It’s a combination. Pay scales being high, license rights, and the period design of the set and costume does cost a pretty penny. And marketing was very aggressive for the film, adding around $100 million. In a way, they really overspent for a film that is set in TWO locations.
You people need to stop with the whole chris stuckman thing if you don’t like his content just move on it’s almost like you guys want jonh and him to have a falling out
@@patricklarsen182 Because he actually makes movies now and can appreciate and respect other people’s art -unlike armchair critics who create nothing but negativity and constipated bowel movements.
I used to watch your videos all the time when you first started your channel, but didn't see an upload in my feed from you for years and years until today. Good job youtube.
What a really appreciate about John is that he never bullshits around a review. If he doesn’t think a movie is good he will say he hates it, but if he loves something it’s warranted
It was extremely sad. I loved Joaquin. Loved when he sang, could remove a couple singing sections but overall the movie was truly sad. Made me care about Arthur more, just like the first movie. I feel that the end scene was upsetting because I really liked him as the joker, but turns out he didn’t have a double personality.. he was just Arthur all along.
The first joker movie itself is very stupidly overrated and boring, people are disgusting to unnecessary saying it's good because it makes joker a good guy even though he's out of character in the first movie, Thomas Wayne and alfred are way more joker than joker himself in that movie, this movie only removed the sympathic part and evil thing as good part stating it's wrong, that's the main thing people are comolaining disgustingly for no reason.
When I heard there was a sequel, I was so hyped. When I found out it was a fucking musical with lady gaga, I gave up and stopped even watching trailers.
That's why I found this movie so... frustrating. It had all the ingredients for being a good movie: good acting, good cinematography, it is really well done. If they completely removed the musical numbers that don't serve any purpose, just let the Joker be the Joker, and completely scrap that ending, it could have been a good movie.
90s Disney movies are basically musicals and they rock. But there’s an art to doing it. I’m sorry but I don’t think the director of the Hangover films is the guy you want handling it. I admire the balls, though
I don't know if that is true, but if it is, he is an idiot. Because he didn't give the audience any real chance to question let alone detest the character, giving him tons of baggage out of the gate and making him a victim in almost every scene. It didn't work on me though. None of the characters were compelling to me and I cared nothing about them.
Lol I just think if this is true that somewhere after Joker earned a billion plus dollars Todd is somewhere going no no no this movie is supposed to suck!!
😅CHRIS STUCKMAN: "I won't rate it or review it! But I do wanna say I blame the paper and the font this film was written on, comic sans is a bad font! but I want to congratulate the actors for being born in a world that believes in movie magic* Us: WTF
I myself taught we were going the get that! He would break out of Arkham and him and Harley Quinn would form a crime organization. That would essentially give us a continuation of Joker and a solid backstory of how he became the clown prince of crime!
@@NoahSaib-Ghost It had potential. I thought this film was building up to a revenge on the people that had abused him, and after the explosion and escape from the court room he was about to mask up and go on a psychotic rage. Instead he sings a song and gets shivved by a bad actor playing the part of a psycho. What a load of bollocks.
What's up with all these negative reviews and comments? (SPOILERS) I just saw the movie yesterday and I loved it. Although it is a musical, it doesn't FEEL like a musical much akin to how the first movie doesn't feel like a ballet performance. The musical performance scenes do so well in the movie context to symbolize Arthur going off meds and slowly drifting into madness. Arthur Fleck could never be a "Hannibal" or anything like that. He could never be THE Joker that we know and love, and that actually makes both these movies so much more tragic. All the way throughout both these movies, the audience is hoping for a moment where Arthur can shine. A moment where he finally tells a "Joker esque" funny sadistic joke, or a moment where we realize that he actually has some type of hidden agenda, manipulating the shrink at Arkham in the first movie, or maybe ending up mounting a revolution teased there. But no, Arthur never gets one single moment like that, save for in his own head. In my opinion that is a masterful move. Arthur Fleck is in the end nothing more than a broken man, finding refuge in his shadow. The ending of this movie was in my opinion a real stroke of genius, and no matter how much I wanted to see Joaquin step into the real Jokers shoes, that was never the point. And I realized that by the last quarter of this movie. Seeing the real joker cutting into Arthurs stomach whilst maniacally laughing was the best ending I could have imagined. The shock and impact of that moment was something entirely different, but it makes so much sense for Arthurs character arc. Arthur never did anything on purpose, he only acted on emotions or trauma response. But he did create a symbol. That symbol being more than a man and something which will live on and come back to haunt Gotham once again at a later time after having died within Arthur himself. A point I want to make here to end my rant is that Arthur is the exact opposite of what Joker is supposed to be. Arthur is not manipulative, cunning or even intelligent enough to become what the Joker is supposed to be, even with the help of his adapted persona. The insistense these movies ultimately made about The Joker being an idea rather than a man is so perfect to the "character". Arthur never did anything on purpose, only wanted to see the world burn, and that is exactly what he accomplished by CREATING The Joker. That's it for my rant, it honestly seems like everyone just buys into the idea of this movie being horrible without giving it a real chance which is really sad.
Joker: Folie A Deux for me was a strange experience, because I did like it explored the psychological tension between Arthur and Joker, the courtroom drama scenes, the performances by JP and Lady Gaga, as well as the overall look of the film (visually stunning). The musical aspects fell flat to me, as well as the decision to have it not be a fully Joker movie, but instead an Arthur spends alot of time on Arkham asylum movie, that just has musical cues to it. Sean Chandler even called it an "epilogue" rather than a sequel to it, which I feel is appropriate.
