multiple choice thing where we see him being acquitted then we cut back to him being sentenced to death then to him evading, and we jump between these various possibilities each with its own musical number, and there are clues on which one is real but we can't say for sure... I mean come on, I am literally making this up on the spot in a youtube comment and it's already better than what we got!
@@KombatGod I thought joker 1 repeatedly made the point that the “joker” idea/ movement wasn’t a real thing for Arthur, and he just had a sort of faux arc. Everyone he ever killed was only due to personal grudges or reasons, with no other motive or prior planning. Even coming on Murray franklins show as the “joker” was just some sort of meta joke because he was going to shoot himself on stage, which he didn’t end up doing. Then in Joker 2, he still didn’t ever accept or even really seem to care what the joker image meant. He was just going along with a very basic version of it (painting his face) A, because he was in love with Harley, and she showed him affection when he assumed the “joker” persona. And B, because his defence required it for the insanity plea. I think he gave up the double personality act because he thought his love with Harley was real and so he basically stopped caring about the trial. Basically, don’t think his character is supposed to have the mental capacity to have split personalities or larger goals/ motives. He’s just Arthur fleck and everyone else perceives the “joker” because they don’t really understand him. I don’t think he became “joker” at the end of the first movie, and I don’t think he became it in the second either A note about what’s real and what’s imagined; I think almost everything in joker 1 was explicitly real, due to the fact they had the whole imagined love story which was explicitly shown to be imagined. I don’t feel there would have been that distinction if the whole movie was supposed to be ambiguous.
@@dookie3453 I can see your point, that may be why I made that example of what they could have done, it's not that I have a big problem with them "undoing" the previous film as much as them not pushing forward more, leaning more into Arthur's craziness, leaning more into the uncertainty of the Joker's story, showing something different happening in his path, instead it felt like it retreaded the same path of the first film. After all that happens in the first film (Arthur making up the Joker persona, his imaginary romance with the neighbor, his relationship with his mother, his job situation, the subplot with Thomas Wayne, the social commentary, ON TOP of it being a great origin story not just for Joker but for the crime-ridden Gotham of Batman as a whole), we got a sequel that is just a pointless addendum, his trial on the events of the first film.
You have no idea how validated i feel hearing Tarantino share my exact thought about how it was directed. Who else would deliver this movie like this? With all the praise the first one got, the anticipation it’s built. It’s like burning a pile of money you just stole after a heist. It’s such a chaotic, Joker move.
7:43 no, the character at the end is not Heath Ledger nor is it supposed to be. We’ve seen the death of the Wayne’s in both universes, both are played by different actors and both are executed in completely different ways under completely different circumstances. They literally cannot be in the same universe.
I’m all for opinions but the hilarious reaction to joker 2 all but proves my theory that media discourse is dead, film fans don’t know what they want and people are stupid.
I think the financial numbers and overall reviews for the film prove that people in fact DO know what they want and know what they DON’T want. I got about 30 minutes into the movie watching it on Max a few weeks ago and man, it was so boring, dull, uninteresting and flat out embarrassing to watch Arthur quickly have sex with Lee in his cell. We get the point being made. It’s not lost on people that Arthur was a pathetic loser who also happened to get screwed by the world he lived in and that he is not a good guy for becoming the Joker but my god do we really need a whole movie where they hammer it in over and over again that you’re not supposed to like Arthur and he sucks? How did anyone at Warner or Todd or Jaoquin think that this would be good after the first was so well received?
@@tmac326 Arthur's sex scene with Lee was very realistic considering who these characters are, plus Arthur was virgin, it's supposed to be embarrassing/uncomfortable.
The biggest issue with this movie was, that people didnt want a character study on a character that was claimed to be the joker. If the movie wasn't a joker movie, it would have been better recieved.
It’s a masterpiece! & I don’t think people are deep enough to truly appreciate it. Arthur fleck is likely Batman’s half brother & Batman’s dad ironically created the inevitable real joker( the man who kills Arthur fleck). There’s inconclusive evidence on this fact, Arthur never experienced love , not from his mom or anyone, that sadness that loneliness and utter despair is the entire point. Arthur is a good person a victim , someone we all had empathy for in part 1 and throughout. He bottled up his emotions and trauma tried to laugh it off as his mom would try and have him do calling “happy” , but those emotions never went away , it could go to suicide or outward aggression and in part 1 he chose outward aggression. Something he is eventually remorseful for in part 2 . The Folie a deux is French for two crazy people delusional together . He’s delusional believing harley truly loves him for who he is as Arthur Fleck, and she’s delusional for loving the joker side of him even tho that’s not really him because he’s a good guy deep down inside because his true self is not the “joker “ psychopath , and not even the real joker after all. The midget even said you were always good to me. It was Arthur’s redemption, to be honest and true self, but when he went searching for Harley the tragedy is she doesn’t love who he really is and Arthur ends up dying alone never experiencing love. Just when you feel good for him that he finally is being loved. Arthur doesn’t make the direct connection that maybe he could get fake love if he continues the fake self joker persona and is never presented that opportunity, maybe he would have kept being the joker just to please her if it meant he could be fake loved by Harley, maybe that would have caused him the anger he needed to turn into the real joker, we will never know. At the end of it that’s all Arthur ever wanted , love. When he sees Harley his make up is faded away as Arthur fleck this weak man who came out at closing statement emerges as his true vulnerable unattractive true self to Harley, that’s why she left him alone in the courtroom as she herself realizes in the end that it was all a fantasy & he isn’t the joker, she studied to be a psychiatrist and realizes what he really is and leaves him & turns him in to the cops. Arthur betrayed and symbolically shot by Harley in the stomach comes to fruition. In the end he is the origin story & inspiration of the real joker , the guy who kills him in the end and cuts smile on his face in the background, which is the perhaps the Keith ledger Joker character who battles Batman not Arthur fleck. We all are him angry at the film angry at Arthur not giving him love and stabbing him to death. Even some happy he dies for being this weak man nobody loves. The musical aspect of the film is fitting since no singing occurs until he falls in fake love with lady Gaga, he never sings in his delusions prior to this, and he even sings in his real life in fitting and funny moments to his cell inmates. Singing is his delusional state feeling the perceived notion of love that he truly never receives and I don’t mind the music since he’s crazy singing to himself most of the time. We are the audience that hates him for not being funny , the point of this film is not to like him for being weak and vulnerable, that’s why you don’t like it, Arthur fleck still not being loved. The film is deeper then we think and horrible if you come in to it with pre conceived notions of what you thought it should be. In due time I hope people appreciate the beauty of the film and don’t look at it through a superficial lens.
