Joker "The Joker" in development with Todd Phillips and Martin Scorsese attached? - Part 2

[Gothamsknight]

Warner Bros. breaks silence on 'Joker' violence controversy

 

[BaelaTargaryen]

Warner Bros Responds To ‘Joker’ Fears From Aurora Families – Deadline

 

[Arachnerd]

I figured they were going to sooner or later.

 

[Rodimus]

At this point I would post a meme from Brian Yuzna's classic horror film Society, but I literally don't think there's an image I could post that wouldn't instaban me.

Feel free then

 

[antsman41]

How about you send letters to the NRA, the White House, and all of the GOP members who make money on the death of other's from gun violence...?

AND, not a movie studio.

 

[Arachnerd]

But that would actually be taking a stand against something really problematic in the US at the moment. It's much more preferable to lambast a movie about a comic book character and claim it'll create incels and terrorists.

 

[Detective Conan]

 

[Hollis Mason]

I have to say that's a good answer from WB, even if it's stating something obvious.

 

[FunkMiller]

This is the issue I have, but a lot of those who have seen the full movie mention that’s not how he’s portrayed, and that the film directly answers the question of what happens when people do view him as a hero.

I’ve seen as many reviews say he is positioned as an antihero (or at least a protagonist with a sympathetic story), as those who say he isn’t, so I’m fascinated to find out my own feelings about it when I see the film!

 

[The Shape]

I don't know how many times it can be said a story featuring a deranged/evil/criminal protagonist (of which there have been MANY) does not equate to that story supporting/condoning the actions of that character, nor does it mean they are purposely positioned as a hero that others should emulate.

 

[DlAMONDZ]

This is the first piece of media with violence in it

The concern trolling over this movie has been lol worthy

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I don't know how many times it can be said a story featuring a deranged/evil/criminal protagonist (of which there have been MANY) does not equate to that story supporting/condoning the actions of that character, nor does it mean they are purposely positioned as a hero that others should emulate.

It doesn't have to be directly supporting or condoning such actions to be an issue. It depends on how you tell the story and even more so, how the Joker has been marketed by WB/DC for a long time. The Joker is "cool". They want him to be appeal to people, and it is hard to argue the trailers for this movie haven't been trying to make him just that. He isn't simply a villain, but a selling point for the company. And not in a Darth Vader or Thanos kind of way. If Your deranged/evil/criminal protagonist is depicted as cool and with some "merit", that can be an issue. One of the things I have been worried about with the trailers is how much the Joker comes off as "wronged" and his motivation of the citizens sounding a bit too much like he is a force for good in some way.

TDK avoids this issue by showing how full of crap the Joker is. He is shown to be liar who does so to benefit him in the moment, that the arguments he has been making in the movie are flat out wrong, and when Batman tosses him off a building and then saves him, he reacts the way only a mentally ill person would. How the Joker terrorizes Gotham is so important in that regard. He infects it, fills it with fear, and the problem with that is a big part of the film. It is emphasized when the city turns on Batman, tries to kill that former Wayne Enterprises employee and what happens with Harvey.

 

[The Shape]

It doesn't have to be directly supporting or condoning such actions to be an issue. It depends on how you tell the story and even more so, how the Joker has been marketed by WB/DC for a long time. The Joker is "cool". They want him to be appeal to people, and it is hard to argue the trailers for this movie haven't been trying to make him just that. He isn't simply a villain, but a selling point for the company. And not in a Darth Vader or Thanos kind of way. If Your deranged/evil/criminal protagonist is depicted as cool and with some "merit", that can be an issue. One of the things I have been worried about with the trailers is how much the Joker comes off as "wronged" and his motivation of the citizens sounding a bit too much like he is a force for good in some way.

TDK avoids this issue by showing how full of crap the Joker is. He is shown to be liar who does so to benefit him in the moment, that the arguments he has been making in the movie are flat out wrong, and when Batman tosses him off a building and then saves him, he reacts the way only a mentally ill person would. How the Joker terrorizes Gotham is so important in that regard. He infects it, fills it with fear, and the problem with that is a big part of the film. It is emphasized when the city turns on Batman, tries to kill that former Wayne Enterprises employee and what happens with Harvey.

TDK also wasn't a story told from the perspective of the Joker, or the man who will become the Joker. Just because Arthur Fleck may be the hero of his own story in his own mind (and this movie supposedly plays with the fact that some things happening may not even be "real"), that doesn't mean they are presenting him as a hero to us -- the viewer. This much should be obvious.

This is a raw and realstic take on The Joker, not a flashy comic book villain showdown like B89 or TDK. Really not much different from other films told from the perspective of morally questionable/abhorrent characters.

 

[The Shape]

But I'm done discussing that aspect of the film for now. I'm pumped and just got my tickets for Thursday night.

 

[HBarnill]

TDK also wasn't a story told from the perspective of the Joker, or the man who will become the Joker. Just because Arthur Fleck may be the hero of his own story in his own mind (and this movie supposedly plays with the fact that some things happening may not even be "real"), that doesn't mean they are presenting him as a hero to us -- the viewer. This much should be obvious.