I loved the performances and the direction that Todd Phillips and Joaquin Pheonix decided to go with the character of Arthur with having him face the consequences of his actions and battle with his identity through them. The challenges placed on Arthur both felt subversive and yet cohesive with where we last saw him in 2019’s Joker. However, the lame musical sequences, thin story, and off-putting ending bog this movie down tremendously! Still, I have not stopped thinking about since I left the theatre, and that is worth something in my opinion. Great review, John! I love that you’re back!!
I don't think the ayer cut 1) exists anywhere. 2) would be any better at all. What, we'd get more Jared Leto? The lack of Jared Leto screentime definitely wasn't the issue with that movie.
@@mistertestsubject I dunno why people get so up in arms over the Ayer cut specifically. There’s tons of more interesting movies out there that went through the same production issues as SS and are far more deserving of this treatment
Saw it earlier, spoilers ahead At the end of the film audiences watch as Arthur returns to prison. Harley has left him, and Arthur is seemingly coming to the conclusion that he isn’t the Joker. This leads to an Arkham inmate approaching Arthur now that he’s back behind bars. During the course of their interaction, said inmate begins telling Arthur a joke. But before Arthur can reach the punchline, this unknown inmate stabs and kills him. What is more, the killer then uses his knife to carve a wide smile on his own face, revealing that he is the “true Joker
Oh man I kind of hope not because in my opinion that is stupid, because that implies the arthor has been stealing his identity this whole time or this joker has stolen. This person's identity. That means that this joker is an adult as well.. so once again Bruce Wayne when he becomes Batman is going to have to fight an elderly old man joker. Joker's going to be in the arkham nursing home by then
I totally agree that the a different editing and a change to the story of Harley would work perfectly for this movie. So many ingredients for a great film but so many poor choices in the writing room and editing room
@@mistertestsubjectyeah, there's no reason to watch it even if it is better than Jared Leto, everything's better than Jared Leto's joker doesn't mean it's good.
Agreed 😂 but at least Jared's Joker was actually a clown prince of crime, terrorised Gotham and it's inhabitants with actual intent and was actually an enemy of a Batman 😅
This had so much potential as a musical they could have picked a number genres It could have been amazing: I would have loved if the music actually went with the theme of his dual personalities. Show the difference of reality to fiction.
I didn’t dislike the musical numbers as much as most people so in my opinion I would give it a B. I enjoyed the exploration into what would attract Joker and Harley versus him just abusing tf outta her like he does down the line in their relationship. But i essentially agree with everything you said! :)
Just saw it and as much as I agree with a lot of the criticism I didn't hate it. There is a much better movie in here but the musical numbers ruin any true tension this movie could have had. Joaquin Phoenix is still the reason to see this ..His performance is not what it was in the first one but he is definitely good.
I see everyone saying it didn’t need a sequel…… but after the first one all I remember seeing was people hoping they made a sequel…. It was such a good thing it’s almost hard to mess up….. UNLESS IT WAS INTENTIONAL…..
GREED that’s what, the first cost $50mil and made $1bil, and this cost $200mil so sounds like the WB top brass thinks this should make $2bil then, it’ll be lucky to clear $500mil all said and done I think
What they should have done is have like 3 different musical sequences throughout the film. They should have made it a light musical more similar to the first film.
I feel like they went this route because this is a stand alone story about this version of Joker and they’re trying to stay far away from the DC world building style that superhero movies usually have had.
Too early to say anything about this movie. It just came out two days ago. Too early for any unfavorable comments on it that are impulsive or rushed unfairly. It needs to be OUT and viewed in the theaters. VIEWED without bias and inattentiveness.
Yea we decided a while ago to wait for streaming if we even watch it. Just didn't look good, and now hearing different reviews, I am glad we didn't go.
I just figured something. This movie was made badly on purpose, so the fans wouldn't count it as a real sequel and kept the original as a standalone film in their minds. That's why it was a musical in the first place, to keep us away from wanting to see it.
i left the theater, feeling totally defeated, so i guess the movie did its job. im taking a shot of addressing the problems, ive had with it, since this feeling of utter defeat is heavily boosted, by the backlash, it received. to address it, ill dive into SPOILERS!!!!! this film was frustrating, its definitely flawed and the way the musical aspects are woven into the narrative, makes said narrative stops dead in its tracks, every time the musical fantasy becomes more elaborate- and by design, it will be jarring, theres a contrast, especially in the last act, that reinforces said effect. with all that out of the way, i will say, that this movie emotionally affected me, far more, than the first one ever did and i was on board, with that one, empathizing with arthur, every step of the way. this movie deconstructs most of the first film, in some very frustrating ways- my main issues were, as follows 1. if youre going the route of integrating musical elements and portraying it as an elaborate fantasy, i think its a missed opportunity, to write original music, for your characters, especially when your composer previously won an oscar. i got why they chose to go with old fashioned american songbook tunes and imo it works half of the time, but theres definitely some instances, of the song not furthering the narrative, or stopping it dead in its tracks. they couldve cut about 4 songs out of the movie and it wouldve benefited the flow. 2. while on the subject of cut material, its clear from the trailers alone, that portions of the film were cut, especially regarding lee- gaga does good, with what shes given, but i cant help but feel, that she was originally a more rounded character (a pun on her clearly having a baby bump, in one of the cut scenes), but that she got sidelined, because this is ultimately arthurs story and they didnt want to lose sight of that fact. 3. it being arthurs story is an exact mirror image of the first films narrative- where youre led to believe, that the first ends with arthur transforming into the joker, this film is about his letting go, of this construct, letting go of the fantasy. you can argue the point, since a good bit of the first one was only playing out in his head, that it should have been more of a struggle, for him, to let go, of his persona. 