In 20 years this movie will be a cult classic. 2 weeks after its release I wrote an internet review called “Your favorite critic is wrong about Joker 2.” It’s starting already…
Joker was such an amazing experience. Its so brilliant how it handles its drab humor and stunning character study along w its beautiful shots and score
Same, I heard nothing but bad things so I thought everybody was just hating it because they didn't know it was a musical, so I went in wanting to find the good in it, but man was it bad. I managed to sit through it all the way to the end, but really you didn't lose anything, the first 20 minutes already tell you everything, pretty much nothing else happens in the film until the end.
I love that Quentin is going to bat for Joker 2. Not that I needed anybody to tell me to like it, but the scathing early reviews just go to show how entitled audiences have become. I thought it was an absolute masterclass in surrealism. The Gary Puddles courtroom scene in particular was at dime turns both hilarious and heart-wrenching, and that sex scene with Harley and Arthur was one of the most difficult such scenes I think I’ve ever seen put to film. It’s been almost three months since I saw it in theatres, only ever watched it that one time, and am still unpacking it. Waiting for the right time to revisit it, but it’s interesting to hear how certain people feel about it now that the initial dust has settled. I honestly think it’s a simple matter of people being scared to like the unpopular thing, and I predict that this film will go on to be a cult classic, dissected and analyzed for years to come.
This movie will never be a cult classic, not as bad as some people made it out to be but still a pretty big misfire. This movie is like the dumb kid in class thinking he's smart and original.
@@EddieHenderson92 lol, if asking you to expand upon what qualifies you to deem something as self-evidently smart or dumb is your idea of “being upset” (i.e. reading into something that isn’t actually there), it probably speaks for itself whether anybody could take your opinion seriously, ironically enough.
Finally someone who appreciated it. Rather than people who were disgusted they didn't get to see a (batman genre) joker film. I can't stand musicals. This is by far the best musical I've ever seen.
It sounds like he's trying to convince that he likes it. It's just like when somebody buys something that disappointed them but they act like it's just perfect so they can make everyone think they were right to buy it lol
I couldn't more agree with what Quentin said about Joker 2 when he said Todd Phillips was the real Joker and his movie was like F-word you Hollywood, furthermore I don't think Joker 2 is the worst film of the year, but it might be on a top 10 misunderstood masterpieces where I will also include Jackie Brown. By the way, I feel like watching Joker 2 again after hearing Tarantino's views on it.
I know that this film is a magnet for criticism right now, as an exercise in hubris and self-correction - but when Hideo Kojima and Quentin Tarantino both sing the praises of a film, it makes me wonder (even though I did not like it) how our perceptions miiight change with a few years of hindsight.
RIGHT???? I feel like I have to go watch another video to cleanse my palate, like for example "Why Joker 2 Is A Terrible Musical" by channel The Closer Look.
I have no problem with it either. Nolan (one of my favorite directors) loved Zach Snyder's movies. Which doesn't bother me because when you're THAT skilled of a director you see things from a different perspective. Shot, color grading, filming techniques ect. Basically don't throw the baby out with the bathwater... even if the majority of the film is the "bathwater" to someone like me.
Every complaint can never fully describe their distaste for Joker 2 without making it seem more like severe nitpicks. It went over most heads (who were trolled as a result), but still twisted itself a little more than even I would've enjoyed, but is completely justified in itself to be as absurd and "dry" as it was---just as an Arthur Fleck joke lol.
9:09 HOLY!! So its to early and.. blah.. I wrote a few thousand emails a few years ago and yup AMAZING! Saved my life! This movie is awesome hahaa. great upload! Im 4 months now with no panic or anxiety attacks. This movie helped save my life. 14:09 Take that feeling of seeing a bad movie and just amp it up until you want to hurt people, and then times that by 10. Thats how I felt for 15 years. Holy smokes! Its so nice not to feel like that anymore. 14:25 Now thats where I feel horrible. Wanting to see a good movie and coming out angry, is that the right approach for art? And just making someone feel like I did make me feel bad and oh my gosh. I gotta share this, how many people worked on this movie, how many thousands of people have pitched in to make entertainment to take my mind off my problems. I love it!
This video has way more views than the scenes in joker 2. Just goes to show how much people care about others opinions than actually watching something and think on it and you decide if you like it.
My only complaint about Folie A Deux would be that the musical numbers could drag a bit at times. I had read all about how it sucked ass and all that before watching, so my expectations were low. Very compelling stuff
Exactly! Every complaint can never fully describe their distaste without making it seem more like a nitpick. It went over most heads (who were trolled as a result), but still twists itself a little more than even I would've enjoyed, but is completely justified in itself to be as absurd and "dry" as it was---just as an Arthur Fleck joke lol.
I think joaquin phoenix not being the greatest singer made the songs hit a little bit harder I was able to feel what he was going through in a way that I may not of is he was a better vocalist
That is pretty lame, he could've still said no. The studio for years was trying to get the Cohen brothers to do a Big Lebowski 2, and they kept saying no. It was that simple.
I saw the movie on max and i really liked it, there were a couple moments where the musical aspect would take me out of it for a sec but for the most part they made it make sense. The plot was a bit weak but still enjoyable, and the ending opens up possibilities to probably connect it with The Batman in the future if they think it fits, that is exciting.
I loved it too. Great movie! First movie was an easy escape out of the marvel consumtion fest. The second is a more deeper look into the psychological world of joker. I actually prefer the second one. Even tho its not so easy to watch.
By the early 1970s, the Western was dead and Hollywood entered a "post-Western" phase (The Wild Ones, Westworld, Heaven's Gate). I hope we have reached the equivalent of the post-Superhero phase with films like this.
I enjoyed the film when I went to the theater. I think everyone went in with expectations and I went in with none. It was very complimentary to the original film for me. I liked it for different reasons than Tarantino, I think, but it is interesting to see it from his perspective.
What I got when it comes to Phoenix's singing is that Arthur is trying to make his life into a musical. That's why he's singing these songs, but he doesn't know how to make a musical. So that's why he sings all these melancholy songs instead of the traditional musical happy, move the story along kind of songs. That you traditionally see in musicals because he doesn't know happiness. So how could he sing a happy song that moves the story along in a musical?If he doesn't know the feeling
I wasn't sure if I liked the movie just because everyone else hated it. Now Im leaning towards It actually had some depth and I'm justified in liking it.
