A Joker Review
The Joker Sucks
Joker is a comic book movie for people who hate comic book movies and vice versa
From the guy who made dumb Judd Apatow films for morons, he now tries to make Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy but with a Joker who pales in comparison to even the cartoon version of the same character. Jojo Phoenix is not a good actor, just because he lost weight for the role extreme method acting is not good acting. Just look at Jared Leto he tried to become the Joker and failed horribly at it, and acted like a douche both off and on film method acting is not necessarily good acting. Phoenix also gave a terribly pretentious speech or monologue at the Oscars acting like the stereotypical stuck up primadonna, that most Hollywood actors are portrayed as. "(Time magazine's Stephanie Zacharek, in a negative review, labeled Phoenix's performance as over-the-top and felt that while Phillips tried to "[give] us a movie all about the emptiness of our culture... he's just offering a prime example of it." She argued the plot was nonexistent, "dark only in a stupidly adolescent way," and "stuffed with phony philosophy.")" (Zacharek, Stephanie).
Sometimes you, as in anyone, can try too hard, and you can come off as phony, and this can take someone as in the viewer, out of the film or ruin the immersion because the actor or actors don't feel natural in the cinematic world we see them in. Jojo Phoenixdown, or whatever his name is, comes off as fake like an uncanny valley effect, the world he inhabits also seems fake it's not Gotham city there is no dark gothic architecture like in the comics, it's just another bland dingy city that filmmakers try to make look like a fictional city. You need to either shoot it or film it thematically, underexpose shots, up the contrast, or add in features that make it feel like Gotham as envisioned by Bill Finger, and the many other great writers and artists who helped define the world of Batman over the years. On a somewhat unrelated note, fuck Bob Kane, he took all the credit for something that would've sucked with a less interesting Batman with a dumb costume and no colorful rogues gallery, if he did it alone without Bill Finger, kind of like how Stan Lee screwed over Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko and took all the credit for creating all the classic Marvel characters, which is why they both left Marvel.
The world of the Joker film tries to be realistic, however, it comes across as cartoonishly bad and still, it also tries to be about a comic book character in which it also fails, you can mix the two and can have success, but it's very easy to add too much of one or the other and have it fail. The twist near the end of the film where we see that the Joker's girlfriend was a delusion was quite apparent from the beginning, which is because this portrayal of the Joker is a creepy simpleton, he's not suave, he's not in any way believable as the intelligent Joker from the comics. Batman would kick this Joker's ass easily every time if they ever met, plus this Joker would be in his 60's by the time they met so he might break every bone in his frail body fighting batman. This film should not be set in the world of Batman, or at least it should try to be a good Batman film, and it should not be a rip-off of Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy. The Joker is based on the character of the man who laughs or Gwynplaine played by Conrad Veidt, and German expressionism just like the whole concept of Batman, and his Gallery of Rogues, who were based on the early black and white horror and action films, and had his parents killed after viewing one of those said films.
The citizens of Gotham going ape shit also felt forced to me, what some billionaire says you’re a clown, and you throw a temper tantrum like a dumb baby? And that billionaire is supposed to be the moral foundation and the very reason for Batman existing, why include him at all if you can't understand that? Thomas Wayne should not be a villain, and he is not Donald Trump, does Todd Phillips know you can have an evil protagonist and the quote-unquote villain is the real good guy or hero. If you don't want to make a good Batman movie, why even try if you're just going to copy a Martin Scorsese film instead? Bruce Wayne would not become batman if his father was a hateful idiot instead of a kind-hearted surgeon turned philanthropist who taught him, mercy, kindness, and right from wrong. This batman would either become a drunken playboy or a crazed punisher knock off. Joker is a terrible Batman movie, it ruins Thomas Wayne, the death of the Wayne’s, and even the character of the joker.
The reason people are defending this cinematic failure is because of the ties to an iconic super-villain they all grew up with, but also because 90 percent of people are stupid, but that's beside the point. Although, audience members are not critics they are not well studied in objective film criticism they often are not as smart as their reviews are short and not helpful and do not contain constructive criticism. Now I'll admit sometimes the critics will give good ratings to bad movies, which is bad for journalism and film criticism, and sometimes the audience is right but still fail to be as coherent and objective as professional critics, some try and fail, and yet others succeed. This film is pretentious garbage made by a dumb dude-bro comedy movie director and an overdramatic weirdo playing a simpleton playing the joker. Joker is not a fitting film set in the world of Batman, not only that but in general, it is kinda dumb, it received so many bad critical reviews for a reason.
