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

[Travesty]

I didn't like the song, cause I didn't think it was fitting. It took me out, because the song is sooooo played out. It's used in so much stuff.

I actually didn't even know Gary Glitter made the song, nor did I know anything about his pedophilia. Yes, he's a terrible person, but I was just critiquing the scene on its own merits, not based on how bad Gary Glitter is.

 

[The Guard]

Regarding the whole "can Batman exist in this Gotham?"/"Can Batman still exist if Thomas Wayne was a bad person?" debate:

I think it's fairly ambiguous.

In the late 70's and early 80's Thomas Wayne was occassionally portrayed as a less than engaged, gruff, potentially abusive or neglectful father figure.

There's a story called "To Kill a Legend" from 1981's Detective Comics #500 issue where Batman goes back in time/to an alternative timeline with Robin thanks to The Phantom Stranger, and we meet young Bruce, and he's kind of a spoiled brat. The murder of his parents sets him on a different path, and adult Bruce himself muses about what might have been had his life not gone in that direction. They don't really go there in this movie, but they could if they continued the story.

The movie presents everything with enough ambiguity there's not really any indication that Thomas is truly bad, corrupt, etc. You can interpret it as you see fit.

As for whether the movie glamorizes Joker and his actions...there are some pretty clear context clues to consider. The only time Arthur receives fanfare/applause when he is not engaging in violence are either fantasy/dream type sequences. The other times...who is applauding/praising/looking up to him? A seemingly reckless, violent mob. Consider the source of the praise when assessing what the movie's creators are trying to say about whether his actions are justified.

And look at the shift in Phoenix's performance. When he's misunderstood, downtrodden Arthur Fleck, he generally comes across as socially awkward, but also sort of charismatic, someone potentially likeable, even if

Spoiler

some of it isn't real

. When he's starting down the path to violence, and Joker? Not even close. He alters his voice, his speech patterns, his mannerisms, he plays up the "monster" in the man, I assume so the audience understands that this isn't to be sympathized with just because he was once a sympathetic figure.

 

[FunkMiller]

Which is why I thought it was perfect. It literally made me laugh which was needed after what happened. That is just me though...

I think Gary Glitter is the scum of the Earth but that doesnt mean I cant like the song. I personally can separate the art from the man. I understand others that cant and its all good. But to pretend this "controversy" isnt only because of the film is ludicrous. The song is everywhere and no one has complained. Sure some teams (my college for example) have banned it (and the fans are still pissed about it) but not even close to all of them have or will. The media didnt care about it then, hasnt until now and wont mention it 6 months from now when Joker isnt a big deal. They dont care about Gary Glitter being played, they care that Joker gets them clicks.

Jesus Christ, if all Americans have this kind of attitude I find that very sad. Everyone okay with Lost Prophets being played as well?

 

[The Endless]

Gary Glitter is a dirty nonce case who should've been castrated. I dont like the fact he's getting royalties.

But he made good music. That particular song is a classic. And I think it fitted well with the scene, actually. It's Arthur finally being free and embracing Joker fully. He's like a rock star making his entrance. And I loved how it shifted into that ominous score.

 

[Travesty]

Jesus Christ, if all Americans have this kind of attitude I find that very sad. Everyone okay with Lost Prophets being played as well?

You're virtue signaling so hard, you're now becoming a xenophobe.

 

[BatLobster]

The only reason I felt the Gary Glitter song sorrrta worked, is it felt SO tone deaf and inappropriate to the context of what was happening, that I could see it coming from The Joker's warped sense of humor. But as for whether it was a smart move from an optics standpoint...nah, it was kind of an unnecessary blunder. There are any number of songs that could've worked there. I'm sure there will be a lot of fan edits with alternate cues, and that might be interesting to see.

With all due respect to Jared Leto, because I think he's a fantastic actor and was absolutely brilliant in Blade Runner 2049, but Letoker was just horrendous. I can't think of anybody that would want a film all about whatever that was,

It's got to suck being The Joker sandwiched between Heath Ledger and Joaquin Phoenix, in a movie where most of your material was cut and whatever was left was not well-received. I don't mean to kick him while he's down, but...the way he behaved on set sounded insufferable, and his Joker was truly ill-conceived from the word go. It was all just an unfortunate misfire. It happens.

 

[Gothamsknight]

It's got to suck being The Joker sandwiched between Heath Ledger and Joaquin Phoenix, in a movie where most of your material was cut and whatever was left not well-received. I don't mean to kick him while he's down, but...the way he behaved on set sounded insufferable, and his Joker was truly ill-conceived from the word go. It was all just an unfortunate misfire. It happens.

Yup. and I know it wasn't Letos idea for the character to look the way he did, but my god it was awful in every sense of the word. Ill also never understand his atrocious and disgusting onset antics. That's not method acting, it's just being stupid.

 

[Brother Jack]

I didn't like the song, cause I didn't think it was fitting. It took me out, because the song is sooooo played out. It's used in so much stuff.

I actually liked that choice because it's such a familiar song. It felt like a way to get the audience to root for Arthur fully transforming into Joker in that moment by framing it as this triumphant fist-bumping thing. There's a lot of tonal dissonance in it because it's getting you to champion this guy even though you know it's leading to death and destruction.

 

[Travesty]

Well, I'm not rooting for The Joker...and I don't think the movie plays it out that way, either.