I think part of it was Todd trying to find a way for a Joker 3 to never happen. I get the subversion and all of that and the anarchy. I don’t see it as a creation for Heath Ledger’s Joker or any other version of the Joker at all either. When Quentin said Todd Phillips is the Joker…he hit the nail on the head. This is what I thought after the end of the film. Which is pretty sick and twisted…so maybe it was pretty great. Depends on what the director was aiming to do. I plan on buying the film and rewatching pretty soon. And the interviewer bringing up Brendan Gleeson…I’d agree in Banshees or In Bruges…but he was fairly looked over in this one.
I actually haven’t seen Joker 2 yet and not sure if I’ll manage to but I can tell that there’s a possibility it’s a case where the film is not technically bad but it does not hold up as a follow up to the first
People disliked it because it betrayed the joker they know. In the end this joker was weak and confused and a victim. The joker most knew was just crazy
Joker Folie A Deux literally means Madness of Two. This IS a fever dream...a massive hallucination. Plus to me this is all just a joke. A one hundred plus million dollar joke. We have an expectation of what we are going to see and it gave us everything we didn't want in such a brilliant way. He was never Joker. This was never real. You are the punchline. This is the best worst movie ever to the point it's genius.
I think everyone says this movie is "bad" but only because they can feel that it is satire targeted directly at THEM and what they came into it expecting...but they haven't yet figured out what is happening
Natural Born Killers is actually a very good movie. Tarantino has such a specific taste in movies that it kinda disqualify him somehow for a generalised consensus.
To be a great film maker you need to be in love with film, to see the magic and the mystery and the imagination and feel it deeply. QT has that, he loves the art and so he can see things in films that most audiences can't. That doesn't make him a good critic for recommendations, but I like hearing his perspective and sometimes he shows me something that makes me like a film more post-hoc
It’s happening because honestly, it wasn’t that bad. I already thought this was going to be a pretentious dude movie. I knew some dude that’s such a movie snob like him would love this shit.😭😭😭
The “problems” with this movie are not technical they are just creative decisions that are frustrating so somebody that really likes movies like him is going to get a lot more out of this than somebody that cares about the property itself
Joker 2 for me is the best 200 million dollar practical joke on an audience that I've ever seen. It turned the audiences expectations on themselves and made them the critique of the movie which understandably nobody liked. An audience doesn't like to see a filmmaker basically point and laugh at what his audience have been hoping for with a Joker movie. But people made the mistake of thinking that we were getting Batman's Joker.
Except it would have been enough to unexpectidely make it a musical. Instead he went on his way to make BAD musical, on top of it being a bad film and an awful sequel.
I think the reason people misunderstood joker 2 was because from a cinematic point of view, it was trying to do things beyond the average comprehension of story telling. Unlike most media now, nothing was spoon fed to the audience nor was it simple in any way. People wanted to mindlessly watch the film, but instead it requires you to THINK and be prepared to use your own moral compass to navigate its tale. Anyone who doesn’t like it, ultimately missed the whole point.
The biggest plot twist would be Tarantino's final film being a musical LMAO
@@kyledouglascox that would be cool
Id be down
A revisionist history musical co-written by Roger Avery about how J6 was a friendly picnic where a bunch of patriots got tricked into insurrection by the FBI
Sweeney Todd but every 10th word is the N word
@@howdareyou41 I thought you said revisionist? :p
I watched a bootleg of Joker 2 and walked out of my own home
Lmao
for fk sake, matt!😄😄
Lol😢😮😮😂
"I really like this movie because it owes its debt to me" - tarantino
And it has nothing to do with natural born killers. Totally absurd that he would even say that
Now you got it
@@depressedtvit does…glamorizing killers as anti heroes etc
@@HeynowHeynowheynow Not unique to Tarantino (like most of what he's done).
I love how Tarantino is ridiculously in love with all aspects of film, he has to be one of the most passionate, knowledgeable, skillful, and perceptive artists. It's always awesome to see someone who lives and breathes everything about their field of art.
Not to be reductive toward Mr Tarantino, but it really sounds (especially around the end of this clip) like he enjoyed it because it was deliberately bad in a lot of ways to spite its audience, and he found that more interesting than a bad film that's just bad and has nothing to say. He was laughing at the dark scenes because he innately understood this was not really a movie anymore, it was Todd Philips having one big expensive meltdown about how much he hates all the kinds of people who liked the first film or gained any insight from it.
He probably has a hard time being critical of many films
Since he is catalogging what worked over what didn't work. And can see the value in whatever the film maker was doing, or reaching for.
Very constructive and very seasoned.
By now one thing we know about him, is that he’s a contrarian.
It's good to make a movie that audiences like.
I watched joker 2 for free and still wanted a refund
I haven't seen it yet but they owe me, son.
same lol it was trash the guys a great director but his oppinion on movies is just that.
I bet your opinion would be different if all this noise wasn’t going on. The movie was NOT bad. People don’t like it because other people don’t like it. Perception becomes reality for the weak minded. Not calling you weak minded but I feel that’s the majority of the people on this “train”.
@@JamesBriar-x7t I'm as big a comic book nerd as they get, and I truly appreciated the film for what it was- a study in madness & toxicity sung in three acts. I grew up on 1970s Soft Rock/Lite FM songs and variety shows so they all resonated with me. Have people become so infantile that if they don't get their superhero v. supervillain movie they just turn off their brains and stomp their feet?
@@juniorjames7076 Nobody expected it to be a superhero movie. For me it just fell flat. There wasn't much to it. But I did like that it was different.