4. the way hes quite literally forced, to let go of the joker persona, is frankly tasteless. the heavily implied rape from the guards seemed like an overreaction, to what was merely an unspecified name drop, in the courtroom- what seems to break him, is that they kill his only friend and this, in combination with garys testimony, finally makes him realize, the kind of impact hes had. while i appreciated, that it showed arthur still had some empathy left, (despite the state psychiatrist claiming, one of his psychological issues, being a lack of such), it felt like a quick, brutal solution, that i feel couldve been achieved more organically, in court. 5. while on the court topic, i will say that harvey dent seemed like a caricature, of a smug lawyer- its yet another missed opportunity, to have dent be the one, to make the case against arthurs dual identity, when harvey dent traditionally has his own struggles, with said diagnosis, arguably to a much heavier degree. one can make the case, that after this case and him being minimally disfigured, by the bomb going off, said events may influence his stance, on duality, further down the road, also furthering the theme of arthurs influence, on people. as it stands, hes just this smug guy, who seems to think the courtroom is his audition, for a modelling gig. 6. addendum to the courtroom scenes- i realize, im probably very much in the minority, but i actually appreciated, that some of the events of the first movie were clarified. i never was a fan of the read, that the whole first movie might have been in his head, a theory, heavily argued for, by a majority, as being the joke, that arthur replies to, with you wouldnt get it. getting that isnt clever, it was always dumb, because it not only destroys any purpose for a narrative, it also goes against the idea, of empathizing with arthur, which was my big takeaway, of both movies. i will also say, that for the attentive viewer, theres quite a few examples, when it can be seen, that arthur is imagining things, which purposefully have been edited- one example of that, comes in the very beginning of the movie, during the bus scene, with the kid. when the camera pans back, after the argument with the kids mother, the kid isnt there anymore. i also never felt, that sophie and her kid surviving, was left ambigious, in the context of what weve come to know, about arthur. 7. last, but definitely not least, ill address the elephant in the room- the ending. it baffles me, how many people tried to tie this in, with heath ledgers joker, despite neither timelines, nor events, nor actors ages and appearances, line up with the nolan trilogy. while on the subject of the nolan trilogy, it had a pretty similar ending, to this one and i for one, found it way harder, to buy into the idea, of john robin blake taking up the bat-mantle, when comparing it, to the joker, as being this shadow, that will always be there, as an influence. it does make more sense to me, especially because the symbol of batman, is too specific to bruce, in my mind. while on the topic of bruce, i found it very interesting, that pretty much everyone from part 1, that survived, was brought back, except him. in retrospect, it does make the wayne family plot point of the first feel kind of tacked on, but i feel, it was done on purpose, to separate it further, from the source material. its not hard to understand, why many fans of comic book movies will feel, like theyre being pranked, but its a tragic prank, as written by arthur fleck. arthur fleck who? this point wouldve gone over better, if they didnt make harley closer to her source material, than expected, only to completely flip the dynamic, that joker and harley have, in said source material. everything gets turned on its head. so yes, its kind of a mess, on purpose and the decisions are often baffling, but for me at least, there was still genuine emotional investment and i knew, that this numbness, after leaving the theatre, was the point, not a clever, (like some have interpreted the ending of the first one), but a deeply emotionally resonant one. on a not so unimportant sidenote- the laughing condition was a bit inconsistent, arthur shouldve at least laughed, during his sex scene with harley. warts and all, this has genuinely touched me deeply, more than any film ive seen in the theatres, since the last one. arguing whats the point, is missing and proving said point- collectively we didnt care about arthur, we wanted to see joker. we wanted escapism and got something uncomfortably real and the contrast, in the fantastical musical numbers, made it land even heavier and ive felt anxious, every time the flick came to a grinding halt, when musical sequences faded to black and we got thrown back, into reality. as an audience weve been collectively taught, to expect certain things, from a franchise movie and this film, if nothing else, exists, to defy these expectations and i for one, cant help, but respect it, for that, while still understanding perfectly, why this wont go over well, for a lot of people. it has made me think and feel a lot, since i came out of the cinema- about the last 20 years and how these franchises have turned into the flogging of a dead horse, yet somehow, a flick like deadpool and wolverine taking up the mantle, of biggest R rated film off of joker, feels like a statement, about where we are, both artistically and collectively- easy sarcasm, cameos and even characters being reduced to memes- you contrast this with the honest sentiment, of an old timey song, sung slightly off key, but genuinely vulnerable, naked, stripped, like arthur was, of any pretense. and while i wont argue against todd phillips very own pretensions, the character of arthur fleck will stay with me and cast a shadow.
I think if you delete everything and just add the last scene of Folie a Deux with the Last Scene of Joker. They could have just kept it all in one movie.
What if the plot began the movie exactly the same as the first act but very early during the count trial the car bomb goes off and it's harley breaking Arthur/Joker out and a city wide manhunt begins to capture both of them? That plot could have gone in 20+ different directions. Just use your imagination.
My theory is Todd tried to Paul a Spielberg by writing a musical to turn off the studio but they saw dollar signs. If anyone needs a history lesson Steven Spielberg after ET was pressured to do a sequel naturally, but Spielberg in an act of defiance and genius wrote ET nocturnal nightmare as a horror film about ETs race invasion of earth so the studio got the hint as it was not a movie that could have success. Todd’s plan backfired and he did the best he could
Joaquin did an awesome job of acting. Putting Lady Gaga in the movie was a huge mistake. I hated the singing scenes. I agree with you about Shawshank redemption and Joker. I thought the scenes in the prison were great and gritty. The ending sucked. And who was the person that came to visit Joaquin in the end? The story should have been developed more and without all that singing nonsense. But you can't ignore the good scenes because of some bad scenes.