This is a raw and realstic take on The Joker, not a flashy comic book villain showdown like B89 or TDK. Really not much different from other films told from the perspective of morally questionable/abhorrent characters.

How the hell was Ledger’s Joker a “flashy cb villain”?

 

[Hollis Mason]

How the hell was Ledger’s Joker a “flashy cb villain”?

I don't think he means it in a bad way. While TDK is still ****ing great, it's a classic villain vs hero story, while this one is more like villain vs villains thing.

 

[Kane52630]

Without a doubt he's a flashy comic book villain, which isn't a bad thing.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I mean, art doesn't have to follow a same direction. Maybe they're trying something different or trying to say something about how these kind of revolutionary idols get created. TDK was a movie about Batman fighting Joker. This one is a movie about Joker fighting the world. You are being showed the cynical and disgusting point of view of one of the most sickest and evil villains of entertainment.

Like i said before, making a villain's backstory tragic doesn't mean the movie is condoning his action. It's just trying to make the audience have more emotions and feeling during the film. That's something that has been done a LOT of times.

But the thing is if people think the Joker is cool, then that's not the director or writers fault, because they have stated many times that's not their intention. Even with all those things you pointed there are MANY people that think TDK's Joker has a great point and is still "cool". You can't stop people from thinking villains are "cool". They have been doing it since Alex DeLarge and Michael Corleone. Just look at how many people thought Killmonger and Thanos were right. That's something that will always happens. So i don't really see any point with just accussing this film.

Just for the record, I know nothing of the plot of the actual movie. Only what I can glean from the trailers. I don't know how the movie protrays him. Only the trailers. If it is art, you hold it to the standards of art. And intentions rarely matter in such circumstances. What the movie actually shows, what it invokes. If that wasn't the case, the argument of intention could be made for poor films that do not show any of the writer's intent. The idea that the Joker isn't being portrayed as cool in the marketing is just downright incorrect. There is also the issue of you know, you wouldn't say there is any merit to a sympathetic approach to a terrorist, even if that is what you made, unless you are a complete idiot.

Also yes, potentially portraying the poor white male outcast terrorist as being misunderstood, pushed to his limit and then breaking because of society is sympathizing with the white male outcast terrorist. Again, TDK and Nolan understood this. Hence the scar stories. That at first suggest a reason for why the Joker is the way he is. And then you quickly realize, he is a manipulative piece of garbage. You can get into what people took from it, but it most certainly never sympathetizes or lionizes the Joker.

Bringing up Killmonger is a great example of the nuance needed to tackle such a subject. The movie presents such complex subject matter associated with black identity, including militant movements in a search for personhood in the face of oppression. Killmonger was created by the US military. They harnessed his feeling of injustice and turned him into a weapon. Which is why he answers the call with violence. But again, T'Challa proves Killmonger wrong, while still sympathizing with his resentment. More importantly, he provides a solution far from what Killmonger suggest in his rage.

It is also rather important to point out that you don't have a lot if any black terrorism in the United States. Black Panther only really made dudes like Ben Shaprio angry at it's existences. It didn't inspire a wave of terrorism nor did it support an existing wave of terrorism. We know the issue with White Supremacy and Incels in North America already. I mean, there is a reason people are even discussing this and warnings are being made. Even by the US military.

 

[terry78]

Batman shooting families 'horrified' by Joker film


Here we go.

 

[The Joker]

Batman shooting families 'horrified' by Joker film


Here we go.

Oh for goodness sake....

 

[DarthSkywalker]

TDK also wasn't a story told from the perspective of the Joker, or the man who will become the Joker. Just because Arthur Fleck may be the hero of his own story in his own mind (and this movie supposedly plays with the fact that some things happening may not even be "real"), that doesn't mean they are presenting him as a hero to us -- the viewer. This much should be obvious.

This is a raw and realstic take on The Joker, not a flashy comic book villain showdown like B89 or TDK. Really not much different from other films told from the perspective of morally questionable/abhorrent characters.

This is raw and "realistic"? Sure.

You know what should be obvious? That such a portrayal easily slides into sympathy for the terrorist. Because at the very least the advertising sure as hell loves to glorify the Joker. Which means they are glorifying is actions at the very least out of context.

How the hell was Ledger’s Joker a “flashy cb villain”?

The Joker is flashy. It's his thing. Well that and lacking substance, which is potentially part of the issue here. The Joker is Ben Shapiro with a sense of style. The Joker in the trailer for Joker is flashy as ****. Artistic shots of him putting on his makeup, jumping around in full costume, etc. I am sure it is very raw and realistic to put a literal smile on a kid's face. Nothing flashy about it at all. Same with the suit, same with the dramatic shots of him walking through hallways and curtains.

I am not complaining about that by the way. I think the imagery is pretty awesome. Just you know, he is as flashy as the Joker always has been.