Everyone said it sucked, so I didn't watch it. Then I heard the beginning of this video and, before having it be ruined for me, I said "Ok, if it's arguably good, I'm going to give it a chance" and; I really liked it. It's a really good movie. I understand the point of the singing (obviously I heard there was a lot, so I was ready for it). Everything that Arthur did and what happened to him MADE SENSE. It was good. I think people were upset he wasn't a big anti-hero. He was a weak man, and the plight and redemptive quality of the first film is not at all negated by this film. In fact, the way the world stayed harsh and dim is exactly the point
My thoughts exactly..I loved it
As a sequel it did not live up to the bar set by the first
as it's own thing it is too busy finishing off aurthor's final chapter to be a standalone movie of any other character
Over all it is a mid film
no where near as bad as people claim it is
but not good on it's own or as a sequel
imo it was likely setting up another sequel besides this film, but that won't happen now bc it bombed so bad
but I think this movie would be looked at differently if there was a harly movie to prop it up more, or a son of joker as a proper villian of batman movie, or both
imo it is at best mid
6/10 is the most I would give it
and that is mostly bc of the performances, mostly the gary character stole the spolight in his court testimony scene
over all it was just predicatable and depressing as a gritty and realistic final chapter for aurthor
but I agree I think a lot of people went in with the expectation that it would be a bonnie and clyde tragic vigilante romance
that is not this film and imo that would also be predictable but more action oriented
when they anounced it was a musical I knew it would not be that though...so I was not disapointed
in my head canon this is a ledger's joker prequel, and harly had aurthor killed so she could raise THE joker and she never wanted the son to see what his father really was
I was going to skip bc I knew essentially what it would be and I don't like musicals
but I had to see what the fuss was so I skipped through the musical numbers
imo if you can imagine how aurthor's story would play out irl, then you can skip this film
if you liked the first and nothing else is on and you don't mind musicals or can skip them, it is worth watching for a few other things, but not a necessary viewing as author's story
Wow. That's good to read. Loved it the first time, I love the dialogue between the films and what it tells about how we make martyrs and forget about them as we just use them as cathartic projections of ourselves etc. Anyway. I'm sad that in a way people who loved it are often presented like stupid ones who really dont get what cinema is about lol.
@@acon2211
I feel like aurthor didn't even get to be a martyr in this movie
that role goes more deservedly to the young prisoner that idolized him as joker
the only guy on youtube who LOVED it was tarantino, wouldnt have guessed.
It's a great film. It is sophisticated, It is not for DC/Marvel fanboys.
@@binoched9302As someone who likes musicals. Why did they make it a terrible one? Why did they opt for not making the singing good or have songs you wanna listen to?
@@Divergent-ym3py Emotion
I liked it a lot. It's hard to deny the artistry on the moment-to-moment basis of the film (Joachim is beyond hilarious in some insanely unhinged scenes). I believe it'll be retroactively viewed as a great film a decade from now, like Wind Waker is for Zelda
Watch more videos on youtube. There are several videos of people liking the movie.
How many feet were in Joker 2? That might explain some things
zero
he loved happy feet
😄@@knoeppe
There's a closeup of Joker with some socks
I actually totally agree with tarantino, which is a rarity. I think most critiques just reveal the fact that viewers are more interested in seeing what they want to see, then they are curious about what a creator wants to create. I hear two critics saying I was bored, and I needed more action, and it wasn't what I wanted. I hear tarantino say, take it for what it is and try to experience it the way it was intended. I could not agree more.
It’s still bad. Disjointed, unfulfilling, and boring.
@etantife you are mistaking the words, subjective and objective
Def agree with you on that. People wanted classic Joker and Harley, but meanwhile… these films were NEVER about comics books. And the majority were so hung up on that fact they couldnt appreciate what the creator set out to do as you said.
He followed that by saying that he’s nihilistic enough to see.
If I go out of my way to craft a pile oh shit, and I perfectly execute my goal, with little hairs and everything…. Have I made something beautiful? You and Quentin would be staring at that shit with tears running down your face lol
Hideo Kojima and Quentin Tarantino, two of the most famous people that are known to be a cinephile and had watched god knows how many movies, liking Joker 2 is enough to convince me to watch it.
My condolences
Just because you watch alot of movies doesn't mean you have good taste.
Let us know what you think, I personally find it a pretty decent movie.
@@54032Zepol of course not, but having watched, say, 2000 movies is arguably a better indicator for a certain development of taste than a pool of 20 movies - as your horizon widens, your capability to differentiate certain qualities and patterns hopefully develops simultaneously. obviously it can't necessarily sharpen your mind to read between the lines and to capture every interesting and profound detail of a piece of art though.
Kojima has no idea about movies and hasn't made a good game in 20 years.
Quentin saying "I think you're taking it way too seriously" lolllll
Very sad that the general audience will probably never realize how much of a masterpiece joker 2 is. And as much as people hate it, they wont understand the hypocrisy and how much they prove todd’s point. “Its entertainment”. And he made art
They’re literally part of the movies paradox
The people who are commenting .... this is the majority. Sadly. No brain. Disturbing people who go to theatre to watch movies with their phone on. But its not about joker. Its a movie about Arthur.
I watched Joker 2 today and I was expecting an absolute train wreck of a film with the way all the reactionary reviewers of the film were talking about it but honestly I enjoyed it. Was it the greatest movie ever made no but it wasn't the worst movie ever made either. I thought it was well directed and well acted at times it dragged but I was still engaged in the story. I might be in the minority with this opinion but I liked Joker 2 not as much as I liked the original but I did like it.
Same here
I agree. And I think its a work of art that they made for its own sake as all art should be....which is brave considering the cost. But this not a Batman/Joker/DC type movie. Its unique.
Same
What you liked about the first is literally diminished with the sequel though. Regardless of whatever anyone says, it was literally a character assassination. I liked the idea of the sequel being a stand alone movie set around a different character. They did not intend for people to sympathize with Joker so they had to retcon their own story.
What story??
I see the ending as a metaphor for how everyone always want more and more Joker (sequels) but are never satisfied. Any slight difference and they are ready to move on to the next, while using Heath Ledger (nostalgia) as the standard. The film is a criticism of sequels, the studios, & the audience.
"Oh Tarantino likes it?? we like it now!!"
Can't stand this fucking movie
“Oh it’s a musical! I won’t watch it and call it the worst movie ever!”
@@king_vision4085
Yeah you're right, Nolan really missed a trick by not making "The Dark Knight" a musical, didn't he?
You sound dumb.
@@MrGenedancingmachine Fun fact Nolan loves the Fast and Furious movies, especially the newest ones.
@@king_vision4085 Fast and Furious movies are ridiculous but fun to watch if you just chill. Joker is not fun to watch whatsoever. The Musical pieces are horrible.
It sounds like a kid in debate club who was told what their position is and they have to defend it
Lol
"'I just made a giant declarative statement, don't bring up Brendan Gleeson"... 😂
People need to realize, Tatantino is not ur average "film enjoyer".
Even back in his formative years as a filmmaker, he was always a film enthusiast first, who often enjoyed films from the perspective of other film critics.
You should hear how he would glaze the old school film critics who themselves extracted films through a post modern lens.
So if you hear him reference some obscure novel or a film/art movement(surrealism/neo-realism etc) or hype some off kilter pulp movie, realize, that that's just the "referential" aspect of post modernism.
That's what most of them do, all the damn time, i.e. be edgy, deconstructive and "I'm different than you normies" sometimes just for the sake of it.