People walked out of the theater as it was just horrible. I was with my significant other and I just looked at her during the movie and cringed how utterly horrible it was. Yes the artistic side was awesome looking at but it had me at WTF the whole time and a waste of money. The best part was at the end with the court room scene and I actually laughed that they did that after all we went through
I don't get the hatred for this film. I just got out of the theater and I love it as much as I love the first film. The songs, the acting, the story. Also, I know what it's like to have a crazy girl manipulate you, so I felt his pain at the end. It was a really good movie. I'm so confused.
Well, that was not the response I expected. My bad. Your father then. JK. No, I do apologize. Honestly, was trying to be playful and don't where to go from here. Enjoy the rest of your day, I guess?! Maybe?
As I read that they casted Lady Gaga and it was a musical I knew it was going to suck. I didn't expect it was going to suck this bad though. A sequel could have worked too, which is the saddest part about it all.
It’s not a musical in the way you think it is. When I think of musicals, I think of lighthearted and unserious stories like Sound of Music. Joker 2 is the natural progression of what would happen in real life if someone did what Arthur did in the first film.
I actually thought this was a Fantastic Troll Movie. set up Murray as a singing idiot that you just feel like stabbing throughout the whole movie, then in the end your wish comes true and he turns out to be the REal Joker, lol let's give this one a 4/5 stars, movie of the year award for sure!
I left the theater feeling that the real clown was me all along for giving this my money.
Same here 😂
Thank you for you're money 💰 🤡
I just left the theater 😂😢
Lmfao 😂😂😂 I’m stealing that comment that’s a good one 😂
I felt the same way after the 1st movie
Absolute trash and Phoenix did NOT deserve the Oscar
The only way this cost $200M is if Joaquin got a $150M pay day
I’m gonna say at least 30 million if not more. Plus what Todd Phillips and Lady Gaga earned.
It’s a combination. Pay scales being high, license rights, and the period design of the set and costume does cost a pretty penny. And marketing was very aggressive for the film, adding around $100 million. In a way, they really overspent for a film that is set in TWO locations.
Plus marketing budget, can't forget that
Just because it sucked doesn't mean it wasn't a big budget film. Ever seen a Marvel movie?
@@colbyseaman801Horrible example, Marvel movies have extremely expensive cgi in them, where was the cgi in this?
This wasn't a sequel. It was a "Bad Romance."
Nice. You delivered that with a "Poker Face"
@@downeykids what a shallow response
I wouldn't be surprised if there was a ''Paparazzi''.
CHRIS STUCKMAN won’t rate it
@@Hvacrvlogger who gives a sh!t
On the contrary, he'll give it unrightful praise, i firmly believe this
He just says everything is great
You people need to stop with the whole chris stuckman thing if you don’t like his content just move on it’s almost like you guys want jonh and him to have a falling out
@@patricklarsen182 Because he actually makes movies now and can appreciate and respect other people’s art -unlike armchair critics who create nothing but negativity and constipated bowel movements.
Joker borrowed liberally from Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy. Joker Folie a Deux borrows liberally from Chicago.
Why because court ?
You're 100% spitting facts
@standardperson3189 Yes and there is the whole show within a show - theatre of the.mind being played out.
Wait.... Chicago? The band?
The musical. The narrative device and premise. And now that you say it, man, Phillips and Sliver is an imitating hack.
I used to watch your videos all the time when you first started your channel, but didn't see an upload in my feed from you for years and years until today. Good job youtube.
What a really appreciate about John is that he never bullshits around a review. If he doesn’t think a movie is good he will say he hates it, but if he loves something it’s warranted
He's the anti Chris hallelujah
It was extremely sad. I loved Joaquin. Loved when he sang, could remove a couple singing sections but overall the movie was truly sad. Made me care about Arthur more, just like the first movie. I feel that the end scene was upsetting because I really liked him as the joker, but turns out he didn’t have a double personality.. he was just Arthur all along.
What went wrong?
Making a sequel in the first place!
My favorite movies are sequel: Aliens, T2 the dark knight.
Acting like the first one was good at all? Is notorious 😂
This 😂
The first joker movie itself is very stupidly overrated and boring, people are disgusting to unnecessary saying it's good because it makes joker a good guy even though he's out of character in the first movie, Thomas Wayne and alfred are way more joker than joker himself in that movie, this movie only removed the sympathic part and evil thing as good part stating it's wrong, that's the main thing people are comolaining disgustingly for no reason.
@Xander-86 yeah the first joker film is mid
The nickname for this movie: Joker Folie a Douche
Folie a Deuce
Crazy in shower ???
Fully a doo doo
Fully A Dud.
feminism *SUCKS* 👎🏻👎🏻
The first 3/4ths of this was great and the last act had me staring at the screen like Patrick Bateman at Paul Allen’s card.
When I heard there was a sequel, I was so hyped. When I found out it was a fucking musical with lady gaga, I gave up and stopped even watching trailers.
A sequel would be ok if it wasn't a stupid musical.
That's why I found this movie so... frustrating. It had all the ingredients for being a good movie: good acting, good cinematography, it is really well done. If they completely removed the musical numbers that don't serve any purpose, just let the Joker be the Joker, and completely scrap that ending, it could have been a good movie.
@@that_guy_v It was announced to be a musical in June 2022. Gaga didn’t sign on until August.
Sweeney Todd was a musical and it was awesome
@that_guy_v That's called making money and she's a Grammy winning artist.
Dipshit
90s Disney movies are basically musicals and they rock. But there’s an art to doing it. I’m sorry but I don’t think the director of the Hangover films is the guy you want handling it. I admire the balls, though
Todd Phillips was mad that people empathized with Arthur the first time around, so he ensured that they'd loath him this time.
