Joker- Full Spoiler Talk (SPOILERS)

What would be the point of bringing her back in a sequel? She mostly exists in Arthur's head. In reality, we don't really know her beyond the fact she's one of his neighbors.

If nothing else, showing the traumatizing effects of having a man, who proved himself to be a mass murder, break into her home.
 
He cared for Sophie that's why he didn't kill her. Much like he doesn't kill Harley.
That said he is still very unpredictable, he cared for his mother but killed her anyway after he learnt about his past. He killed the psychiatrist at the end, who obviously hasn't done him any harm.
He could easily still kill Sophie is she was to (emotionally) harm him in any way...

You have to walk on eggshells around him, very thin eggshells.

He's tried to kill Harley multiple times in the comics (he nearly killed her on B:TAS too), which led to her finally shooting him to save herself. That's what led to her "babyface turn."

My main criticism of Letoker was much the same: he showed way too much genuine affection for Harley. Joker enjoying a physical release would be in character, but any kind of authentic caring isn't.
 
I saw it again a few days ago, and I was kind of disappointed by the dialogue when he's on the Murray show. I feel like...from when he's talking about "going werewolf" etc,..it's too much of a normal, dull description of what he's been through up to that point, and doesn't really show that he's left all that behind to become a being of chaos. I don't want to be negative about Joker, because I love the film, but that dialogue kind of rang as a bit dull and redundant. Like he's still a normal person with normal problems. I wanted him to say something more wild to incite the people of Gotham. Feel free to disagree though.
 
I saw it again a few days ago, and I was kind of disappointed by the dialogue when he's on the Murray show. I feel like...from when he's talking about "going werewolf" etc,..it's too much of a normal, dull description of what he's been through up to that point, and doesn't really show that he's left all that behind to become a being of chaos. I don't want to be negative about Joker, because I love the film, but that dialogue kind of rang as a bit dull and redundant. Like he's still a normal person with normal problems. I wanted him to say something more wild to incite the people of Gotham. Feel free to disagree though.

Scott Mendelson said it's the worst dialogue in the movie, then they redeemed themselves in the epilogue. lol.

I just enjoyed it for the visual contrast (Joker sitting with normal people), Joaquin's acting, letting out his frustration, the time bomb score and the aftermath =)
 
Not sure if this was posted yet. Joaquin goes in pretty good detail about the movie on this podcast. It's also just really nice to see Joaquin doing something other than a talk show interview he obviously hates lol
 
I saw it again a few days ago, and I was kind of disappointed by the dialogue when he's on the Murray show. I feel like...from when he's talking about "going werewolf" etc,..it's too much of a normal, dull description of what he's been through up to that point, and doesn't really show that he's left all that behind to become a being of chaos. I don't want to be negative about Joker, because I love the film, but that dialogue kind of rang as a bit dull and redundant. Like he's still a normal person with normal problems. I wanted him to say something more wild to incite the people of Gotham. Feel free to disagree though.

I feel the same way. After Marvel's 3 event movies and the lighthearted nature of Shazam, Joker was a welcomed palate cleanser. It was a wild ride, but it was a long way from flawless. I still feel like there were missed beats, but we still don't know how much of what we saw was confirmed to be reality.
 
Kevin Smith Reveals Alternate, Shocking Ending For Joker Movie

Originally, the ending in the hospital was different," Smith said on his Fatman Beyond show. "He's in the hospital and he laughs, chuckles, and he says, 'I was just thinkin' of something funny. What was supposed to happen was you flashed back to the death or Thomas and Martha Wayne and it was him killing Thomas and Martha Wayne and the boy was screaming and crying and he turned to walk away and he turned back, shrugged, and shot the kid. Credits."
 
Would have been more interesting and original. Besides, this Joker is too old to ever be Batman's archnemesis so there's no need to keep Bruce alive.
 
Joaquin Phoenix is 45. Bruce in this is, what, ten? If he becomes at least a fledgling Batman by the time he's in his twenties, Arthur would only be in his fifties, no older than Jack Nicholson's Joker.
 
Would have been more interesting and original. Besides, this Joker is too old to ever be Batman's archnemesis so there's no need to keep Bruce alive.

Joaquin is in his 40s irl but we never actually got Arthur's age in the film. He could easily be early 30s but looking a bit more aged due to his living conditions.

By the time Bruce usually becomes Batman in most versions, he's 25ish. Meaning Arthur would be early to mid 50s by the time he's Batman, same age Nicholson was when he played the role.



Wtf did Kevin Smith have to do with the movie for him to even have that knowledge? This dude always seems to be in the know somehow lol. Like I guess it makes sense considering his status and all but damn
 
Last edited:
Hildur Guðnadóttir won best score Grammy for her work in JOKER. :up:

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
200,535
Messages
21,755,256
Members
45,591
Latest member
MartyMcFly1985
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"