And if I'm being honest, a lot of them(PoMos) have nursed this pov to such a degree and for such a long time that they don't know when they're being genuine or just being reactionary. 😂
Tl;dr - you do not need to take Tatantino seriously, your like or dislike of Joker 2 is just as valid as his because he likes it for some very uber-subjective reasons that you don't need to subscribe to.
I see a lot a people throwing temper tantrums because they didn't get the rock'em sock'em superhero v. supervillain movie they were promised. That disappoints me, but whatever.
@juniorjames7076 sure, you can be disappointed by their non acceptance of Joker 2's deconstruction and they can be disappointed by the fact that they never got the classical archetypes and grand metanarratives of a pulp staple(comic books).
Who's to say who's opinions are "more valid".
At least it's not gonna be as opposing in opinions as Last of Us: part 2, lol.
Fr, it's a bad movie and he said I like how Todd Philips said fu to the audience😂
If Tarantino was your average film enjoyer, he wouldn't have made any of the movies that he did. We wouldn't have Pulp Fiction or Kill Bill or Inglorious Basterds. He liked the movie because it's different and bold and he also found it enjoyable moment to moment. There's a lot of cope in your comment trying to downplay his experience with the film as "uber-subjective." Everyone's opinion is subjective but you're just being patronizing toward his take.
Just because the guy cuts a smile doesn’t mean it’s ledgers joker. I don’t think it is at all and it’s just an assumption. You can’t state that as a fact
Think I heard this originally from Penguinz0 "review" and ever since then people have been peddling the Heath Ledger thing. At most you could say it's a reference but hardly a direct connection
Sometimes when don't get the movie we want. We get the movie we deserve.
Tod Phillops actually did a documentary on GG Allen, and it shows in Joker 1 and 2. That whole punk attitude is so present and so is the "fuck you" to the masses as it is sprayed everywhere in these movies. Loved both tbh
Man, not enough people who want to want to speak loudly about Todd Phillips get what that GG thing means. He pursued that project for a reason.
I usually mention this (and then have to explain who the last of the late great s--t eaters was, ha ha) to anyone who asks me what I think about him as a director.
What threw me for a while was that most of his movies were really pedestrian. But I think the punk was there the whole time.
I had no idea Tod made a GG doc. Thank you, I'll have to check it out.
I couldn't really explain why I enjoyed Joker 2 so much, the fact that it was a big "fuck you" to masses probably had a lot to do with it.
He is a filmmaker so he can appreciate it on a deeper level. He respects it and enjoys it for different reasons than a critic would.
I agree the movie was a giant, deliberate Fuck You, but I don't think that's a good or enjoyable thing.
Subversion at a massive level is a diagnostic that Freddy got Fingered could also receive. A QT breakdown of that magnum opus would definitely stand out
I didnt care about critics, just watched it by myself and l liked it too. Its dark but realistic in how it concludes Flecks story. The music elements controling his psyché like dancing without hearing music were already present in the first movie and in this movie he went full mad by being in love, therefore his voices in his head became a full blown musical but in the end he finally managed to snap out of it and confront his reality and the dumb masses who glorify him for wrong reasons.
It doesn't "conclude Fleck's story" it merely backtracks on what was told in the first movie, it's basically a retcon, not a continuation of the story.
And the musical aspect was poorly planned and poorly executed, all songs are just "love love love" instead of exploring different themes and progressing the story like any good musical does.
@@KombatGodwhat did it backtrack from the first movie?
@@dookie3453 It reverts Arthur back to what he was at the beginning of the first movie. If the movie started with him as the Joker and then showed his transformation back into Arthur that could have worked (I don't think it would have been a good idea, but at least it would have been consistent) but instead we have little meek Arthur again trying to transform into the Joker and failing. It renders the first film pointless by erasing his character arc. Which maayybe could have worked as a stand-alone film, but again it is supposed to come after the first one and this merely redoes part of its plot. It just shows Arthur creating "the Joker" but rather than assuming this persona himself he inspires others to do the same... we already got that (and so much more) in the first film!
Also it betrays the original idea from the comics that the Joker's story is "multiple choice", which the original film was able to convey by keeping us guessing how much of it was real, how much of it was Arthur's delusions, and how much of it was him making it up to the psychiatrist. This time it's unambiguous: it is all real, except the musical numbers which are all in his head... and they are not even interesting fantasies, they are just him singing old songs
They could have literally done a multiple choice thing where we see him being acquitted then we cut back to him being sentenced to death then to him evading, and we jump between these various possibilities each with its own musical number, and there are clues on which one is real but we can't say for sure... I mean come on, I am literally making this up on the spot in a youtube comment and it's already better than what we got!
@@KombatGod I thought joker 1 repeatedly made the point that the “joker” idea/ movement wasn’t a real thing for Arthur, and he just had a sort of faux arc. Everyone he ever killed was only due to personal grudges or reasons, with no other motive or prior planning. Even coming on Murray franklins show as the “joker” was just some sort of meta joke because he was going to shoot himself on stage, which he didn’t end up doing.
Then in Joker 2, he still didn’t ever accept or even really seem to care what the joker image meant. He was just going along with a very basic version of it (painting his face) A, because he was in love with Harley, and she showed him affection when he assumed the “joker” persona. And B, because his defence required it for the insanity plea.
I think he gave up the double personality act because he thought his love with Harley was real and so he basically stopped caring about the trial.
Basically, don’t think his character is supposed to have the mental capacity to have split personalities or larger goals/ motives. He’s just Arthur fleck and everyone else perceives the “joker” because they don’t really understand him. I don’t think he became “joker” at the end of the first movie, and I don’t think he became it in the second either
A note about what’s real and what’s imagined; I think almost everything in joker 1 was explicitly real, due to the fact they had the whole imagined love story which was explicitly shown to be imagined. I don’t feel there would have been that distinction if the whole movie was supposed to be ambiguous.
@@dookie3453 I can see your point, that may be why I made that example of what they could have done, it's not that I have a big problem with them "undoing" the previous film as much as them not pushing forward more, leaning more into Arthur's craziness, leaning more into the uncertainty of the Joker's story, showing something different happening in his path, instead it felt like it retreaded the same path of the first film.
After all that happens in the first film (Arthur making up the Joker persona, his imaginary romance with the neighbor, his relationship with his mother, his job situation, the subplot with Thomas Wayne, the social commentary, ON TOP of it being a great origin story not just for Joker but for the crime-ridden Gotham of Batman as a whole), we got a sequel that is just a pointless addendum, his trial on the events of the first film.
