This is legitimately the most nuanced conversation I’ve seen about this film. Just goes to show how articulate you guys are when discussing movies, love it!
There were certainly flaws in the pacing, length, and the musical bits, but the more I think about it the more I like the film. The social commentary, and the clear message to the fanboys who idolized Joker, is pretty strong. I like that. A lot actually. It's quite audacious, because most would never dare take that risk for very obvious reasons. But he did, and I respect it.
I left the theater with the exact same feeling of not knowing what I thought about the film… If I watched this in Venice with no reviews and high expectations I would’ve definitely hated, but everyone is hating so much (and I’m not the biggest musicals fan) that I went into it with the lowest expectations… and I actually appreciated a lot of aspects of the film, are we completely taking this out of the race for tech categories?!?! Cuz I loved the cinematography, production design and costume/hair/makeup in this!! Every scene was gorgeous to look at, I really think it deserves those noms
I think for a mainstream "blockbuster" to get into tech categories, it needs to be either well received or financially successful. This movie is neither. Of course, their are exceptions, but I think the odds are not looking good
@@leannebrown02 yeah i get that, but since the first one got e l e v e n nominations, maybe a lot of voters were super curious to at least give the benefit of the doubt on this one I don’t know… but I agree the odds are not great, just saying it’s deserving of a lot of tech noms for sure!
thank you for this nuanced conversation! i adore both Joker flicks, they're masterpieces i don't think Folie a Deux is a "bait and switch" at all having rewatched the first one after the sequel --- the "more interesting conversation" is the responsibility of paid critics who have failed both flicks while yet pretending to like the odd art film that comes along
I found this movie chaotic and weird, and that’s why I loved it. It took bold swings and was more of a commentary of mental illness and always thought this was the best conclusion to the first one. Kudos to the bravery of the filmmakers and we would so lucky to have such brave directors as Todd.
making a 200million dollar movie to respond to 2% audience at best of the first that got Enbolden by Joker was a choice. Headlines really put in Todd`s head that incels exists and got the first one to a billion dollar boxoffice and oscar success, crazy. Anyway, i liked the movie, if the name was The Trial of the Joker or somethin the response would`ve been better.
While I didn’t like this movie I just don’t think Todd was thinking “yeah fuck the people who like the first movie” when making this movie. I honestly believe Todd make a good movie the first time because he used his references and had a good screenplay and this time around he didn’t. That’s it.
Five years ago, I was 16, starting to get into cinema and you two really helped me to think critically during that 2019/2020 Oscar race. Now I’ve watched every video you’ve put out since I watched your Joker review and it’s sad to hear the disappointment of Joker 2, but I’m just glad that the Oscar Expert and Brother Bro have stayed true to themselves as a window into my childhood when I began falling in love with cinema
All I wanted for them to do was be mindful of the pacing. All the parts were there and it had potential to be incredible. Some test screenings would’ve been so so so helpful.
I enjoy your takes. Especially considering everything that Phillips intended to do (which was a lot) I ended up enjoying the film mainly due to it's kind of "realistic" take on how figures like Arthur Fleck end up. It wasn't cathartic, for sure, but it did leave me thinking.
i heavily agree, because this genuinely surprised me, the response however, did not. i feel some people are blinded, by the notion, that the film hates them (which really only comes up, in the final act and the delusional joker fanboys were arguably crazier, in the first one, arthur not being their symbol anymore is the main difference here) and thus, theyre missing, that not everything in the narrative, thats not distinctly marked, as being a delusion, is necessarily to be taken, at face value. just a few examples, because this couldve gotten way longer, if i left all my thoughts and conclusions, down below, as follows- what became clear to me, is that the killing of arthur was indeed, without a doubt, an idea, by the guards, to get rid of him....jackie mockingly tips his hat to him, sings we three (me echo, my shadow and me), another one of the cops tells him not to sing that song (in a way to suggest, that its unnecessarily macabre)....after hearing the lyrics to build a mountain more clearly this time, i think the whole harley pregnancy, was always just meant, to foreshadow (pun intended) the arrival, of the inmate, taking over for arthur....the lyrics are Ah, what a fine young son to take my place and that part cuts back to new proto-joker (i think its the last, or second to last line, that arthur sings, while imagining harley shooting him) also convinced that the narrative of the movie was either severely changed up, during the editing, or theres at least three harley scenes, two of them in close proximity to each other, that are in arthurs mind alone and not distinctly marked, as delusion....pretty sure, that despite phillips course correcting, by explaining, that certain scenes were real (which he also did, after the first movie) you cant take all of the surface story, at face value- one of the more obvious examples is harley telling him, shes pregnant and after the close to you sequence, hes dancing inside his cell, in a way, that this time around, suggested he might imagine the song in his head, due to the way, it cut immediately from the song, to the shot of arthur, dancing in dreamlike manner (and i think his delusion stars with the sex scene, hes thrown into solitary confinement, imagines them dancing on the rooftop, shes already there, when he wakes up, he makes it a point, to tell her, hes not taking his meds anymore, before they have sex and later on, in the courtroom, what causes him to snap and fire mary anne? the suggestion, during sophies testimony, that arthurs a virgin)- i also picked out, that at least half the time, if not more, the next song title, or a lyric, is suggested in the dialogue, by a person, that usually isnt arthur, or lee (an example would be mary anne, telling him she knows, what its like to love somebody, after telling arthur about lee and then him dreaming up the performance of to love somebody, during which arthur is shot) theres a fair bit more, for anyone interested, feel free to ask away, if you like to explore further, or open up discourse, in a more civil manner, than whats been making waves, in those last couple of days
I did immediately thought why the producers and Todd Phillips made this film for. Because this actually would be a great film if this wasn’t a “Joker” film. We were so attached to the idea and symbolism of Joker that the fact there is a universe with “This” narrative for the Joker is honestly baffling to me. I still like the way this was technically shot, but story wise I’m just speechless.
I believe Phillips wanted to create a narrative that was as authentic to the character of Arthur as possible. As cathartic as the first film's ending was, Arthur still lives in a more realistic Gotham where consequences for his actions exist, and behind the Joker persona, he is still a broken and lonely man. There was no way for this film to end but in tragedy. The film does not offer easy answers or solutions because it is a cautionary tale that relies on the audience to fill in the blanks - like one of Aesop's fables. In addition, this film is not only an origin to Batman's Joker, but a Gotham City with a neglectful society and mental health system that spawns individuals like the Joker - a Gotham City that would require a Batman to step in and take control. That is why the film is as bleak as it is. Regarding your comment on entertainment, I watched this film in 70mm IMAX. The cinematography, performances, soundtrack, and sound design alone allowed for an immersive experience that served as my "entertainment," which let films like Oppenheimer be as compelling as they were beyond the talk-heavy scenes. Lastly, I believe this film has attracted too much hate and has significantly more to offer than what most believe.
Even though you guys are on the fence, thank you for at least getting it! People aren’t giving negative reviews bc they think the movie is bad, they are leaving negative reviews bc they don’t like what happened in the film. To me, it was entertaining, bonkers, unhinged, and a social commentary on the viewers. People are mad and tbh it’s hilarious! Todd took one for the team who cares if it’s a flop. It’ll be a cult classic
I know I'm in the minority on this, but as massive #DCComics fan, Joker: Folie à Deux actually did work for me. In addition to the Scorsese flicks that inspired them, both Joker films have elements of Brian Azzarello and Lee Bermejo's Joker comic in them, and Joker: Folie à Deux really incorporates even more elements from previous iterations of Joker and Harley. The musical aspect of Joker: Folie à Deux reminds me a lot of the Joker and Harley musical number in Harley's introduction episode from my all-time favorite animated series The #Batman, "Two of a Kind". The lethargic manner with which Joker begins the film in Arkham before his energy is sparked by Harley calls to mind Joker being basically catatonic at the beginning of The Dark Knight Returns before Batman hits the streets of Gotham once again for the first time in 10 years. The notion of one Joker inspiring others to follow in his footsteps is reminiscent of the Jokerz gang that roams the streets of Neo Gotham on Batman Beyond and Jerome Valeska paving the way for Jeremiah Valeska on #Gotham. The actor playing Harvey Dent in Joker: Folie à Deux ranks only behind Aaron Eckhart for me in terms of the six live-action portrayals we've gotten of that character, and Lady Gaga is awesome as Harley. I agree that Joker: Folie à Deux is pretty much just reckoning with the fallout from Joker's actions in the previous movie rather than paving its own path as a sequel, but that's a big part of what is so interesting to me about it.