 

[BaelaTargaryen]

LMAO

 

[Travesty]

I'm sure the porn parody is coming soon.

 

[Boom]

#CANCELTHEOFFICEAGAIN

 

[Kane52630]

#CANCELTHEOFFICEAGAIN

 

[Brother Jack]

Well, I'm not rooting for The Joker...and I don't think the movie plays it out that way, either.

It's portraying Arthur's perspective. The song choice is representative of his sense of victory in that moment.

 

[Travesty]

#CANCELTHEOFFICEAGAIN

No joke, but I was actually thinking of this very scene while watching the movie. I was picturing Michael Scott going up and down on the chair.

 

[The Shape]

You're virtue signaling so hard, you're now becoming a xenophobe.

No more Michael Jackson songs can ever be played again!

 

[Boom]

No joke, but I was actually thinking of this very scene while watching the movie. I was picturing Michael Scott going up and down on the chair.

Gone.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Which is why I thought it was perfect. It literally made me laugh which was needed after what happened. That is just me though...

I think Gary Glitter is the scum of the Earth but that doesnt mean I cant like the song. I personally can separate the art from the man. I understand others that cant and its all good. But to pretend this "controversy" isnt only because of the film is ludicrous. The song is everywhere and no one has complained. Sure some teams (my college for example) have banned it (and the fans are still pissed about it) but not even close to all of them have or will. The media didnt care about it then, hasnt until now and wont mention it 6 months from now when Joker isnt a big deal. They dont care about Gary Glitter being played, they care that Joker gets them clicks.

Nobody complained presumably because they either didn't know of Glitter's past, or because they don't read or hear about him making money off of its use in arenas. Actually, I'm not sure he does get royalties when played in an arena.

Your arguments of being able to buy the song on itunes, or wherever, are weak, since in that case, it is up to the consumer whether or not they want to buy the song. It's a conscious decision on their part. But it's not a conscious decision if they go to the movie unaware the song is going to be in it, or that Glitter may profit from it.

I haven't seen the movie yet, so I don't have a dog in this fight. But Phillips made a choice to use the song, and he was either unaware that Glitter would profit from it, or he didn't care. The fact still stands, that Glitter will get royalties from this movie.

 

[Art Vandelay]

No more Michael Jackson songs can ever be played again!

Michael Jackson was just accused. He was never found guilty. Glitter, on the other hand, was.

 

[kguillou]

Okay, I think...the trauma’s worn off since last friday, I...think I’m ready to watch this again.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Yup. and I know it wasn't Letos idea for the character to look the way he did, but my god it was awful in every sense of the word. Ill also never understand his atrocious and disgusting onset antics. That's not method acting, it's just being stupid.

Seriously. And the sad part is, I feel like Leto COULD have played a good Joker if he hadn't gone so far off the mark. I'm not sure how much of it was him or Ayer (even though I'm pretty sure the on-set antics were 100% Leto), but it just makes me wonder what could have been. I feel like had the movie been in more capable hands, or at least in the hands of a director who would have told Leto NO on certain character choices, he might have actually been good. It reminds me of when Johnny Depp played Willy Wonka. I think he could have been great in the role but sadly, the choices he and Burton made were just terrible.

 

[FatRobin]

I've never thought David Ayer had it in him to make a great Joker tbh. But then again the Hangover director did, so... .

 

[Doc Samson]

I completely know what you mean. It's a weird response to have to a film where you like it a lot more only if you frame it that way. And yet that's also exactly how I find myself viewing the film.

Thankfully, the movie did offer up enough ambiguity at the end where I felt I was justified in having that interpretation.

I think it's a great film regardless.

But if we go with the idea that the whole film is Joker telling a "multiple choice" origin to the therapist at the end (and us), or its him reminiscing to himself... it becomes the greatest portrayal of the Joker in live action, for me. Telling a tall tale, making him seem sympathetic, making his nemesis' father out to be a *****e who got what he deserved, just for ****s and giggles... it's pure Joker.

Agreed 100%. It walks the line between being the most un-Joker-like portrayal possible or the most Joker type iteration ever. And definitely, the ambiguity allows fans whatever interpretation they want...

 

[Gothamsknight]

Seriously. And the sad part is, I feel like Leto COULD have played a good Joker if he hadn't gone so far off the mark. I'm not sure how much of it was him or Ayer (even though I'm pretty sure the on-set antics were 100% Leto), but it just makes me wonder what could have been. I feel like had the movie been in more capable hands, or at least in the hands of a director who would have told Leto NO on certain character choices, he might have actually been good. It reminds me of when Johnny Depp played Willy Wonka. I think he could have been great in the role but sadly, the choices he and Burton made were just terrible.

Exactly! Couldn't have said it better.

 

[Maze]

Spoiler

It depend what he really tell the psychiatric : if, it's the tale that we know, well we have a guy who say that he enjoys what he does. A guy, to appear sympathetic who could have painted as just having a psychotic crisis after the people who humiliated him, A guy who killed even his mother (she wronged him, but still) He could have painted himself also as as defender of the poor people vs The Elite, but he tell us repeatidly that he doesn't care and is not into politics. Even more, we know ( in his tale at least) that Arthur think that people doesn't listen enough. He think that he is misunderstood, he wants recognition. What does it tell the psychiatric? that she would not get the joke. So maybe, for him she didnt listen him like he would have liked