3:10 didn’t phoenix 🐦🔥 sing all the parts on Walk the Line?? If so he totally can sing
he did. trained his voice down an octave for it even.
Maybe it was the 5 pack a day cigarette habit that fucked his voice up.
It’s like a banking investor complimenting a child for saving a penny they found
I could listen to tarantino talk about movies all day. he is the only elite hollywood talent that I feel is absolutely one of us.
Quentin is a directors director and saw the movie for the Directors vision. Todd did what he wanted to do exactly. But it’s trash lol
You have no idea how validated i feel hearing Tarantino share my exact thought about how it was directed. Who else would deliver this movie like this? With all the praise the first one got, the anticipation it’s built. It’s like burning a pile of money you just stole after a heist. It’s such a chaotic, Joker move.
Cool
@@Shallow_grave117 thanks man
So todd phillips was the joker all along. Quintin Tarantino is right he pulled the ultimate joke on everyone.
This actually makes me want to watch it tbh…
freaky ass quentin would like this movie
I agree. I enjoyed the film too. Very dark so hard to see again but i will watch again.
Imagine being in the privileged position to direct a $200M movie and your response is to give everyone the middle finger.
Hell yeah, mad respect for him. Fk Hollywood and entitled audiences🎉🎉
That’s dope tbh
Like that’s a bad thing? It’s refreshing! It’s art! (^:
That’s what he meant
@@LukeGale-w8m You don't know that
7:43 no, the character at the end is not Heath Ledger nor is it supposed to be. We’ve seen the death of the Wayne’s in both universes, both are played by different actors and both are executed in completely different ways under completely different circumstances. They literally cannot be in the same universe.
Hahaha, big brain movie; he brings the main character back to humiliate and kill him. How original and it bombed, well played Phillips
Guys look look I'm burning money, I'm like... the Joker, now praise me mwahahaha!!
Tarantino- 😂😂
Hosts- 😭😭😭
You can tell Tarantino didn’t even really see the movie. When he didn’t realize Arthur wasn’t the joker.
This is exactly why it worked bc my expectations probably were so low and I loved how everything made sense.
Agreed 100% I love this movie
LOL
Haha ok
“You get what you fucking deserve” - todd Phillips and me to the fans
I’m all for opinions but the hilarious reaction to joker 2 all but proves my theory that media discourse is dead, film fans don’t know what they want and people are stupid.
Definitely didn’t want what they gave us. I thought the songs were really bad, and made the movie drag on.
I think the financial numbers and overall reviews for the film prove that people in fact DO know what they want and know what they DON’T want.
I got about 30 minutes into the movie watching it on Max a few weeks ago and man, it was so boring, dull, uninteresting and flat out embarrassing to watch Arthur quickly have sex with Lee in his cell.
We get the point being made. It’s not lost on people that Arthur was a pathetic loser who also happened to get screwed by the world he lived in and that he is not a good guy for becoming the Joker but my god do we really need a whole movie where they hammer it in over and over again that you’re not supposed to like Arthur and he sucks?
How did anyone at Warner or Todd or Jaoquin think that this would be good after the first was so well received?
@@tmac326 Arthur's sex scene with Lee was very realistic considering who these characters are, plus Arthur was virgin, it's supposed to be embarrassing/uncomfortable.
no, you disliked the movie so you're retrded
Man that movie was trash lol ofc it’s gonna be a few ppl who might’ve like it.
Joaquin isn’t a singer? Walk the line? Anyone? Entire album released for the movie… performed by Joaquin 🙂
The biggest issue with this movie was, that people didnt want a character study on a character that was claimed to be the joker.
If the movie wasn't a joker movie, it would have been better recieved.
It’s a masterpiece! & I don’t think people are deep enough to truly appreciate it. Arthur fleck is likely Batman’s half brother & Batman’s dad ironically created the inevitable real joker( the man who kills Arthur fleck). There’s inconclusive evidence on this fact, Arthur never experienced love , not from his mom or anyone, that sadness that loneliness and utter despair is the entire point. Arthur is a good person a victim , someone we all had empathy for in part 1 and throughout. He bottled up his emotions and trauma tried to laugh it off as his mom would try and have him do calling “happy” , but those emotions never went away , it could go to suicide or outward aggression and in part 1 he chose outward aggression. Something he is eventually remorseful for in part 2 . The Folie a deux is French for two crazy people delusional together . He’s delusional believing harley truly loves him for who he is as Arthur Fleck, and she’s delusional for loving the joker side of him even tho that’s not really him because he’s a good guy deep down inside because his true self is not the “joker “ psychopath , and not even the real joker after all. The midget even said you were always good to me. It was Arthur’s redemption, to be honest and true self, but when he went searching for Harley the tragedy is she doesn’t love who he really is and Arthur ends up dying alone never experiencing love. Just when you feel good for him that he finally is being loved. Arthur doesn’t make the direct connection that maybe he could get fake love if he continues the fake self joker persona and is never presented that opportunity, maybe he would have kept being the joker just to please her if it meant he could be fake loved by Harley, maybe that would have caused him the anger he needed to turn into the real joker, we will never know. At the end of it that’s all Arthur ever wanted , love. When he sees Harley his make up is faded away as Arthur fleck this weak man who came out at closing statement emerges as his true vulnerable unattractive true self to Harley, that’s why she left him alone in the courtroom as she herself realizes in the end that it was all a fantasy & he isn’t the joker, she studied to be a psychiatrist and realizes what he really is and leaves him & turns him in to the cops. Arthur betrayed and symbolically shot by Harley in the stomach comes to fruition. In the end he is the origin story & inspiration of the real joker , the guy who kills him in the end and cuts smile on his face in the background, which is the perhaps the Keith ledger Joker character who battles Batman not Arthur fleck. We all are him angry at the film angry at Arthur not giving him love and stabbing him to death. Even some happy he dies for being this weak man nobody loves. The musical aspect of the film is fitting since no singing occurs until he falls in fake love with lady Gaga, he never sings in his delusions prior to this, and he even sings in his real life in fitting and funny moments to his cell inmates. Singing is his delusional state feeling the perceived notion of love that he truly never receives and I don’t mind the music since he’s crazy singing to himself most of the time. We are the audience that hates him for not being funny , the point of this film is not to like him for being weak and vulnerable, that’s why you don’t like it, Arthur fleck still not being loved. The film is deeper then we think and horrible if you come in to it with pre conceived notions of what you thought it should be. In due time I hope people appreciate the beauty of the film and don’t look at it through a superficial lens.