NPR's Glen Weldon Review
- Review: 'Joker' Has Nothing To Say, And Says It Loudly : NPR
Todd Phillips' film features a bravura central performance and a style that, while dutifully imitative, engenders a claustrophobic sense of dread. But it's all in service of precisely nothing.
Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian's Review
- Joker review – the most disappointing film of the year | Film | The Guardian
Todd Phillips’ solemn but shallow supervillain origins movie has a strong performance by Joaquin Phoenix but is weighed down by realist detail and tedious material
Time magazine's Stephanie Zacharek's Review
- Joker Review: Joaquin Phoenix Overacts So Hard It's No Fun | Time
Joker is an origin story that dovetails with, but does not strictly follow, DC Universe Batman lore. Joaquin Phoenix's character is too much
Zacharek, Stephanie. “Joker Review: Joaquin Phoenix Overacts So Hard It's No Fun.” Time, Time, 31 Aug. 2019, time.com/5666055/venice-joker-review-joaquin-phoenix-not-funny/.
Joaquin Phoenix is no Robert de Niro
Joaquin feels fake and unrelatable, he is a terrible re-mix of the Rupert Pupkin character from The King of Comedy, and Travis Bickle from Taxi Driver, he is no joker he's no Jack Nicholson and he's no Heath Ledger and he is definitely no Mark Hamill he acts like a weird alien. And he's not unlike Tommy Wiseau a weirdo who also acts like an inhuman alien, he'll never be Robert de Niro who is able to act like almost anyone, in stark contrast. This weirdo grew up in a cult, so it makes sense he would act like an inhuman weirdo, he might be better at another career, but definitely not acting, he frankly sucks at it.
I've never much cared for anything he (as in Phoenix) has been in, he’s never been a very good actor, I never feel like he is realistically portraying a specific character, like I would the many great Hollywood actors of the 70s and 80s. He’s not charismatic he's not believable. I hated Joaquin Phoenix in the movie “Her”, I thought it was pretentious; the acting was bad, I didn't feel it was real, it felt fake, it felt forced, stupid, and dumb. But enough about ‘Her’, let's talk about the worst film of the year Joker, I'm kidding I'm sure there was an Adam Sandler movie (not Uncut Gems, one of his happy madison garbage flicks) or a horrible in an ironic sense horror movie or some other film by a hack director or producer, that was an even worse film than Joker, I'm just exaggerating for comedic effect, which Joker has no sense of, ironically.
Joaquin Phoenix again is no Robert De Niro he can't pull off a sad but relatable down on his luck protagonist with mental problems, and let me also say Todd Phillips is no Martin Scorsese he's some jerkoff who made a terrible movie about some guys getting drunk in Las Vegas, he's no dramatic director, heck he's not even a very decent comedic director. You can have a protagonist who does bad things, most of the greatest movies ever made were about very flawed individuals you have; The Godfather parts 1 and 2, you have Dirty Harry, you have Vertigo, you have the King of Comedy, you have Psycho, and you have Taxi Driver. Joker is none of those films it is not even a sad clone of those movies it's just sad. The Joker cannot even be suave for one minute Travis Bickle was suave he was able to ask a beautiful woman out on a date, he does ruin it because he lacks certain social senses and can't tell what a good movie to take a girl out on a date is.
Joker is not Rupert Pupkin a down on his luck comedian who is a little delusional but manages to intelligently coordinate a kidnapping that lands him on a prime time talk show as a comedic guest and gets himself skyrocketed to the top. Phoenix's Joker is not intelligent he can't plan or scheme he's not Heath Ledger's Joker, or the much better and less overrated Mark Hamill's Joker, Heath is good but he was brought down by the writing which was a little lackluster and kinda ripped off Heat with Al Pacino and Robert De Niro as well as several Batman stories that he (Christopher Nolan) kind of mixed together or blended and put back together to make a story.
But enough about that, for now, let's get back to this movie's Joker, He is obviously unintelligent, most successful serial killers have some modicum of intelligence some are near genius-level intelligence and seldom get caught because they know how to stick the knife in just the right way so they don't get sloppy and trip up and get caught because of it. But many possess a quirk, an eccentricity, or an impulse that gives them away, this Joker you could tell is a blithering idiot, and a certifiable lunatic from a mile away just by looking at him, or by catching his terrible act. Another fact that separates him from other Jokers, is that he's not even remotely funny even in a dark way, he's just an idiot with clown makeup on. Rupert Pupkin was actually funny and was able to get an audience to laugh, no such luck on Arthur Fleck's part I'm afraid. And I have to say Robert De Niro was the only part I liked in this film I just wish he had been playing a better character, that Scorsese might've written, and not Todd Phillips.