Remember when we thought gaga was gonna sweep best lead actress, then we changed our predictions to best supporting actress, now she's completely out of the race. Felicity Jones has best supporting actress on lock. The brutalist is gonna sweep. This movie is an indie movie with a mere 5 million dollar budget and it looks grand and expensive, the academy loves this
I mean all critics are saying she did a great job with a poorly written character and was underused so maybe she can get a nom' for supporting actress? 🤔🤔
I loved the original Joker and hated this sequel, but I agree with everything you said. The film's message is thought-provoking once you can get over the painful chore of the theatrical experience.
Articulated my feelings better than I could! I found Arthur a much more complex and relatable character here. How fandom/media encourage fantasy or present illness was pretty unique. Had way more ‘meaty’ things to say. I know fans of the first will dislike it but still loads about the failure of society. It just shows the bleak reality of it rather than the fantasy escape of the 1st. Lots of it doesn’t work (music, lack of plot momentum, far too long) but getting over criticised- if a film was ever going to get a big reevaluation in a decade it is this one 😅
As soon as the reviews came in for this I dropped it from every single category in the awards contender app, even if it was on the outside of the top 5. With a movie this universally panned and even positive reviews like yours being about the subversion of the film more than the narrative quality, any award chances are in the toilet.
This film and Joker were based on characters in DC....not characters in DC comics. Perhaps, also, one of Todd Phillips aims is to give some feeling and understanding about how it might be to experience an asylum for the criminally insane which is very poorly run. It would not be fun. I did really love the cartoon beginning and maybe Carl Jung would also be happy with it. In the end we are both our bright side and our shadow. Am still processing my feelings about the film, but enjoyed hearing your thoughtful conversation.
@@friendlypup5650 I am referring to the ending of the main characters anticlimactic dying. A movie that wasn’t a standard sequel to unbreakable. Putting the main characters in primarily one setting trying to convince the main characters something about their personas.
i like the movie but this is the point of the dc black label is to be a experimental and dark version of the dc universe. they did that in the first and here it is again. i think the movie asks us to understand stardom. the underbelly has elevated fleck to a star bc he represents a (sometimes justified) anger against an unbalanced system. the elite and the system (the court, the police, the media) also elevate fleck as a star for profit, to fill media air or to make people feel better for being a “better human” i think the folie à deux, the shared delusion is the stardom of fleck and how both the underbelly and elite will always elevate the joker. i also loved how the judge was literally dressed like martin scorsese, the director of the courtroom.
I hope Joker 2 will eventually be appreciated. A lot of people, toxic and fragile males, are saying no to it before even seeing it because it's a musical. Then, out of the people that did go see it, half really don't get what the movie is trying to do and the other half that gets it is offended by it. People acting like it's the worst comic book movie ever made is hilarious to me. So, congratulations, we'll keep getting mindless, shallow, fan service, factory made crap like Deadpool & Wolverine. I swear, between streaming and social media, the already small minds of mainstream audiences have gone full rotten. And you can argue that this is a business, and that's correct, but we can allow ONE of these movies to dare to be different.
In a time of strong racism and toxic female behavior against women like Caitlyn Clark do you dare try to blame men for this movie. Who do men take out to movies? Their dates who want to see a movie. It’s women. Women like men like the Joker, men just adapt to what women want to get the woman. Aka he “loses himself” to find her.
5:08 That also applies to most of Martin Scorcese crime films. Dude made Jordan Belfort look like a "fun" fratboy from "Superbad" so everybody ended up liking that p.o.s.
i wont make many friends, with my line of reasoning, but i stand by it- the fact that everyone with a youtube channel can claim, to be a professional critic these days, has early access to viewings, has titles like i watched x, so you dont have to, proudly regurgitating opinions, by quoting them verbatim, without having seen the movie and letting everybody know that, too- in times like these, when creative risk isnt rewarded, when the crown for the first jokers box office success has gone to the fourth wall cameo excess of deadpool vs wolverine, (is this preferable, to honest, raw sentiment?) im starting to wonder, if phillips had a point, by choosing to dedicate a bit of his third act, to some of the more rabid fanbase. the problem here is, that no one has to face, whats actually uncomfortable about that, because of strength in numbers. and if we are all just numbers for views, individuality dies.
Very good review, guys. I think you covered all the bases. I liked the movie, but I fully understand how a comicbook fan going into it stone cold would be outraged by it. I wouldn't say I was cheering for Arthur, but I had huge sympathy for him, and at the death I felt happy for him that his torment was over.
I do feel like it was leading us to the true Joker. I think the guy who killed im is The Joker and adopts what he was suppose to stand for.. Maybe you all explore this later in this video. Did anyone else get that from any of the movie?
Thanks, OE and BB! 🃏 I love this movie. I think hatred for it comes from misplaced expectations. I'm particularly fond of the fantasy sequences... as one's heart does "sing" (for lack of a better term) when in love. The bleakness of the conclusion makes most sense to me. Many might want to imagine him going on to chastise 'Batman' but I see this in its own universe. He's out of his misery. That's about as good as such a broken person who has committed many murders can aspire to... without effective mental health treatment and support... which he wasn't likely to get. I think this will find its audience, eventually.
consider the fact, that its not without precedent, that filmmakers, writers etc have spoken out against the interpretation of their respective movies, take fight club, for instance, from which many young men took a similar message and arguably missed the same point- or more recently, breaking bad- phillips just went one, or rather several steps, step further, because not only did he attach an original IP to it, but during folie a deux, theres several moments, that lead the audience on a bit.... i saw people walk out, during different points in the movie and though i think, it was mostly due to them, having had enough of the singing portions, it was clear to me, that many thought, until arthurs confession in court, even up to the prison rape, that this will bring out joker/they will get what they fucking deserve.... and as a fan myself, i can understand why some might feel righteously pissed, it didnt happen, but also, because they probably dont want to admit, they were invested, up to a point, in the now so popular narrative of critics, that it hates its fans....its made really clear, that this regards only a certain sub-set of the first jokers fan base and it mostly gets addressed directly, after the court explosion.... not a whole lot of time is devoted, to showing how unhinged some of his followers are, so i dont buy into the movie existing purely out of spite, i think phillips may have actually trusted his audience too much, because he gives several chances for an out, only to pull you back in- the unfortunate thing about that is, that it really only works once, thankfully it worked for me, that first time and that i rewatched the movie today- i think some fans are taking it so personal, that they take too much of the narrative, at face value, theres a lot more going on here, underneath what some assume is the reality, within the movie.... i can explain, for anyone who is interested, but for now, let me just say, that neither the argument that this movie exists only to spite people (it was joaquins first oscar win and his first sequel and he wouldnt have done it, if he hadnt known about the risk), as a cynical cash grab, its simply too big of an outlier and the claim, that the character of arthur ends, exactly where he started, really makes me question if we watched the same movie
Congrats on gold derby! Also making a movie that is meta analysis on how the first one was received is a CHOICE, I don’t think the film is a masterpiece or trash.