In 20 years this movie will be a cult classic. 2 weeks after its release I wrote an internet review called “Your favorite critic is wrong about Joker 2.” It’s starting already…
Joker was such an amazing experience. Its so brilliant how it handles its drab humor and stunning character study along w its beautiful shots and score
Stop it
Love that he loved it, I didn’t enjoy it as much as the first film but it was way better than the reviews and general consensus gave it credit it for
Usually when everyone hates a film I’m predisposed to enjoy it out of spite but I couldn’t even sit through 20 mins of it
Same, I heard nothing but bad things so I thought everybody was just hating it because they didn't know it was a musical, so I went in wanting to find the good in it, but man was it bad. I managed to sit through it all the way to the end, but really you didn't lose anything, the first 20 minutes already tell you everything, pretty much nothing else happens in the film until the end.
Great to hear ,its a great film well written ,directored and acted
I love that Quentin is going to bat for Joker 2. Not that I needed anybody to tell me to like it, but the scathing early reviews just go to show how entitled audiences have become. I thought it was an absolute masterclass in surrealism. The Gary Puddles courtroom scene in particular was at dime turns both hilarious and heart-wrenching, and that sex scene with Harley and Arthur was one of the most difficult such scenes I think I’ve ever seen put to film. It’s been almost three months since I saw it in theatres, only ever watched it that one time, and am still unpacking it. Waiting for the right time to revisit it, but it’s interesting to hear how certain people feel about it now that the initial dust has settled. I honestly think it’s a simple matter of people being scared to like the unpopular thing, and I predict that this film will go on to be a cult classic, dissected and analyzed for years to come.
This movie will never be a cult classic, not as bad as some people made it out to be but still a pretty big misfire. This movie is like the dumb kid in class thinking he's smart and original.
@ you’re more than welcome to elaborate on why you think so, smart guy.
@@jasonkh4 No need to get upset little lady. Watch some real movies and you will feel better.
@@EddieHenderson92 lol, if asking you to expand upon what qualifies you to deem something as self-evidently smart or dumb is your idea of “being upset” (i.e. reading into something that isn’t actually there), it probably speaks for itself whether anybody could take your opinion seriously, ironically enough.
@@jasonkh4 Little lady, I can't teach you common sense and the truth is out there if you care enough to accept it.
Finally someone who appreciated it. Rather than people who were disgusted they didn't get to see a (batman genre) joker film. I can't stand musicals. This is by far the best musical I've ever seen.
It sounds like he's trying to convince that he likes it. It's just like when somebody buys something that disappointed them but they act like it's just perfect so they can make everyone think they were right to buy it lol
I couldn't more agree with what Quentin said about Joker 2 when he said Todd Phillips was the real Joker and his movie was like F-word you Hollywood, furthermore I don't think Joker 2 is the worst film of the year, but it might be on a top 10 misunderstood masterpieces where I will also include Jackie Brown. By the way, I feel like watching Joker 2 again after hearing Tarantino's views on it.
I know that this film is a magnet for criticism right now, as an exercise in hubris and self-correction - but when Hideo Kojima and Quentin Tarantino both sing the praises of a film, it makes me wonder (even though I did not like it) how our perceptions miiight change with a few years of hindsight.
Quentin is just trying to be edgy. He also thinks Crystal Skull was better than Last Crusade.
Well lets be honest hideo fell off with mgsv and death stranding
Quentin Tarantino with another hot take. Nothing new here.
@@EddieHenderson92he also made kill bill. Snooore.
And Roger Avery... And John Waters.
This whole video, and the comments, were like a fever dream
RIGHT???? I feel like I have to go watch another video to cleanse my palate, like for example "Why Joker 2 Is A Terrible Musical" by channel The Closer Look.
But which was the better subversion, joker 2 or matrix 4-
The Last Jedi
I have no problem with it either. Nolan (one of my favorite directors) loved Zach Snyder's movies. Which doesn't bother me because when you're THAT skilled of a director you see things from a different perspective. Shot, color grading, filming techniques ect. Basically don't throw the baby out with the bathwater... even if the majority of the film is the "bathwater" to someone like me.
Every complaint can never fully describe their distaste for Joker 2 without making it seem more like severe nitpicks. It went over most heads (who were trolled as a result), but still twisted itself a little more than even I would've enjoyed, but is completely justified in itself to be as absurd and "dry" as it was---just as an Arthur Fleck joke lol.
The fact that the masses hated this film lets me know exactly why I’ll love it.
9:09 HOLY!! So its to early and.. blah.. I wrote a few thousand emails a few years ago and yup AMAZING! Saved my life! This movie is awesome hahaa. great upload! Im 4 months now with no panic or anxiety attacks. This movie helped save my life. 14:09 Take that feeling of seeing a bad movie and just amp it up until you want to hurt people, and then times that by 10. Thats how I felt for 15 years. Holy smokes! Its so nice not to feel like that anymore. 14:25 Now thats where I feel horrible. Wanting to see a good movie and coming out angry, is that the right approach for art? And just making someone feel like I did make me feel bad and oh my gosh. I gotta share this, how many people worked on this movie, how many thousands of people have pitched in to make entertainment to take my mind off my problems. I love it!
The movie in my opinion was great. Arthur vs. his shadow joker
If you only watched the first 5 minutes then yes.
@ I saw the entire movie
This video has way more views than the scenes in joker 2. Just goes to show how much people care about others opinions than actually watching something and think on it and you decide if you like it.
My only complaint about Folie A Deux would be that the musical numbers could drag a bit at times. I had read all about how it sucked ass and all that before watching, so my expectations were low. Very compelling stuff
Exactly! Every complaint can never fully describe their distaste without making it seem more like a nitpick. It went over most heads (who were trolled as a result), but still twists itself a little more than even I would've enjoyed, but is completely justified in itself to be as absurd and "dry" as it was---just as an Arthur Fleck joke lol.
I think joaquin phoenix not being the greatest singer made the songs hit a little bit harder I was able to feel what he was going through in a way that I may not of is he was a better vocalist
i agree with the big FU theory. I dont think Phillips wanted a sequel, but success forced him into it. ;)
That is pretty lame, he could've still said no. The studio for years was trying to get the Cohen brothers to do a Big Lebowski 2, and they kept saying no. It was that simple.
@@EddieHenderson92its possible that in the case of The Joker, WB would’ve just found another director if Phillips had said NO.
He's a G for that 100% entitled audiences are a cancer.