I don't know if that is true, but if it is, he is an idiot. Because he didn't give the audience any real chance to question let alone detest the character, giving him tons of baggage out of the gate and making him a victim in almost every scene. It didn't work on me though. None of the characters were compelling to me and I cared nothing about them.
makes sense this is all some some plot to take revenge on the fans for paying and praising on the work that was done and earning millions
They literally f*cked the character in this movie.
Don't know why he needed to spend $200 million to do it
Lol I just think if this is true that somewhere after Joker earned a billion plus dollars Todd is somewhere going no no no this movie is supposed to suck!!
Joker 2 : A fool and a douche😂😅
hahahaha
LMAO 🤡👏🤣👍 !!!!
Joker: Drops a deuce 💩
feminism *SUCKS* 👎🏻👎🏻
Always love watching ya John!
Big up for John, back at it again love that
I like that the courtroom explosion would explain Harvey Dent’s transition to Two Face
😅CHRIS STUCKMAN: "I won't rate it or review it! But I do wanna say I blame the paper and the font this film was written on, comic sans is a bad font! but I want to congratulate the actors for being born in a world that believes in movie magic*
Us: WTF
"Speaking of magic, this video is sponsored by Magic Spoon!"
😮😮@@OrthoLou
Stuckman is cooked lol
"There was a lot of talk about this movie ... but it didnt bother me ...
If you liked the directrs previous movie youre should give this one a try."
Yes Chris has lost his way
Glad to see you making more videos Johnny! I agree the first Joker was way better. Fantastic review as usual!
I’ve only seen “Joker” once and, though I thought it was good, have never felt the need to revisit it. I’m definitely skipping the sequel.
I’ll pass. Thanks, John.
Your welcome
chud
Great review John! I didn’t have high hopes for this sequel. I’ll just wait to see it on streaming
I appreciate that you were level headed with your review and found things to like and also criticize.
They should at least make a sequel how joker become a mob boss or become well known in criminal world, not this musical bullshit.
I myself taught we were going the get that! He would break out of Arkham and him and Harley Quinn would form a crime organization. That would essentially give us a continuation of Joker and a solid backstory of how he became the clown prince of crime!
@@NoahSaib-Ghost It had potential. I thought this film was building up to a revenge on the people that had abused him, and after the explosion and escape from the court room he was about to mask up and go on a psychotic rage. Instead he sings a song and gets shivved by a bad actor playing the part of a psycho. What a load of bollocks.
What's up with all these negative reviews and comments?
(SPOILERS) I just saw the movie yesterday and I loved it. Although it is a musical, it doesn't FEEL like a musical much akin to how the first movie doesn't feel like a ballet performance. The musical performance scenes do so well in the movie context to symbolize Arthur going off meds and slowly drifting into madness. Arthur Fleck could never be a "Hannibal" or anything like that. He could never be THE Joker that we know and love, and that actually makes both these movies so much more tragic. All the way throughout both these movies, the audience is hoping for a moment where Arthur can shine. A moment where he finally tells a "Joker esque" funny sadistic joke, or a moment where we realize that he actually has some type of hidden agenda, manipulating the shrink at Arkham in the first movie, or maybe ending up mounting a revolution teased there. But no, Arthur never gets one single moment like that, save for in his own head. In my opinion that is a masterful move. Arthur Fleck is in the end nothing more than a broken man, finding refuge in his shadow.
The ending of this movie was in my opinion a real stroke of genius, and no matter how much I wanted to see Joaquin step into the real Jokers shoes, that was never the point. And I realized that by the last quarter of this movie. Seeing the real joker cutting into Arthurs stomach whilst maniacally laughing was the best ending I could have imagined. The shock and impact of that moment was something entirely different, but it makes so much sense for Arthurs character arc. Arthur never did anything on purpose, he only acted on emotions or trauma response. But he did create a symbol. That symbol being more than a man and something which will live on and come back to haunt Gotham once again at a later time after having died within Arthur himself.
A point I want to make here to end my rant is that Arthur is the exact opposite of what Joker is supposed to be. Arthur is not manipulative, cunning or even intelligent enough to become what the Joker is supposed to be, even with the help of his adapted persona. The insistense these movies ultimately made about The Joker being an idea rather than a man is so perfect to the "character". Arthur never did anything on purpose, only wanted to see the world burn, and that is exactly what he accomplished by CREATING The Joker.
That's it for my rant, it honestly seems like everyone just buys into the idea of this movie being horrible without giving it a real chance which is really sad.
Of course it’s fine that you like it. Everyone is different. But John and I have the same taste in movies so I’m going to skip this one.
best review dude 👌 legend
5:33 "Never date someone you meet in an insane asylum. It just never turns out good. Trust me."
-Chris Stuckmann in two months.
😂😂😂
Thank tou for your honesty, I value it immensely 💪🏻
Joker: Folie A Deux for me was a strange experience, because I did like it explored the psychological tension between Arthur and Joker, the courtroom drama scenes, the performances by JP and Lady Gaga, as well as the overall look of the film (visually stunning). The musical aspects fell flat to me, as well as the decision to have it not be a fully Joker movie, but instead an Arthur spends alot of time on Arkham asylum movie, that just has musical cues to it. Sean Chandler even called it an "epilogue" rather than a sequel to it, which I feel is appropriate.
I loved the performances and the direction that Todd Phillips and Joaquin Pheonix decided to go with the character of Arthur with having him face the consequences of his actions and battle with his identity through them. The challenges placed on Arthur both felt subversive and yet cohesive with where we last saw him in 2019’s Joker. However, the lame musical sequences, thin story, and off-putting ending bog this movie down tremendously! Still, I have not stopped thinking about since I left the theatre, and that is worth something in my opinion. Great review, John! I love that you’re back!!