I think where the 1st is Taxi Driver meets King of Comedy. This film is more Fight Club Meets American History X. Or it tries to be. In X, bad guy gets raped, seemingly leads to his repentance, and at the end of the movie is little brother whom he misled is killed as a consequence of his bad influence. In Fight Club, an entire extra human being ends up not being real. In this movie he struggles with wanting to be Arthur, wanting to be the Idol Joker, as being the form of Joker that's an Idol is his last hope for relationship. His relationship with his worshippers symbolized by Harley. And Then full tilt Joker, the Joker that would kill his own fans and laugh in their face. This battle leads to X like consequences, on the surface. Replace Arthur dying with his brother. BUT, with the possible Fight Club influence. Could Gaga and Full Tilt Joker be apart of Arthurs imagination. Could Arthur really still be alive, and the guy that killed him, wasn't real and it was all in his head. It was Arthurs persona dying and being permanently replaced by Full Tilt Joker. Which is different than the Idol Joker for the people. On the surface Arthur is getting what he deserves by dying, since the surface takeaway is that Vengeance shouldn't be condoned. The archetypal takeaway, if him dying is only symbolic, is if you punish the mentally ill will zero consideration for their unique sensibilities, then you contribute to the escalation. You have created, someone who would otherwise feel remorse and want to repent feel like that's not a option for survival and they have to go Full Joker, because not even the sympathizers or fans give what is needed.....empathy
Doesnt work as entertainment and doesnt work as a character study. Arthur is barely explored at all. Harley isn't explored period. Theres just random and abrupt conclusions. Also the musical scenes are so uneffective and ultimately tank the film bc they're wasting so much time on that when they could be doing the juicy character work.
Arthur killed 6 people Who he had a reaction or conflict with A car bomb goes off and kills 10-20 people By his “fans” And it’s overshadowed by JOKER again JOKER is bigger than Arthur What separates them is Arthur HAS HOPE till his “that’s life” final breath
so to make a long story short, the only thing even remotely interesting about this film is the fact that Todd Phillips attempted (probably unintentionally) to subvert expectations by go against what the first film set up. i don't see how this is something worth giving acclaim for when everything else is so utterly terrible. it is a useless film that has NOTHING new to say that can't already be extracted from the first film. the fact that they bring up Arthur's sexual and physical abuse when he was a child as a motive to revert into the joker identity, to then right after include a scene where he is literally r*ped and use THAT as his self-realisation scene is so fucking gross? and then they just kill him off at the end????
Love this discussion. I think it's a bit ridiculous how dramatic some Joker 1 fans are being about this movie... it's a comic book character, you guys. Get a grip.
People hate the movie because its a musical is a terrible excuse. I think its a well made movie but the story and the treàtment of Arthur/Joker is furiously dissapointing.
12:32 what I took from this is not that Phillips was illustrating how horrible the world is and how we are powerless to stop it, rather he’s telling viewers who idolise Joker and make him their entire personality that he’s no hero, and that systemic oppression is a vital issue we need to tackle. Something *does* need to be done about this, but Arthur can’t do it alone, and none of his “supporters” who are actually only there for Joker will help him. And those same supporters don’t actually tackle the root cause of these issues that undermined Arthur’s existence in the first place. They just caused chaos. Because for a short moment these Joker fans did come together to “do something” about all this oppression and systemic injustice. When the inmates cheered for Joker, causing havoc, for a moment the authoritarian power of the guards were threatened. There was a silver of chance of overthrowing those in power, and I thought that was where the movie was headed too. Instead, all that led to was an inmate being murdered and the realization dawning on Arthur that he wasn’t any hero. I saw that as the movie saying “that’s not how you tackle systemic injustices.” Not by idolising someone like the Joker, dressing up like him and pretending to be the main character. The Joker supporters were anarchists and wanted chaos. They didn’t care for Arthur, who in this movie represented material issues. Kind of like how social media glorifies mental illnesses and thinks it’s quirky until someone with actual mental illnesses act in a way outside of that glamorization and everyone turns on them. Their support meant nothing to Arthur because he was still stuck being abused by those in power. Those who saw Arthur for who he was (his lawyer) were actively confronting negative pre-conceived notions these people had about Arthur and his mental state, actively contributing to keep him safe and away from harm (i do have problems with the way Phillips handled mental illnesses in this film but that’s for another day). If they actually cared for Arthur’s grievances like they pretended to, they would’ve made more substantial efforts to help him rather than doing what they did. Bombing the court and helping him escape hurt Arthur’s chances of getting the public’s sympathy completely. But overall great review! Loved Brother Bro’s perspective but Oscar Expert’s comments provoke deeper discussions as well and mirror some of the problems I had with this film. I very much agree with Brother Bro’s thoughts though.
@imripeh i heavily agree, because this genuinely surprised me, the response however, did not. i feel some people are blinded, by the notion, that the film hates them (which really only comes up, in the final act and the delusional joker fanboys were arguably crazier, in the first one, arthur not being their symbol anymore is the main difference here) and thus, theyre missing, that not everything in the narrative, thats not distinctly marked, as being a delusion, is necessarily to be taken, at face value. just a few examples, because this couldve gotten way longer, if i left all my thoughts and conclusions, down below, as follows- what became clear to me, is that the killing of arthur was indeed, without a doubt, an idea, by the guards, to get rid of him....jackie mockingly tips his hat to him, sings we three (me echo, my shadow and me), another one of the cops tells him not to sing that song (in a way to suggest, that its unnecessarily macabre)....after hearing the lyrics to build a mountain more clearly this time, i think the whole harley pregnancy, was always just meant, to foreshadow (pun intended) the arrival, of the inmate, taking over for arthur....the lyrics are Ah, what a fine young son to take my place and that part cuts back to new proto-joker (i think its the last, or second to last line, that arthur sings, while imagining harley shooting him) also convinced that the narrative of the movie was either severely changed up, during the editing, or theres at least three harley scenes, two of them in close proximity to each other, that are in arthurs mind alone and not distinctly marked, as delusion....pretty sure, that despite phillips course correcting, by explaining, that certain scenes were real (which he also did, after the first movie) you cant take all of the surface story, at face value- one of the more obvious examples is harley telling him, shes pregnant and after the close to you sequence, hes dancing inside his cell, in a way, that this time around, suggested he might imagine the song in his head, due to the way, it cut immediately from the song, to the shot of arthur, dancing in dreamlike manner (and i think his delusion stars with the sex scene, hes thrown into solitary confinement, imagines them dancing on the rooftop, shes already there, when he wakes up, he makes it a point, to tell her, hes not taking his meds anymore, before they have sex and later on, in the courtroom, what causes him to snap and fire mary anne? the suggestion, during sophies testimony, that arthurs a virgin)- i also picked out, that at least half the time, if not more, the next song title, or a lyric, is suggested in the dialogue, by a person, that usually isnt arthur, or lee (an example would be mary anne, telling him she knows, what its like to love somebody, after telling arthur about lee and then him dreaming up the performance of to love somebody, during which arthur is shot) theres a fair bit more, for anyone interested, feel free to ask away
I know half the idea of "connecting this story to a comic book character is the only way people will see it" is a big reason both of these films fail for me. The connection is such a distraction and puts unnecessary expectations on the storytelling.
Phillips said he wouldn’t be able to raise the funds to make the kind of film he wanted on its own so he trojan horsed into a comic book film. Which says more about out the state of the movie industry and popular culture in general because there was a time when audiences would go watch antihero films with dark subjects made by major studios. I get that comic book fans will be disappointed, but I liked the absurdity of a dark, Fosse style musical inserted into a Sidney Lumet homage. Movie lovers will enjoy the movie if they can get over the whole Joker aspect of it (which is a conundrum) but I suspect most fans of the first film will hate this one. A big reason why I enjoy both films is because the film isn’t about The Joker. But audiences don’t want to believe that. They want this to be the origin story of an iconic villain. In a way it is, but indirectly.
