Ongoing Sci-Fi, Comic Book Movie Thread v2

[pseudoreality]

I just recently watched the Joker and I actually felt like it needed a sequel. The first movie shows loser Arthur who finally snaps and stops trying to follow rules/care. However, we didn't seem him become a master villain worthy of being Batman's greatest foe.

Unfortunately, I get the feeling we are not going to see that side of his transformation in this movie either.

[Parallex]

I liked Joker... but it's not what I want or expect from major comic-book based movies.

When I go to a comic-book based movies I just want to stuff my face with popcorn and forget that the real-world and it's problems exist for 2 hours. Joker doesn't really let me do that.

Still a very good film. Would recommend it in general... I would just tell people ahead of time that it's not really a comic-book movie and more a slow-burn drama about man with mental illness having a psychotic break.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

A Joker movie didn't need to be made. Phoenix was great but the movie wasn't. It literally could have been called anything else and you have the same movie. If anything, to me at least, it takes away the best part of who the Joker is. His motivation for why he does what he does. All that movie did was show he was an incel loser blaming others for his problems. Killed the mystique around the character. Somethings are better off left alone.

Just a riff on King of Comedy and Taxi Driver. Watch those instead.

I just watched Taxi Driver a few months back for the first time. A young Cybill Sheppard was great!

[Galakanokis]

Scorsese at his best. Also a fantastic cast.

But it was written by Paul Schrader who is fantastic. Check out Rolling Thunder. Came out right around the same time as Taxi Driver. Maybe a few years later cannot remember now.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

A Joker movie didn't need to be made. Phoenix was great but the movie wasn't. It literally could have been called anything else and you have the same movie. If anything, to me at least, it takes away the best part of who the Joker is. His motivation for why he does what he does. All that movie did was show he was an incel loser blaming others for his problems. Killed the mystique around the character. Somethings are better off left alone.

Just a riff on King of Comedy and Taxi Driver. Watch those instead.

Incel loser? That's a....unique interpretation. To me it felt like a realistic portrayal of what and who the character would have actually been in the context and period.

Originally Posted by Parallex

I liked Joker... but it's not what I want or expect from major comic-book based movies.

When I go to a comic-book based movies I just want to stuff my face with popcorn and forget that the real-world and it's problems exist for 2 hours. Joker doesn't really let me do that.

Still a very good film. Would recommend it in general... I would just tell people ahead of time that it's not really a comic-book movie and more a slow-burn drama about man with mental illness having a psychotic break.

If you went into Joker thinking it was standard DCEU or MCU fare I think that's more of a 'you' problem.

Originally Posted by pseudoreality

I just recently watched the Joker and I actually felt like it needed a sequel. The first movie shows loser Arthur who finally snaps and stops trying to follow rules/care. However, we didn't seem him become a master villain worthy of being Batman's greatest foe.

Unfortunately, I get the feeling we are not going to see that side of his transformation in this movie either.

I don't think we're meant to. Personally, I don't understand why the original film needed a sequal. I mean, I understand why they made one, but it wasn't required. It was a unique take on the character that was hella interesting.

Would agree on the general consensus that the film wouldn't have had the draw without the connection to the DC characters, though. I guess they could have made a Bernhard Goetz biopic, but where's the draw for something so out of mind for most people?

[Galakanokis]

Not just my take. Used in reviews from many people like Variety and even called an incels training manual. It’s in the ballpark for sure.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

Not just my take. Used in reviews from many people like Variety and even called an incels training manual. It’s in the ballpark for sure.

Incels are people so obsessed with their inability to get laid that they define themselves by it. I didn't get that vibe from Joker at all. If anything the Joker seemed asexual and not interested in sex.

Edit: I can see how people might think that the movie encourages people who feel rejected by society to act violently. This is the danger anytime you tell a story from the villain's perspective. I still don't see anything specifically Incel about the Joker though.