Great, in-depth review with some compelling thoughts. Hope to see you more frequently on UA-cam,
and see your subscriber count explode.
I'd rather see the ayer cut of suicide squad 🤷🏻
Agreed
People wanna see it out of curiosity not whether or not its actually good lol
I don't think the ayer cut
1) exists anywhere.
2) would be any better at all. What, we'd get more Jared Leto? The lack of Jared Leto screentime definitely wasn't the issue with that movie.
@@mistertestsubject I dunno why people get so up in arms over the Ayer cut specifically. There’s tons of more interesting movies out there that went through the same production issues as SS and are far more deserving of this treatment
@@MILDMONSTER1234 Because the Snyder Cut campaign worked and some people can't seem to work out that it was a one off lol
Hey John excited to see your channel coming back and hope you can keep up brother
I will never understand why when they chose to make a sequel they chose this direction.
So surprised no one stopped them
Saw it earlier, spoilers ahead
At the end of the film audiences watch as Arthur returns to prison. Harley has left him, and Arthur is seemingly coming to the conclusion that he isn’t the Joker.
This leads to an Arkham inmate approaching Arthur now that he’s back behind bars.
During the course of their interaction, said inmate begins telling Arthur a joke. But before Arthur can reach the punchline, this unknown inmate stabs and kills him.
What is more, the killer then uses his knife to carve a wide smile on his own face, revealing that he is the “true Joker
What a shame, what a shame
Uhh .. 🤦
@@jamesbar3572
Don't want people to waste their time or money on this crap
Did the guy at least look like a convincing joker or were they going more with the concept that any one can be joker?
Oh man I kind of hope not because in my opinion that is stupid, because that implies the arthor has been stealing his identity this whole time or this joker has stolen. This person's identity. That means that this joker is an adult as well.. so once again Bruce Wayne when he becomes Batman is going to have to fight an elderly old man joker. Joker's going to be in the arkham nursing home by then
Love the shirt
I totally agree that the a different editing and a change to the story of Harley would work perfectly for this movie. So many ingredients for a great film but so many poor choices in the writing room and editing room
Brilliant, brilliant review! Excellent editing!
Still better than Jared Leto’s Joker 🤡
The bar isn't on the floor, it's under it.
@@mistertestsubjectyeah, there's no reason to watch it even if it is better than Jared Leto, everything's better than Jared Leto's joker doesn't mean it's good.
Agreed 😂 but at least Jared's Joker was actually a clown prince of crime, terrorised Gotham and it's inhabitants with actual intent and was actually an enemy of a Batman 😅
@sketch_0193 yup, that's true. Arthur the cry baby should be the name of the first movie.
It's better than the entire DCEU in general.
I think you are spot on.
Felt like Todd Phillips heard the Taxi Driver and King of Comedy comments and said “you want something different? Here’s a musical.”
I really liked it. Not as good as the first one. But I had a great time. There were 2 musical numbers I liked but the rest could’ve been cut out
a good classic review by the GOATS and OG's of movie reviewing. great review. thanks John!
This had so much potential as a musical they could have picked a number genres It could have been amazing: I would have loved if the music actually went with the theme of his dual personalities. Show the difference of reality to fiction.
John can you do a new video of what movies you are going to watch thru out october for spooky season?
This movie needs more scenes like the one with Gary, more moments exploring the aftermath for the people in the first one.
What went wrong?? They made it a musical...what a damn waste.....🤡💩
Joker 2 could've been awesome if they did a Natural Born Killers thing, but Todd and Phoenix had to get all pretentious on us.
Tarantino left NBK because it was too pretentious for him. What the fuck are you talking about?
Did you watch the first film - it was pretentious with a capital P!
That would have been amazing
The first film wss and still is a masterpiece.
It's not Todds fault you don't understand art.
@veronicamaine3813
@@dcmastermindfirst9418
The actual art are the films that Joker leached off of too much. You can get more out of them than Joker.
I didn’t dislike the musical numbers as much as most people so in my opinion I would give it a B. I enjoyed the exploration into what would attract Joker and Harley versus him just abusing tf outta her like he does down the line in their relationship. But i essentially agree with everything you said! :)
How did you already get such high quality shots of the movie? Great video!
This movie geeked
Just saw it and as much as I agree with a lot of the criticism I didn't hate it. There is a much better movie in here but the musical numbers ruin any true tension this movie could have had. Joaquin Phoenix is still the reason to see this ..His performance is not what it was in the first one but he is definitely good.
So good to hear that voice again.
Great review.
I see everyone saying it didn’t need a sequel…… but after the first one all I remember seeing was people hoping they made a sequel…. It was such a good thing it’s almost hard to mess up….. UNLESS IT WAS INTENTIONAL…..
6:35 Yes do that if you can.
Awesome video joke r 2 ok
Which rocksong is it in the intro? 🎉
Spoilers:
Killing him off at the end was brain dead
GREED that’s what, the first cost $50mil and made $1bil, and this cost $200mil so sounds like the WB top brass thinks this should make $2bil then, it’ll be lucky to clear $500mil all said and done I think
Typical WB 😂 the things they aren't involved in directly succeed, when they do it flops 😂
What they should have done is have like 3 different musical sequences throughout the film. They should have made it a light musical more similar to the first film.
Two words “cash grab”
Dude!! I wrote this comment before I watched this video. Great minds think alike lol.
I feel like they went this route because this is a stand alone story about this version of Joker and they’re trying to stay far away from the DC world building style that superhero movies usually have had.
i remember when you used to make videos in your basement playing with action figures
Look at you now!
Too early to say anything about this movie. It just came out two days ago.
Too early for any unfavorable comments on it that are impulsive or rushed unfairly.