@djstarsign i agree to a point. I understand the play Phillips made in wrapping this story in the guise of something people already kind of know. But again, I think the first one having so many specific ties to the lore is a distraction from the story it seems he wanted to tell. The sequel falls into a similar trap that left me asking "Who's is this for?" I don't think it's for fans of the first one. I don't think it's for fans of musicals. I don't think it's for people that like courtroom dramas. The only thing I think it really gets right is examining Joker as an idea rather than an individual. The rest i was kinda bored with if I'm being honest
@@shotsforshot3753 it’s definitely a mess of a situation he got himself in. The complaints are valid from fans of the people expecting a “real” Joker film. In terms of who it’s for, I believe it’s for the Z Channel fans. The kind of movie fans who love 70s cinema. Fans of Altman, Ashby, Pakula, Cimino, Roeg, etc. I think they’d get the Fosse and Lumet undertones. In a ridiculous comparison, which I admit is a bit of a reach, I think Joker is Breaking Bad: a really amazing show about a villain who was resting underneath the surface of a meek and humble facade. Folie a deux is Better Call Saul: a slow burn of a show that many of us expected to be the origin of a slimy character. But as the show progressed, it revealed itself to be about the internal dynamics torturing Jimmy McGill. It’s not a one to one comparison and easy to dismantle, but I liked the unexpected journey of the Joker sequel.
TBH: I feel like if anyone of the cast deserves an Oscar Nomination, It's Leigh Gill (who plays Gary from the first film who was the only one nice to Arthur). His Courtroom scene alone is the 1 thing that kept me from giving the film a 1/5 star. Discount Tye Sheridan was pretty decent also
I thought this movie was brilliant. The fact that you guys went on what has been the most off the cuff interesting conversation you have ever had shows how thought provoking, meta, and subversive this movie was. I believe time will redeem this film. I think you guys are being a bit unfair to Todd Phillips as a filmmaker. I think he is a great filmmaker and the fact that he had the balls to do this film shows how much of a daring filmmaker he is. In addition to that, the movie is technically fantastic.
While I didn’t like this movie I just don’t think Todd was thinking “yeah fuck the people who like the first movie” when making this movie. I honestly believe Todd make a good movie the first time because he used his references and had a good screenplay and this time around he didn’t. That’s it.
I actually like the idea of the 2nd movie as a Fight Club style movie, I just don't think they really nailed that. If the movie had opened with Arthur being freed and then he tries and fails to run this revolutionary organization, realizing the Joker identity is something he can't live up to and is usurped at the end, that could have worked and been interesting.
The Marvels bombed because it sucked ass and it’s not wat the audience wanted Joker 2 is bombing because it sucked ass and it’s not what the audience wanted It’s not hard
the movie is clearly a response to the people that liked the first movie for the wrong reasons from todd phillips. and that makes the movie very interesting unfortunately todd phillips isn't a very good director so the execution is a little clunky however, this movie is better than the first one by alot
The director hated the first film, does he hate the millions he made from it? Todd Phillips is so phoney. Same with mr phoenix. He was paid 10 million dollars to do this film. he should stop acting like he is above Hollywood shenanigans. He is pay for play just like every other actor He has a price and we finally found it
This movie reminded me of the Pigman Seinfeld episode with Kramer, when Jerry said "So there wasn't actually a Pigman was there" and Kramer goes "Nope, it was just a fat little mental paitent". This movie is like "So, there wasn't really a Joker was there", "Nope, just a skinny little mental patient"....sigh 🤦♂️
The movie was complete shit but I love how people are trying to convince themselves it was good. "No, no. You don't understand. Todd Phillips meant this to be a giant FU to the audience who liked the first one. You're supposed to think it was shit, which means it was great." 😂
2024 has been a horrible year for film All anticipated movies have been disappointing. But movies nobody was anticipating are doing so well Who had the brutalist or anora or the wild robot, the substance, on their anticipated list at the beginning of the year? nobody
??? Anora is from Sean baker. So if you've seen his previous films then anora would definitely be anticipated. Certainly the case for me. It's not some newcomer director out of nowhere.
I left the theater thinking it was like a 4/10. After a couple days I'm at a 5 or 6/10 depending on if I want to be generous or not. I however cannot recommend anyone see it in theaters. It isn't worth the price of the ticket, potential parking fees/gas, and of course popcorn/soda etc. For instance I saw it with two friends and we each took one of those categories to pay for. One of my friends bought the three tickets, I bought the snacks ($34 or so), and one drove/paid for the $20 parking fee that was near the IMAX we saw it at. So it all worked out but none of us liked it much. I've yet to see if their scores have gone up like mine but I doubt one's opinion went up. He kept checking his phone to see what time it was (we were in the back row and nobody was really there btw) and called it a piece of shit lol. Basically unless you are really intrigued by it, or maybe if you can see it on a cheaper day, wait for it to on streaming.
Let me say this: it is anything but clever. Many forms of entertainment ranging from movies to video games have done a bad job of subverting our expectations. For me, examples include The Last Jedi, The Last of Us 2, and Joker 2. I’m not saying these are complete dumpster fires (at least they have memorable scenes and/or look great). But the creators take these big swings that mostly don’t pay off. Worse, it feels like they hate their fans. There is a way to do it successfully, but this movie ain’t it.
@@pb.j.1753 im sorry sir, I saw parasite in December of 2019 and as soon as I left I knew that film would win every award it would be nominated for and it won all but one!
Greetings, heterosexuals...No mention of the prison yard kiss? and the subsequent implication that they are having a relationship? and then he is murdered by his prison boyfriend.... Looks to me that this key plot point was edited out...and the remnants of this part of the story are just left hanging there....
An intense chanting session on Shreem Brezee with different techniques. Padma and Vijay are Pillai Centre teachers from Singapore who are husband and wife who is in charge of the Asian Pacific region and Singapore amongst other portfolios. ua-cam.com/users/live91IvvPatU6w?si=z4imn9lZPUvZdVRo
This is legitimately the most nuanced conversation I’ve seen about this film. Just goes to show how articulate you guys are when discussing movies, love it!
“I don’t even know if I like this movie or not” is honestly so real
i still don’t know how i feel about it, was like a fever dream… the whole time i was ??????
@@submarinosthat was me with Everything Everywhere all at once lmao. I was like wut, did I like that?
It's garbage.
There were certainly flaws in the pacing, length, and the musical bits, but the more I think about it the more I like the film. The social commentary, and the clear message to the fanboys who idolized Joker, is pretty strong. I like that. A lot actually. It's quite audacious, because most would never dare take that risk for very obvious reasons. But he did, and I respect it.
I left the theater with the exact same feeling of not knowing what I thought about the film… If I watched this in Venice with no reviews and high expectations I would’ve definitely hated, but everyone is hating so much (and I’m not the biggest musicals fan) that I went into it with the lowest expectations… and I actually appreciated a lot of aspects of the film, are we completely taking this out of the race for tech categories?!?! Cuz I loved the cinematography, production design and costume/hair/makeup in this!! Every scene was gorgeous to look at, I really think it deserves those noms
I feel the cinematography is top notch. The performances were good but I don't think enough for a nomination (maybe at the Globes though).
The Cinematography was awesome and gorgeous
I think for a mainstream "blockbuster" to get into tech categories, it needs to be either well received or financially successful. This movie is neither. Of course, their are exceptions, but I think the odds are not looking good
@@leannebrown02 yeah i get that, but since the first one got e l e v e n nominations, maybe a lot of voters were super curious to at least give the benefit of the doubt on this one I don’t know… but I agree the odds are not great, just saying it’s deserving of a lot of tech noms for sure!
@@98LucasFG It should win cinematography, from what I have seen this is the most beautiful looking movie of the year so far
thank you for this nuanced conversation!
i adore both Joker flicks, they're masterpieces
i don't think Folie a Deux is a "bait and switch" at all having rewatched the first one after the sequel --- the "more interesting conversation" is the responsibility of paid critics who have failed both flicks while yet pretending to like the odd art film that comes along
I found this movie chaotic and weird, and that’s why I loved it. It took bold swings and was more of a commentary of mental illness and always thought this was the best conclusion to the first one. Kudos to the bravery of the filmmakers and we would so lucky to have such brave directors as Todd.
Yay, my opinion just dropped!
making a 200million dollar movie to respond to 2% audience at best of the first that got Enbolden by Joker was a choice. Headlines really put in Todd`s head that incels exists and got the first one to a billion dollar boxoffice and oscar success, crazy. Anyway, i liked the movie, if the name was The Trial of the Joker or somethin the response would`ve been better.