 

[Hollis Mason]

Just for the record, I know nothing of the plot of the actual movie. Only what I can glean from the trailers. I don't know how the movie protrays him. Only the trailers. If it is art, you hold it to the standards of art. And intentions rarely matter in such circumstances. What the movie actually shows, what it invokes. If that wasn't the case, the argument of intention could be made for poor films that do not show any of the writer's intent. The idea that the Joker isn't being portrayed as cool in the marketing is just downright incorrect. There is also the issue of you know, you wouldn't say there is any merit to a sympathetic approach to a terrorist, even if that is what you made, unless you are a complete idiot.

Also yes, potentially portraying the poor white male outcast terrorist as being misunderstood, pushed to his limit and then breaking because of society is sympathizing with the white male outcast terrorist. Again, TDK and Nolan understood this. Hence the scar stories. That at first suggest a reason for why the Joker is the way he is. And then you quickly realize, he is a manipulative piece of garbage. You can get into what people took from it, but it most certainly never sympathetizes or lionizes the Joker.

Bringing up Killmonger is a great example of the nuance needed to tackle such a subject. The movie presents such complex subject matter associated with black identity, including militant movements in a search for personhood in the face of oppression. Killmonger was created by the US military. They harnessed his feeling of injustice and turned him into a weapon. Which is why he answers the call with violence. But again, T'Challa proves Killmonger wrong, while still sympathizing with his resentment. More importantly, he provides a solution far from what Killmonger suggest in his rage.

It is also rather important to point out that you don't have a lot if any black terrorism in the United States. Black Panther only really made dudes like Ben Shaprio angry at it's existences. It didn't inspire a wave of terrorism nor did it support an existing wave of terrorism. We know the issue with White Supremacy and Incels in North America already. I mean, there is a reason people are even discussing this and warnings are being made. Even by the US military.

I am sorry but i don't really see how the Joker is being potrayed as "cool" in the trailers. All i see is a tragic villain just like they did with The Killing Joke and White Knight. Making you feel empathy for him doesn't mean it's glorifying him. There's a big difference between empathy and simpathy. I don't know which trailers you watched, but that's something that has been done since art starting to evolve.

Also, i'm sorry (again), but i don't see what difference there is between showing the struggle of a white man and a black man that gets bullied daily. Race doesn't make you less worthy of empathy. I say this a black man. The fact so many people use "white male" when they talk about Arthur instead of just a mental ill person suffering abuse seriously disgusts me. It shows these people don't really feel empathy to anybody except those they feel are worthy. I know this because i suffer from mental illness, and i know what it is like to be bullied because of it. And it shouldn't mean **** if i'm white or black.

"Hey see that guy being bullied there?! Let's go hel- Oh, wait, he's white. Doesn't matter"
That's what i hear everytime.

People like Arthur Fleck do exist in these world, i understand that, but demonizing them and not acknowledging these people are human that need serious mental help isn't gonna make them go away. What do you think it will do? If anything, a movie that shows why these kind of people could be created and how it could be stopped should be something really necessary, which is something the movie does, according to the script i read.

Joker is a movie that talks about mental illness, and how the lack of attention to that topic only creates tragedy. Making these themes "taboo" isn't gonna make solve anything but only censore entertainment which is a terrible thing and isn't gonna lead us anywhere but souless movies that only show the world as sunshine and rainbows instead of actually trying to send a message that matters.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Oh for goodness sake....

I mean you don't have to agree with them. I agree with their sentiment, but not their approach outside of apparently wanting WB to distance themselves from politicians who go against gun control. But you know, they did lose family to a person that mirrors the main character in this movie. I don't know if I'd Charlie Brown "good grief" them over this.

 

[Snow Queen]

This is raw and "realistic"? Sure.

You know what should be obvious? That such a portrayal easily slides into sympathy for the terrorist. Because at the very least the advertising sure as hell loves to glorify the Joker. Which means they are glorifying is actions at the very least out of context.


The Joker is flashy. It's his thing. Well that and lacking substance, which is potentially part of the issue here. The Joker is Ben Shapiro with a sense of style. The Joker in the trailer for Joker is flashy as ****. Artistic shots of him putting on his makeup, jumping around in full costume, etc. I am sure it is very raw and realistic to put a literal smile on a kid's face. Nothing flashy about it at all. Same with the suit, same with the dramatic shots of him walking through hallways and curtains.

I am not complaining about that by the way. I think the imagery is pretty awesome. Just you know, he is as flashy as the Joker always has been.

I spy an opening for another society meme...

 

[The Joker]

I mean you don't have to agree with them. I agree with their sentiment, but not their approach outside of apparently wanting WB to distance themselves from politicians who go against gun control. But you know, they did lose family to a character that mirrors the main character in this movie. I don't know if I'd Charlie Brown "good grief" them over this.

I would. I have nothing but sympathy for their loss, but the movies are not to blame for it. Millions of people managed to watch these movies and not walk out and shoot up a theater afterward. Its the deranged individuals who commit these acts that are responsible.