It needs to be OUT and viewed in the theaters. VIEWED without bias and inattentiveness.
Still really bad
I subbed because your ability to make anything about this movie sound good is remarkable.
This was the biggest waste of money this yr this far
The whole time I watched the movie I just thought how good it could have been, Joaquin is amazing and lady gaga is pretty good too
Mate, your not alone everything you just said i couldnt have said it any better and im sure many would also agree
Soon as I saw the thumbnail I couldn’t help but watch it
Modern musical dream sequences done right - All That Jazz, and Hedwig and the Angry Inch.
I LOVED…. The first 30 minutes 🤣
Whoever made the call to put all the musicals in this movie needs to be fired immediately.
Yea we decided a while ago to wait for streaming if we even watch it. Just didn't look good, and now hearing different reviews, I am glad we didn't go.
The original was bad. They destroyed a great villain
Cameron monaghan to, Joaquin Phoenix: First time? (IYKYK)
I just figured something. This movie was made badly on purpose, so the fans wouldn't count it as a real sequel and kept the original as a standalone film in their minds. That's why it was a musical in the first place, to keep us away from wanting to see it.
I see what you did there at the end😂
Love the vids
What went wrong id everyone swore the first one was so good....they tried it again
Did someone say a fanedit?? lol
I actually can’t wait to get my hands on this for an edit. I feared those musical numbers the second they were leaked.
i left the theater, feeling totally defeated, so i guess the movie did its job. im taking a shot of addressing the problems, ive had with it, since this feeling of utter defeat is heavily boosted, by the backlash, it received. to address it, ill dive into SPOILERS!!!!!
this film was frustrating, its definitely flawed and the way the musical aspects are woven into the narrative, makes said narrative stops dead in its tracks, every time the musical fantasy becomes more elaborate- and by design, it will be jarring, theres a contrast, especially in the last act, that reinforces said effect. with all that out of the way, i will say, that this movie emotionally affected me, far more, than the first one ever did and i was on board, with that one, empathizing with arthur, every step of the way.
this movie deconstructs most of the first film, in some very frustrating ways- my main issues were, as follows
1. if youre going the route of integrating musical elements and portraying it as an elaborate fantasy, i think its a missed opportunity, to write original music, for your characters, especially when your composer previously won an oscar. i got why they chose to go with old fashioned american songbook tunes and imo it works half of the time, but theres definitely some instances, of the song not furthering the narrative, or stopping it dead in its tracks. they couldve cut about 4 songs out of the movie and it wouldve benefited the flow.
2. while on the subject of cut material, its clear from the trailers alone, that portions of the film were cut, especially regarding lee- gaga does good, with what shes given, but i cant help but feel, that she was originally a more rounded character (a pun on her clearly having a baby bump, in one of the cut scenes), but that she got sidelined, because this is ultimately arthurs story and they didnt want to lose sight of that fact.
3. it being arthurs story is an exact mirror image of the first films narrative- where youre led to believe, that the first ends with arthur transforming into the joker, this film is about his letting go, of this construct, letting go of the fantasy. you can argue the point, since a good bit of the first one was only playing out in his head, that it should have been more of a struggle, for him, to let go, of his persona.
4. the way hes quite literally forced, to let go of the joker persona, is frankly tasteless. the heavily implied rape from the guards seemed like an overreaction, to what was merely an unspecified name drop, in the courtroom- what seems to break him, is that they kill his only friend and this, in combination with garys testimony, finally makes him realize, the kind of impact hes had. while i appreciated, that it showed arthur still had some empathy left, (despite the state psychiatrist claiming, one of his psychological issues, being a lack of such), it felt like a quick, brutal solution, that i feel couldve been achieved more organically, in court.
5. while on the court topic, i will say that harvey dent seemed like a caricature, of a smug lawyer- its yet another missed opportunity, to have dent be the one, to make the case against arthurs dual identity, when harvey dent traditionally has his own struggles, with said diagnosis, arguably to a much heavier degree. one can make the case, that after this case and him being minimally disfigured, by the bomb going off, said events may influence his stance, on duality, further down the road, also furthering the theme of arthurs influence, on people. as it stands, hes just this smug guy, who seems to think the courtroom is his audition, for a modelling gig.
6. addendum to the courtroom scenes- i realize, im probably very much in the minority, but i actually appreciated, that some of the events of the first movie were clarified. i never was a fan of the read, that the whole first movie might have been in his head, a theory, heavily argued for, by a majority, as being the joke, that arthur replies to, with you wouldnt get it. getting that isnt clever, it was always dumb, because it not only destroys any purpose for a narrative, it also goes against the idea, of empathizing with arthur, which was my big takeaway, of both movies. i will also say, that for the attentive viewer, theres quite a few examples, when it can be seen, that arthur is imagining things, which purposefully have been edited- one example of that, comes in the very beginning of the movie, during the bus scene, with the kid. when the camera pans back, after the argument with the kids mother, the kid isnt there anymore. i also never felt, that sophie and her kid surviving, was left ambigious, in the context of what weve come to know, about arthur.