While I didn’t like this movie I just don’t think Todd was thinking “yeah fuck the people who like the first movie” when making this movie. I honestly believe Todd make a good movie the first time because he used his references and had a good screenplay and this time around he didn’t. That’s it.
Five years ago, I was 16, starting to get into cinema and you two really helped me to think critically during that 2019/2020 Oscar race. Now I’ve watched every video you’ve put out since I watched your Joker review and it’s sad to hear the disappointment of Joker 2, but I’m just glad that the Oscar Expert and Brother Bro have stayed true to themselves as a window into my childhood when I began falling in love with cinema
Shut up
Bro we are in the same exact boat. What’s your Letterboxd?
What a touching tribute
Thank you. You understood much more than nearly all popular critics.
All I wanted for them to do was be mindful of the pacing. All the parts were there and it had potential to be incredible. Some test screenings would’ve been so so so helpful.
I enjoy your takes. Especially considering everything that Phillips intended to do (which was a lot) I ended up enjoying the film mainly due to it's kind of "realistic" take on how figures like Arthur Fleck end up. It wasn't cathartic, for sure, but it did leave me thinking.
i heavily agree, because this genuinely surprised me, the response however, did not. i feel some people are blinded, by the notion, that the film hates them (which really only comes up, in the final act and the delusional joker fanboys were arguably crazier, in the first one, arthur not being their symbol anymore is the main difference here) and thus, theyre missing, that not everything in the narrative, thats not distinctly marked, as being a delusion, is necessarily to be taken, at face value. just a few examples, because this couldve gotten way longer, if i left all my thoughts and conclusions, down below, as follows-
what became clear to me, is that the killing of arthur was indeed, without a doubt, an idea, by the guards, to get rid of him....jackie mockingly tips his hat to him, sings we three (me echo, my shadow and me), another one of the cops tells him not to sing that song (in a way to suggest, that its unnecessarily macabre)....after hearing the lyrics to build a mountain more clearly this time, i think the whole harley pregnancy, was always just meant, to foreshadow (pun intended) the arrival, of the inmate, taking over for arthur....the lyrics are Ah, what a fine young son to take my place and that part cuts back to new proto-joker (i think its the last, or second to last line, that arthur sings, while imagining harley shooting him)
also convinced that the narrative of the movie was either severely changed up, during the editing, or theres at least three harley scenes, two of them in close proximity to each other, that are in arthurs mind alone and not distinctly marked, as delusion....pretty sure, that despite phillips course correcting, by explaining, that certain scenes were real (which he also did, after the first movie) you cant take all of the surface story, at face value- one of the more obvious examples is harley telling him, shes pregnant and after the close to you sequence, hes dancing inside his cell, in a way, that this time around, suggested he might imagine the song in his head, due to the way, it cut immediately from the song, to the shot of arthur, dancing in dreamlike manner (and i think his delusion stars with the sex scene, hes thrown into solitary confinement, imagines them dancing on the rooftop, shes already there, when he wakes up, he makes it a point, to tell her, hes not taking his meds anymore, before they have sex and later on, in the courtroom, what causes him to snap and fire mary anne? the suggestion, during sophies testimony, that arthurs a virgin)-
i also picked out, that at least half the time, if not more, the next song title, or a lyric, is suggested in the dialogue, by a person, that usually isnt arthur, or lee (an example would be mary anne, telling him she knows, what its like to love somebody, after telling arthur about lee and then him dreaming up the performance of to love somebody, during which arthur is shot)
theres a fair bit more, for anyone interested, feel free to ask away, if you like to explore further, or open up discourse, in a more civil manner, than whats been making waves, in those last couple of days
It’s one of those movies that so obviously wants to be hated that when i start to hate it feels like it’s accomplishing its goals
Best review of this movie I’ve seen yet. It’s a very interesting watch and I want to see it again
I did immediately thought why the producers and Todd Phillips made this film for. Because this actually would be a great film if this wasn’t a “Joker” film. We were so attached to the idea and symbolism of Joker that the fact there is a universe with “This” narrative for the Joker is honestly baffling to me. I still like the way this was technically shot, but story wise I’m just speechless.
I believe Phillips wanted to create a narrative that was as authentic to the character of Arthur as possible. As cathartic as the first film's ending was, Arthur still lives in a more realistic Gotham where consequences for his actions exist, and behind the Joker persona, he is still a broken and lonely man. There was no way for this film to end but in tragedy. The film does not offer easy answers or solutions because it is a cautionary tale that relies on the audience to fill in the blanks - like one of Aesop's fables. In addition, this film is not only an origin to Batman's Joker, but a Gotham City with a neglectful society and mental health system that spawns individuals like the Joker - a Gotham City that would require a Batman to step in and take control. That is why the film is as bleak as it is.
Regarding your comment on entertainment, I watched this film in 70mm IMAX. The cinematography, performances, soundtrack, and sound design alone allowed for an immersive experience that served as my "entertainment," which let films like Oppenheimer be as compelling as they were beyond the talk-heavy scenes. Lastly, I believe this film has attracted too much hate and has significantly more to offer than what most believe.
Even though you guys are on the fence, thank you for at least getting it! People aren’t giving negative reviews bc they think the movie is bad, they are leaving negative reviews bc they don’t like what happened in the film. To me, it was entertaining, bonkers, unhinged, and a social commentary on the viewers. People are mad and tbh it’s hilarious! Todd took one for the team who cares if it’s a flop. It’ll be a cult classic
I know I'm in the minority on this, but as massive #DCComics fan, Joker: Folie à Deux actually did work for me. In addition to the Scorsese flicks that inspired them, both Joker films have elements of Brian Azzarello and Lee Bermejo's Joker comic in them, and Joker: Folie à Deux really incorporates even more elements from previous iterations of Joker and Harley. The musical aspect of Joker: Folie à Deux reminds me a lot of the Joker and Harley musical number in Harley's introduction episode from my all-time favorite animated series The #Batman, "Two of a Kind". The lethargic manner with which Joker begins the film in Arkham before his energy is sparked by Harley calls to mind Joker being basically catatonic at the beginning of The Dark Knight Returns before Batman hits the streets of Gotham once again for the first time in 10 years. The notion of one Joker inspiring others to follow in his footsteps is reminiscent of the Jokerz gang that roams the streets of Neo Gotham on Batman Beyond and Jerome Valeska paving the way for Jeremiah Valeska on #Gotham. The actor playing Harvey Dent in Joker: Folie à Deux ranks only behind Aaron Eckhart for me in terms of the six live-action portrayals we've gotten of that character, and Lady Gaga is awesome as Harley. I agree that Joker: Folie à Deux is pretty much just reckoning with the fallout from Joker's actions in the previous movie rather than paving its own path as a sequel, but that's a big part of what is so interesting to me about it.
Remember when we thought gaga was gonna sweep best lead actress, then we changed our predictions to best supporting actress, now she's completely out of the race.
Felicity Jones has best supporting actress on lock. The brutalist is gonna sweep. This movie is an indie movie with a mere 5 million dollar budget and it looks grand and expensive, the academy loves this
I mean all critics are saying she did a great job with a poorly written character and was underused so maybe she can get a nom' for supporting actress? 🤔🤔
@@flazeda8743 LOL, no.
Man The Brutalist budget rumors are getting worse and worse. I love the film but it did not cost 5 million to make!
Well done guys. One of the few reviews that really got it! Greetings from Athens, Greece.
I love this discussion from you two and honestly made me love this movie even more than i already, too.
I loved the original Joker and hated this sequel, but I agree with everything you said. The film's message is thought-provoking once you can get over the painful chore of the theatrical experience.
Articulated my feelings better than I could! I found Arthur a much more complex and relatable character here. How fandom/media encourage fantasy or present illness was pretty unique. Had way more ‘meaty’ things to say.