@@CoryPchajek So?
@@EddieHenderson92
Wouldn't be seen as a true sequel if it was another director.
i just found out from this that bret easton ellis has a podcast lol
I saw the movie on max and i really liked it, there were a couple moments where the musical aspect would take me out of it for a sec but for the most part they made it make sense. The plot was a bit weak but still enjoyable, and the ending opens up possibilities to probably connect it with The Batman in the future if they think it fits, that is exciting.
I loved it too. Great movie!
First movie was an easy escape out of the marvel consumtion fest. The second is a more deeper look into the psychological world of joker.
I actually prefer the second one. Even tho its not so easy to watch.
Totally agree. Masterpiece of a movie, even more so than the first one. People are too dumb nowadays to appreciate good movies.
+1
It's a very good film..i dont get the reaction.
@@zootsoot2006 LOL sure GED.
By the early 1970s, the Western was dead and Hollywood entered a "post-Western" phase (The Wild Ones, Westworld, Heaven's Gate). I hope we have reached the equivalent of the post-Superhero phase with films like this.
I like how silent Bret Easton Ellis is throughout all the gushing and pretentious praise.
I enjoyed the film when I went to the theater. I think everyone went in with expectations and I went in with none. It was very complimentary to the original film for me.
I liked it for different reasons than Tarantino, I think, but it is interesting to see it from his perspective.
What I got when it comes to Phoenix's singing is that Arthur is trying to make his life into a musical. That's why he's singing these songs, but he doesn't know how to make a musical. So that's why he sings all these melancholy songs instead of the traditional musical happy, move the story along kind of songs. That you traditionally see in musicals because he doesn't know happiness. So how could he sing a happy song that moves the story along in a musical?If he doesn't know the feeling
People apparently don't understand complex relationships like this is exactly how these things go
I wasn't sure if I liked the movie just because everyone else hated it. Now Im leaning towards It actually had some depth and I'm justified in liking it.
I think part of it was Todd trying to find a way for a Joker 3 to never happen. I get the subversion and all of that and the anarchy. I don’t see it as a creation for Heath Ledger’s Joker or any other version of the Joker at all either. When Quentin said Todd Phillips is the Joker…he hit the nail on the head. This is what I thought after the end of the film. Which is pretty sick and twisted…so maybe it was pretty great. Depends on what the director was aiming to do. I plan on buying the film and rewatching pretty soon. And the interviewer bringing up Brendan Gleeson…I’d agree in Banshees or In Bruges…but he was fairly looked over in this one.
Roger let Quentin speak.... Damn
I actually haven’t seen Joker 2 yet and not sure if I’ll manage to but I can tell that there’s a possibility it’s a case where the film is not technically bad but it does not hold up as a follow up to the first
Thankyou Quentin , I agree
People disliked it because it betrayed the joker they know. In the end this joker was weak and confused and a victim. The joker most knew was just crazy
Joker Folie A Deux literally means Madness of Two. This IS a fever dream...a massive hallucination. Plus to me this is all just a joke. A one hundred plus million dollar joke. We have an expectation of what we are going to see and it gave us everything we didn't want in such a brilliant way. He was never Joker. This was never real. You are the punchline. This is the best worst movie ever to the point it's genius.
Yesssssss indeed! Ppl totally don't get it
I refuse to believe this wasn't intentionally sabotaged by the director so the studio wouldn't make more sequels.
Then why are all musical numbers so flat and boring? A Joker musical could have been great, this wasn't it.
I absolutely loved Folie a Deux
It just goes to show you how one-dimensional this society has become. If you disliked this film, it says a whole lot about you.
My family loved JOKER2
0:27 Nate who? I tried but didn't catch the name
Quentin HAS to insert himself into it haha.
They love to advertise its Pepsi on the can but when you open it and take a drink. Its really RC.
I think everyone says this movie is "bad" but only because they can feel that it is satire targeted directly at THEM and what they came into it expecting...but they haven't yet figured out what is happening
Natural Born Killers is actually a very good movie. Tarantino has such a specific taste in movies that it kinda disqualify him somehow for a generalised consensus.
To be a great film maker you need to be in love with film, to see the magic and the mystery and the imagination and feel it deeply. QT has that, he loves the art and so he can see things in films that most audiences can't. That doesn't make him a good critic for recommendations, but I like hearing his perspective and sometimes he shows me something that makes me like a film more post-hoc
Where did you find this podcast
It’s happening because honestly, it wasn’t that bad. I already thought this was going to be a pretentious dude movie. I knew some dude that’s such a movie snob like him would love this shit.😭😭😭
The “problems” with this movie are not technical they are just creative decisions that are frustrating so somebody that really likes movies like him is going to get a lot more out of this than somebody that cares about the property itself
Circle jerk: the movie xD
Tarantino has become more mainstream after his idol Jean Luc Godard, the french new wave pioneer, dissed him.
To review a movie based on your expectations and what you would of had done is not a review is an option of the movie two different things!
Gotta say I had zero desire to see it but Tarantino just sold me on it. I’ll give it a watch
Lmao real
Same tbh. From what I’ve gathered there’s a bunch of critics who absolutely love it but the masses hate it, it’s definitely got me intrigued
You've fallen for the trap. He's speaking dogtrash and it's working on people like you here
I don't regret watching it, but I'm sad thats the sequel we got.
Give us an update tool
Turns out we have different tastes! Who would've thought
iT IS NOT AN ORIGIN STORY FOR ANY JOKER ITS ITS OWN FILM THIS CHARACTER IS NOT SUPPOSE TO BE A CRIME LORD
was not expecting this
Joker 2 for me is the best 200 million dollar practical joke on an audience that I've ever seen. It turned the audiences expectations on themselves and made them the critique of the movie which understandably nobody liked. An audience doesn't like to see a filmmaker basically point and laugh at what his audience have been hoping for with a Joker movie.
But people made the mistake of thinking that we were getting Batman's Joker.
Except it would have been enough to unexpectidely make it a musical. Instead he went on his way to make BAD musical, on top of it being a bad film and an awful sequel.
He didn’t sing as bad as everyone says. It worked.
I think the reason people misunderstood joker 2 was because from a cinematic point of view, it was trying to do things beyond the average comprehension of story telling. Unlike most media now, nothing was spoon fed to the audience nor was it simple in any way. People wanted to mindlessly watch the film, but instead it requires you to THINK and be prepared to use your own moral compass to navigate its tale. Anyone who doesn’t like it, ultimately missed the whole point.