7. last, but definitely not least, ill address the elephant in the room- the ending. it baffles me, how many people tried to tie this in, with heath ledgers joker, despite neither timelines, nor events, nor actors ages and appearances, line up with the nolan trilogy. while on the subject of the nolan trilogy, it had a pretty similar ending, to this one and i for one, found it way harder, to buy into the idea, of john robin blake taking up the bat-mantle, when comparing it, to the joker, as being this shadow, that will always be there, as an influence. it does make more sense to me, especially because the symbol of batman, is too specific to bruce, in my mind. while on the topic of bruce, i found it very interesting, that pretty much everyone from part 1, that survived, was brought back, except him. in retrospect, it does make the wayne family plot point of the first feel kind of tacked on, but i feel, it was done on purpose, to separate it further, from the source material. its not hard to understand, why many fans of comic book movies will feel, like theyre being pranked, but its a tragic prank, as written by arthur fleck. arthur fleck who? this point wouldve gone over better, if they didnt make harley closer to her source material, than expected, only to completely flip the dynamic, that joker and harley have, in said source material. everything gets turned on its head. so yes, its kind of a mess, on purpose and the decisions are often baffling, but for me at least, there was still genuine emotional investment and i knew, that this numbness, after leaving the theatre, was the point, not a clever, (like some have interpreted the ending of the first one), but a deeply emotionally resonant one.
on a not so unimportant sidenote- the laughing condition was a bit inconsistent, arthur shouldve at least laughed, during his sex scene with harley.
warts and all, this has genuinely touched me deeply, more than any film ive seen in the theatres, since the last one. arguing whats the point, is missing and proving said point- collectively we didnt care about arthur, we wanted to see joker. we wanted escapism and got something uncomfortably real and the contrast, in the fantastical musical numbers, made it land even heavier and ive felt anxious, every time the flick came to a grinding halt, when musical sequences faded to black and we got thrown back, into reality. as an audience weve been collectively taught, to expect certain things, from a franchise movie and this film, if nothing else, exists, to defy these expectations and i for one, cant help, but respect it, for that, while still understanding perfectly, why this wont go over well, for a lot of people. it has made me think and feel a lot, since i came out of the cinema- about the last 20 years and how these franchises have turned into the flogging of a dead horse, yet somehow, a flick like deadpool and wolverine taking up the mantle, of biggest R rated film off of joker, feels like a statement, about where we are, both artistically and collectively- easy sarcasm, cameos and even characters being reduced to memes- you contrast this with the honest sentiment, of an old timey song, sung slightly off key, but genuinely vulnerable, naked, stripped, like arthur was, of any pretense. and while i wont argue against todd phillips very own pretensions, the character of arthur fleck will stay with me and cast a shadow.
Hey John have you ever had your flick pick stuckkmanized?
I think if you delete everything and just add the last scene of Folie a Deux with the Last Scene of Joker. They could have just kept it all in one movie.
F- grade. It’s the worst major theatrical movie released this decade. Maybe even last decade.
What if the plot began the movie exactly the same as the first act but very early during the count trial the car bomb goes off and it's harley breaking Arthur/Joker out and a city wide manhunt begins to capture both of them? That plot could have gone in 20+ different directions. Just use your imagination.
What they did with the joker doesn't track with what happens to him at the end of the first one
My theory is Todd tried to Paul a Spielberg by writing a musical to turn off the studio but they saw dollar signs. If anyone needs a history lesson Steven Spielberg after ET was pressured to do a sequel naturally, but Spielberg in an act of defiance and genius wrote ET nocturnal nightmare as a horror film about ETs race invasion of earth so the studio got the hint as it was not a movie that could have success. Todd’s plan backfired and he did the best he could
When he said “life” he sounded like Christopher Walken
Personally… I enjoyed it. I thought it looked amazing, acting was sensational, & I enjoyed the singing parts.
"Foh-lay ah-doo" is yet the best I've heard.
Joaquin did an awesome job of acting. Putting Lady Gaga in the movie was a huge mistake. I hated the singing scenes. I agree with you about Shawshank redemption and Joker. I thought the scenes in the prison were great and gritty. The ending sucked. And who was the person that came to visit Joaquin in the end? The story should have been developed more and without all that singing nonsense. But you can't ignore the good scenes because of some bad scenes.
Flick rules
People walked out of the theater as it was just horrible. I was with my significant other and I just looked at her during the movie and cringed how utterly horrible it was. Yes the artistic side was awesome looking at but it had me at WTF the whole time and a waste of money. The best part was at the end with the court room scene and I actually laughed that they did that after all we went through
Yeah, it’s not exactly family-friendly.
I watched it today expecting to hate it. Honestly I kind of loved it. The whole movie felt like a prank but that's kinda what I loved about it 😂
I don't get the hatred for this film. I just got out of the theater and I love it as much as I love the first film. The songs, the acting, the story. Also, I know what it's like to have a crazy girl manipulate you, so I felt his pain at the end. It was a really good movie. I'm so confused.
I hate to be the one to tell you this but you got bad taste
@@OrroHelhammerOnly when your mom doesn't shower down there 😄 But thanks for the affirmation.
@@shermanweedon1612 my mother died in 911. We just disagree on movie tastes idk why you feel the need to do stuff like that man
Well, that was not the response I expected. My bad. Your father then. JK. No, I do apologize. Honestly, was trying to be playful and don't where to go from here. Enjoy the rest of your day, I guess?! Maybe?
And you missed the part where I did thank you for reassuring me of my shitty taste in movies. There, I'm done.
You either die a Hero or.................😢😢😢😢
As I read that they casted Lady Gaga and it was a musical I knew it was going to suck. I didn't expect it was going to suck this bad though. A sequel could have worked too, which is the saddest part about it all.
It’s not a musical in the way you think it is. When I think of musicals, I think of lighthearted and unserious stories like Sound of Music. Joker 2 is the natural progression of what would happen in real life if someone did what Arthur did in the first film.
The first one was 🐕 💩.
I actually thought this was a Fantastic Troll Movie. set up Murray as a singing idiot that you just feel like stabbing throughout the whole movie, then in the end your wish comes true and he turns out to be the REal Joker, lol let's give this one a 4/5 stars, movie of the year award for sure!
On paper ending this movie with Heath Ledger Joker killing Arthur at the end is an interesting idea but they terribly executed.