I know fans of the first will dislike it but still loads about the failure of society. It just shows the bleak reality of it rather than the fantasy escape of the 1st. Lots of it doesn’t work (music, lack of plot momentum, far too long) but getting over criticised- if a film was ever going to get a big reevaluation in a decade it is this one 😅
As soon as the reviews came in for this I dropped it from every single category in the awards contender app, even if it was on the outside of the top 5. With a movie this universally panned and even positive reviews like yours being about the subversion of the film more than the narrative quality, any award chances are in the toilet.
phoenix's bad karma for walking away from a movie 2 wks before filming.....ouch.
Dude does that very often. The only reason media brought it to light now is because studios are punishing everybody involved in Joker 2.
“Those films are not endorsing the main characters but they let the audience go on a thrill ride with them” 👏👏👏 couldn’t have said it better myself!
This film and Joker were based on characters in DC....not characters in DC comics. Perhaps, also, one of Todd Phillips aims is to give some feeling and understanding about how it might be to experience an asylum for the criminally insane which is very poorly run. It would not be fun. I did really love the cartoon beginning and maybe Carl Jung would also be happy with it. In the end we are both our bright side and our shadow. Am still processing my feelings about the film, but enjoyed hearing your thoughtful conversation.
I enjoyed watching Jeremy Allen White and Hayden Christensen discuss this film.
It’s crazy how I’m getting massive flashbacks to last of us 2
And Glass
@@thecaptaindeadpool5098 eh
@@friendlypup5650 I am referring to the ending of the main characters anticlimactic dying. A movie that wasn’t a standard sequel to unbreakable. Putting the main characters in primarily one setting trying to convince the main characters something about their personas.
Great analysis of the movie guys. I really appreciated the commentary
i like the movie but this is the point of the dc black label is to be a experimental and dark version of the dc universe. they did that in the first and here it is again.
i think the movie asks us to understand stardom. the underbelly has elevated fleck to a star bc he represents a (sometimes justified) anger against an unbalanced system. the elite and the system (the court, the police, the media) also elevate fleck as a star for profit, to fill media air or to make people feel better for being a “better human” i think the folie à deux, the shared delusion is the stardom of fleck and how both the underbelly and elite will always elevate the joker. i also loved how the judge was literally dressed like martin scorsese, the director of the courtroom.
I hope Joker 2 will eventually be appreciated. A lot of people, toxic and fragile males, are saying no to it before even seeing it because it's a musical. Then, out of the people that did go see it, half really don't get what the movie is trying to do and the other half that gets it is offended by it. People acting like it's the worst comic book movie ever made is hilarious to me. So, congratulations, we'll keep getting mindless, shallow, fan service, factory made crap like Deadpool & Wolverine. I swear, between streaming and social media, the already small minds of mainstream audiences have gone full rotten. And you can argue that this is a business, and that's correct, but we can allow ONE of these movies to dare to be different.
In a time of strong racism and toxic female behavior against women like Caitlyn Clark do you dare try to blame men for this movie.
Who do men take out to movies? Their dates who want to see a movie. It’s women. Women like men like the Joker, men just adapt to what women want to get the woman. Aka he “loses himself” to find her.
LOL. Less women went to see it, and the ones who did, did not enjoy it either.
"Muh fragile muskulineteh dou." Hahaha!!!
there's no way out in society. next person who snaps would become the Joker. Maybe we're just lucky.
5:08
That also applies to most of Martin Scorcese crime films. Dude made Jordan Belfort look like a "fun" fratboy from "Superbad" so everybody ended up liking that p.o.s.
except the first one doesnt portray joker as a badass. if someone needs to have explained to them why murder is bad that's not on the film.
I’ve been waiting for this review!
i wont make many friends, with my line of reasoning, but i stand by it- the fact that everyone with a youtube channel can claim, to be a professional critic these days, has early access to viewings, has titles like i watched x, so you dont have to, proudly regurgitating opinions, by quoting them verbatim, without having seen the movie and letting everybody know that, too- in times like these, when creative risk isnt rewarded, when the crown for the first jokers box office success has gone to the fourth wall cameo excess of deadpool vs wolverine, (is this preferable, to honest, raw sentiment?) im starting to wonder, if phillips had a point, by choosing to dedicate a bit of his third act, to some of the more rabid fanbase. the problem here is, that no one has to face, whats actually uncomfortable about that, because of strength in numbers. and if we are all just numbers for views, individuality dies.
Very good review, guys. I think you covered all the bases. I liked the movie, but I fully understand how a comicbook fan going into it stone cold would be outraged by it. I wouldn't say I was cheering for Arthur, but I had huge sympathy for him, and at the death I felt happy for him that his torment was over.
I do feel like it was leading us to the true Joker. I think the guy who killed im is The Joker and adopts what he was suppose to stand for.. Maybe you all explore this later in this video. Did anyone else get that from any of the movie?
Thanks, OE and BB! 🃏 I love this movie. I think hatred for it comes from misplaced expectations. I'm particularly fond of the fantasy sequences... as one's heart does "sing" (for lack of a better term) when in love. The bleakness of the conclusion makes most sense to me. Many might want to imagine him going on to chastise 'Batman' but I see this in its own universe. He's out of his misery. That's about as good as such a broken person who has committed many murders can aspire to... without effective mental health treatment and support... which he wasn't likely to get. I think this will find its audience, eventually.
9/10
I love the discussion.
Great discussion, thanks!
Very valuable discussion around a perennial problem in cinema
consider the fact, that its not without precedent, that filmmakers, writers etc have spoken out against the interpretation of their respective movies, take fight club, for instance, from which many young men took a similar message and arguably missed the same point- or more recently, breaking bad- phillips just went one, or rather several steps, step further, because not only did he attach an original IP to it, but during folie a deux, theres several moments, that lead the audience on a bit.... i saw people walk out, during different points in the movie and though i think, it was mostly due to them, having had enough of the singing portions, it was clear to me, that many thought, until arthurs confession in court, even up to the prison rape, that this will bring out joker/they will get what they fucking deserve....
and as a fan myself, i can understand why some might feel righteously pissed, it didnt happen, but also, because they probably dont want to admit, they were invested, up to a point, in the now so popular narrative of critics, that it hates its fans....its made really clear, that this regards only a certain sub-set of the first jokers fan base and it mostly gets addressed directly, after the court explosion....
not a whole lot of time is devoted, to showing how unhinged some of his followers are, so i dont buy into the movie existing purely out of spite, i think phillips may have actually trusted his audience too much, because he gives several chances for an out, only to pull you back in- the unfortunate thing about that is, that it really only works once, thankfully it worked for me, that first time and that i rewatched the movie today- i think some fans are taking it so personal, that they take too much of the narrative, at face value, theres a lot more going on here, underneath what some assume is the reality, within the movie....
i can explain, for anyone who is interested, but for now, let me just say, that neither the argument that this movie exists only to spite people (it was joaquins first oscar win and his first sequel and he wouldnt have done it, if he hadnt known about the risk), as a cynical cash grab, its simply too big of an outlier and the claim, that the character of arthur ends, exactly where he started, really makes me question if we watched the same movie
Congrats on gold derby! Also making a movie that is meta analysis on how the first one was received is a CHOICE, I don’t think the film is a masterpiece or trash.
I think where the 1st is Taxi Driver meets King of Comedy. This film is more Fight Club Meets American History X. Or it tries to be. In X, bad guy gets raped, seemingly leads to his repentance, and at the end of the movie is little brother whom he misled is killed as a consequence of his bad influence. In Fight Club, an entire extra human being ends up not being real.
In this movie he struggles with wanting to be Arthur, wanting to be the Idol Joker, as being the form of Joker that's an Idol is his last hope for relationship. His relationship with his worshippers symbolized by Harley. And Then full tilt Joker, the Joker that would kill his own fans and laugh in their face.
This battle leads to X like consequences, on the surface. Replace Arthur dying with his brother. BUT, with the possible Fight Club influence. Could Gaga and Full Tilt Joker be apart of Arthurs imagination. Could Arthur really still be alive, and the guy that killed him, wasn't real and it was all in his head. It was Arthurs persona dying and being permanently replaced by Full Tilt Joker. Which is different than the Idol Joker for the people.
On the surface Arthur is getting what he deserves by dying, since the surface takeaway is that Vengeance shouldn't be condoned. The archetypal takeaway, if him dying is only symbolic, is if you punish the mentally ill will zero consideration for their unique sensibilities, then you contribute to the escalation. You have created, someone who would otherwise feel remorse and want to repent feel like that's not a option for survival and they have to go Full Joker, because not even the sympathizers or fans give what is needed.....empathy
I needed a little heads up about theminute when the spoilers come in...
Doesnt work as entertainment and doesnt work as a character study. Arthur is barely explored at all. Harley isn't explored period. Theres just random and abrupt conclusions. Also the musical scenes are so uneffective and ultimately tank the film bc they're wasting so much time on that when they could be doing the juicy character work.
Arthur killed 6 people
Who he had a reaction or conflict with
A car bomb goes off and kills 10-20 people
By his “fans”
And it’s overshadowed by JOKER again
JOKER is bigger than Arthur
What separates them is Arthur HAS HOPE till his “that’s life” final breath
I think is great that they director got to do the movie he want it. Like Megapolis or Barbie... They are good but I think is awsome they are out there
so to make a long story short, the only thing even remotely interesting about this film is the fact that Todd Phillips attempted (probably unintentionally) to subvert expectations by go against what the first film set up. i don't see how this is something worth giving acclaim for when everything else is so utterly terrible. it is a useless film that has NOTHING new to say that can't already be extracted from the first film. the fact that they bring up Arthur's sexual and physical abuse when he was a child as a motive to revert into the joker identity, to then right after include a scene where he is literally r*ped and use THAT as his self-realisation scene is so fucking gross? and then they just kill him off at the end????
Bingo.
Love this discussion. I think it's a bit ridiculous how dramatic some Joker 1 fans are being about this movie... it's a comic book character, you guys. Get a grip.
People care about the lore of a character, gets told to fcuk off and get a grip..
People hate the movie because its a musical is a terrible excuse.
I think its a well made movie but the story and the treàtment of Arthur/Joker is furiously dissapointing.
It's a regression of the character and that's not a good idea imo
12:32 what I took from this is not that Phillips was illustrating how horrible the world is and how we are powerless to stop it, rather he’s telling viewers who idolise Joker and make him their entire personality that he’s no hero, and that systemic oppression is a vital issue we need to tackle. Something *does* need to be done about this, but Arthur can’t do it alone, and none of his “supporters” who are actually only there for Joker will help him. And those same supporters don’t actually tackle the root cause of these issues that undermined Arthur’s existence in the first place. They just caused chaos. Because for a short moment these Joker fans did come together to “do something” about all this oppression and systemic injustice. When the inmates cheered for Joker, causing havoc, for a moment the authoritarian power of the guards were threatened. There was a silver of chance of overthrowing those in power, and I thought that was where the movie was headed too. Instead, all that led to was an inmate being murdered and the realization dawning on Arthur that he wasn’t any hero. I saw that as the movie saying “that’s not how you tackle systemic injustices.” Not by idolising someone like the Joker, dressing up like him and pretending to be the main character. The Joker supporters were anarchists and wanted chaos. They didn’t care for Arthur, who in this movie represented material issues. Kind of like how social media glorifies mental illnesses and thinks it’s quirky until someone with actual mental illnesses act in a way outside of that glamorization and everyone turns on them. Their support meant nothing to Arthur because he was still stuck being abused by those in power. Those who saw Arthur for who he was (his lawyer) were actively confronting negative pre-conceived notions these people had about Arthur and his mental state, actively contributing to keep him safe and away from harm (i do have problems with the way Phillips handled mental illnesses in this film but that’s for another day). If they actually cared for Arthur’s grievances like they pretended to, they would’ve made more substantial efforts to help him rather than doing what they did. Bombing the court and helping him escape hurt Arthur’s chances of getting the public’s sympathy completely.
But overall great review! Loved Brother Bro’s perspective but Oscar Expert’s comments provoke deeper discussions as well and mirror some of the problems I had with this film. I very much agree with Brother Bro’s thoughts though.
Say what you will about the movie but it is very creative and it takes risks
I've been hoping for this video!
One of the only good reviews of this film.
Hot take but I’m feeling Folie > Joker 1
@imripeh i heavily agree, because this genuinely surprised me, the response however, did not. i feel some people are blinded, by the notion, that the film hates them (which really only comes up, in the final act and the delusional joker fanboys were arguably crazier, in the first one, arthur not being their symbol anymore is the main difference here) and thus, theyre missing, that not everything in the narrative, thats not distinctly marked, as being a delusion, is necessarily to be taken, at face value. just a few examples, because this couldve gotten way longer, if i left all my thoughts and conclusions, down below, as follows-
what became clear to me, is that the killing of arthur was indeed, without a doubt, an idea, by the guards, to get rid of him....jackie mockingly tips his hat to him, sings we three (me echo, my shadow and me), another one of the cops tells him not to sing that song (in a way to suggest, that its unnecessarily macabre)....after hearing the lyrics to build a mountain more clearly this time, i think the whole harley pregnancy, was always just meant, to foreshadow (pun intended) the arrival, of the inmate, taking over for arthur....the lyrics are Ah, what a fine young son to take my place and that part cuts back to new proto-joker (i think its the last, or second to last line, that arthur sings, while imagining harley shooting him)
also convinced that the narrative of the movie was either severely changed up, during the editing, or theres at least three harley scenes, two of them in close proximity to each other, that are in arthurs mind alone and not distinctly marked, as delusion....pretty sure, that despite phillips course correcting, by explaining, that certain scenes were real (which he also did, after the first movie) you cant take all of the surface story, at face value- one of the more obvious examples is harley telling him, shes pregnant and after the close to you sequence, hes dancing inside his cell, in a way, that this time around, suggested he might imagine the song in his head, due to the way, it cut immediately from the song, to the shot of arthur, dancing in dreamlike manner (and i think his delusion stars with the sex scene, hes thrown into solitary confinement, imagines them dancing on the rooftop, shes already there, when he wakes up, he makes it a point, to tell her, hes not taking his meds anymore, before they have sex and later on, in the courtroom, what causes him to snap and fire mary anne? the suggestion, during sophies testimony, that arthurs a virgin)-
i also picked out, that at least half the time, if not more, the next song title, or a lyric, is suggested in the dialogue, by a person, that usually isnt arthur, or lee (an example would be mary anne, telling him she knows, what its like to love somebody, after telling arthur about lee and then him dreaming up the performance of to love somebody, during which arthur is shot)
theres a fair bit more, for anyone interested, feel free to ask away
LOL.
My dudes pulling through. This movie was good.
I know half the idea of "connecting this story to a comic book character is the only way people will see it" is a big reason both of these films fail for me.
The connection is such a distraction and puts unnecessary expectations on the storytelling.
Phillips said he wouldn’t be able to raise the funds to make the kind of film he wanted on its own so he trojan horsed into a comic book film. Which says more about out the state of the movie industry and popular culture in general because there was a time when audiences would go watch antihero films with dark subjects made by major studios.
I get that comic book fans will be disappointed, but I liked the absurdity of a dark, Fosse style musical inserted into a Sidney Lumet homage. Movie lovers will enjoy the movie if they can get over the whole Joker aspect of it (which is a conundrum) but I suspect most fans of the first film will hate this one.
A big reason why I enjoy both films is because the film isn’t about The Joker. But audiences don’t want to believe that. They want this to be the origin story of an iconic villain. In a way it is, but indirectly.
@djstarsign i agree to a point.
I understand the play Phillips made in wrapping this story in the guise of something people already kind of know. But again, I think the first one having so many specific ties to the lore is a distraction from the story it seems he wanted to tell. The sequel falls into a similar trap that left me asking "Who's is this for?"
I don't think it's for fans of the first one. I don't think it's for fans of musicals. I don't think it's for people that like courtroom dramas. The only thing I think it really gets right is examining Joker as an idea rather than an individual. The rest i was kinda bored with if I'm being honest
@@shotsforshot3753 it’s definitely a mess of a situation he got himself in. The complaints are valid from fans of the people expecting a “real” Joker film. In terms of who it’s for, I believe it’s for the Z Channel fans. The kind of movie fans who love 70s cinema. Fans of Altman, Ashby, Pakula, Cimino, Roeg, etc. I think they’d get the Fosse and Lumet undertones.
In a ridiculous comparison, which I admit is a bit of a reach, I think Joker is Breaking Bad: a really amazing show about a villain who was resting underneath the surface of a meek and humble facade. Folie a deux is Better Call Saul: a slow burn of a show that many of us expected to be the origin of a slimy character. But as the show progressed, it revealed itself to be about the internal dynamics torturing Jimmy McGill. It’s not a one to one comparison and easy to dismantle, but I liked the unexpected journey of the Joker sequel.
@djstarsign totally fair. I get what you're saying with the Fosse comparison in particular. This just...didn't work for me I guess lol
I loved the first one. This one let me down
Definitely felt very irishman
Please don’t remind me of that movie 😂
TBH: I feel like if anyone of the cast deserves an Oscar Nomination, It's Leigh Gill (who plays Gary from the first film who was the only one nice to Arthur).
His Courtroom scene alone is the 1 thing that kept me from giving the film a 1/5 star.
Discount Tye Sheridan was pretty decent also
I thought this movie was brilliant. The fact that you guys went on what has been the most off the cuff interesting conversation you have ever had shows how thought provoking, meta, and subversive this movie was. I believe time will redeem this film. I think you guys are being a bit unfair to Todd Phillips as a filmmaker. I think he is a great filmmaker and the fact that he had the balls to do this film shows how much of a daring filmmaker he is. In addition to that, the movie is technically fantastic.
While I didn’t like this movie I just don’t think Todd was thinking “yeah fuck the people who like the first movie” when making this movie. I honestly believe Todd make a good movie the first time because he used his references and had a good screenplay and this time around he didn’t. That’s it.
I believe it is one of the best movies of 2024. Great cinematography, great acting, great use of music, what can else I as a cinemalover want?
A good story?
@@BadBrucey in my opinion, story is good too. If you don't have the story you want, it does not mean you can say story is bad imo.
Joker didn't die at the end of the movie, Arthur Fleck did.
I enjoyed it more than most MCU garbage
I feel like your critique of the film is more interesting, than the film actually was.
Asteroid City
200 millon om this lol
I actually like the idea of the 2nd movie as a Fight Club style movie, I just don't think they really nailed that. If the movie had opened with Arthur being freed and then he tries and fails to run this revolutionary organization, realizing the Joker identity is something he can't live up to and is usurped at the end, that could have worked and been interesting.
The Marvels bombed because it sucked ass and it’s not wat the audience wanted
Joker 2 is bombing because it sucked ass and it’s not what the audience wanted
It’s not hard
The difference is the marvels is a generic comic book movie,Joker for as much as divisive is, it's creative and takes risks
The butthurt fanboys are so funny, this is a wonderfully human film about empathy..
No one cares.
the movie is clearly a response to the people that liked the first movie for the wrong reasons from todd phillips. and that makes the movie very interesting
unfortunately todd phillips isn't a very good director so the execution is a little clunky
however, this movie is better than the first one by alot
Looks wretched
Promise me, youll review The Summer Book starring Glenn Close which will be released in BFI next week. She might become a front Runner.
I didn’t like this movie but it’s important to remember that this was never ever ever meant to be a comic book movie lie a MCU and/or DCU movie
Ooh shit!!! Don't watch this if you haven't seen the movie!!! I just got so spoiled. Gonna finish watching this in a few days
🤡 it was...strange
Hey, Jackasses! You guys just gave away the ending of this movie. Put up a spoiler warning!
Both. The answer is both.
Disaster. This movie is awful, disgraceful.
The director hated the first film, does he hate the millions he made from it?
Todd Phillips is so phoney. Same with mr phoenix. He was paid 10 million dollars to do this film. he should stop acting like he is above Hollywood shenanigans. He is pay for play just like every other actor
He has a price and we finally found it
Joaquin has always been about the money, he's never hidden it lol.
Thought it was 20m. And 20m for Todd. And 12m for Gaga. All three understandably devastated by the bad reviews.
This is not a superhero film
This movie reminded me of the Pigman Seinfeld episode with Kramer, when Jerry said "So there wasn't actually a Pigman was there" and Kramer goes "Nope, it was just a fat little mental paitent". This movie is like "So, there wasn't really a Joker was there", "Nope, just a skinny little mental patient"....sigh 🤦♂️
The movie was complete shit but I love how people are trying to convince themselves it was good. "No, no. You don't understand. Todd Phillips meant this to be a giant FU to the audience who liked the first one. You're supposed to think it was shit, which means it was great." 😂
Punishment to the fans of the first one for daring to enjoy it.
Both great movies
D I S A S T E R
2024 has been a horrible year for film
All anticipated movies have been disappointing. But movies nobody was anticipating are doing so well
Who had the brutalist or anora or the wild robot, the substance, on their anticipated list at the beginning of the year? nobody
??? Anora is from Sean baker. So if you've seen his previous films then anora would definitely be anticipated. Certainly the case for me.
It's not some newcomer director out of nowhere.
dune? challengers?
What's wrong with you people?
Awful movie (5/10)
I left the theater thinking it was like a 4/10. After a couple days I'm at a 5 or 6/10 depending on if I want to be generous or not.
I however cannot recommend anyone see it in theaters. It isn't worth the price of the ticket, potential parking fees/gas, and of course popcorn/soda etc. For instance I saw it with two friends and we each took one of those categories to pay for. One of my friends bought the three tickets, I bought the snacks ($34 or so), and one drove/paid for the $20 parking fee that was near the IMAX we saw it at. So it all worked out but none of us liked it much. I've yet to see if their scores have gone up like mine but I doubt one's opinion went up. He kept checking his phone to see what time it was (we were in the back row and nobody was really there btw) and called it a piece of shit lol.
Basically unless you are really intrigued by it, or maybe if you can see it on a cheaper day, wait for it to on streaming.
Let me say this: it is anything but clever. Many forms of entertainment ranging from movies to video games have done a bad job of subverting our expectations. For me, examples include The Last Jedi, The Last of Us 2, and Joker 2. I’m not saying these are complete dumpster fires (at least they have memorable scenes and/or look great). But the creators take these big swings that mostly don’t pay off. Worse, it feels like they hate their fans. There is a way to do it successfully, but this movie ain’t it.
This makes parasite winning all the more better!!! Cuz people really thought joker would win best picture
Hmm not true. 1917 was thought to win because it won Best Film at Globes, BAFTA and PGA.
@@pb.j.1753 im sorry sir, I saw parasite in December of 2019 and as soon as I left I knew that film would win every award it would be nominated for and it won all but one!
Greetings, heterosexuals...No mention of the prison yard kiss? and the subsequent implication that they are having a relationship? and then he is murdered by his prison boyfriend.... Looks to me that this key plot point was edited out...and the remnants of this part of the story are just left hanging there....
the guy he kissed and the guy who murdered him are different people
it’s terrible and not what the audience wanted
Just because something is subversive or trying something new doesn't make it good automatically. I've mostly heard it's just straight boring.
An intense chanting session on Shreem Brezee with different techniques.
Padma and Vijay are Pillai Centre teachers from Singapore who are husband and wife who is in charge of the Asian Pacific region and Singapore amongst other portfolios.
ua-cam.com/users/live91IvvPatU6w?si=z4imn9lZPUvZdVRo
No one cares.
😢is it really bad?? If it was very bad. I plan to watch Anora coming week ❤🤍🔥