Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I'm glad it doesn't give away the whole plot like some of the older movie trailers do, so at least there's that to look forward to. Not sure if it'll match the heights of the first movie since that's a tall order, but it's definitely something I'm interested in than more MCU drivel.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/04/10 12:42:13
It has my interest. First was pretty left field, so hoping for more of the same. That there’s been a decent period between movies leaves me hopeful that was room to have a good enough story to justify.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
The first movie did nothing for me and I lost interest halfway through the trailer for this one. I foresee Joker: Pardon My French to get overwhelmingly positive critical responses. Maybe some Oscars, too.
Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone?
lord_blackfang wrote: Yea of course it's difficult to watch, it's a psychological drama.
It is known.
More seriously it also had to do with where I was in my own head at the time. I've watched it one and a half times and meh. I heard it was good or well received in the so called "Man o sphere" and all the accompanying whys and what have yous. It wasn't to my tastes because it was just watching a person suffer and have a breakdown. It wasn't bad just unpleasant. I was already going through my own stuff an didn't care for the compound interest, if you will.
I was surprised that I would find any interest at all from the trailer for the second movie. It looks a lot less bleak, we'll see.
The rewards of tolerance are treachery and betrayal.
Remember kids, Games Workshop needs you more than you need them.
I wonder what the naysayers will come up with for this movie. The first one was labeled as racist, pro SA, pro incel, pro right-wing violence, pro child diddling. not that any of it was true, but there seemed to be a concerted effort by some to see it fail.
Basically when I heard the first one was wowed at Cannes, I thought "Huh- so it's artsy?".
I hate it when I'm right..
Thing I wonder is that Phoenix Joker and Cedric Diggory Batman are in same universe? In the first, Thomas Wayne had political aspirations, and the former Riddler went after him because his Dad was a Mayoral candidate.. Hmm HMM?
TheChrispyOne wrote: Basically when I heard the first one was wowed at Cannes, I thought "Huh- so it's artsy?".
I hate it when I'm right..
Thing I wonder is that Phoenix Joker and Cedric Diggory Batman are in same universe? In the first, Thomas Wayne had political aspirations, and the former Riddler went after him because his Dad was a Mayoral candidate.. Hmm HMM?
There's a very different Joker in The Batman. They could go with a 3 Jokers angle but the first Joker movie was a big part of WB going back to the siloed project plan so I doubt it.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
With all the AI trailers and fan made trailers, I honestly thought this was just another one of those. The only thing that convinced me was the standee advertising at the theater.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
Easy E wrote: I have a hard time understanding how a sequel comes from the first one.
You don't understand the quest for more $?
While that is the case I feel like Lady GaGa isn't nearly a big a draw as she was pre-Covid and Joker may have been the most overrated film of the 21st Century so far...
I don't see the audience draw unless you enjoyed Joker and to me it was just a mediocre reskin of Taxi Driver.
The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy
It has some really well done moments, and the acting is good, but you can tell it is movie made solely because the first made so much money.
"I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed" seems to be a common feeling, though some would argue disappointing is worse than bad. One guy described it as an extended prologue that would have been cut from the original but included as an extra on the Blu-Ray.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
Pretty much, I think the biggest problem is that by the end of the movie almost nothing changes from how Joker/Arthur was in the beginning of the movie, but not so much in the sense that the theme is about how things are cyclical but rather it feels like it was a bunch of hullaballoo for nothing and the movie backtracks Arthur's previous character development into the Joker from the first movie for the sake of the plot. It's almost like the director was embarrassed that the previous movie resonated with some people and he wanted to trash its legacy to deny further sequels and retroactively ruin the first movie with it.
Can anyone who's seen it weight in with no big spoilers?
small spoilers, no big spoilers;
Spoiler:
So, the thing of this movie is that it is legit made to destroy the first, if you liked the first, this movie WILL disappoint you if not make you lose all interest in watching movies made by its cast and actors in spite for having aided in this insult.
This movie is a rewriting of the main character, not a sequel. It reverts the main character into his timid form and suggests that the joker is not him but a kind of shadow that just posesses people, which is emediately shown in a retroesc cartoon at the very start of the film to set the stage.
It is echoed many times over in this movie that this is the case.
"lady" gaga plays a decent role, the music and everything isn't that bad either, but everything else is a massive slap in the face of everyone who was expecting more depth to arthur or the joker personality. It's not there, what this movie ultimately is is just a literal waste of time dragging out everything until it shoves the middle finger into your face.
And that is putting it kindly, without spoilers.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/10/06 10:10:59
"Why would i be lying for Wechhudrs sake man.., i do not write fiction!"
For me, first 'Joker' was a good movie,it just had jack all to do with DC's character 'Joker'.
From any prospective sequel for that movie, I would want to see Arthur really assume the role and methodology of real Joker. Because I think this is something Phoenix could pull off and be really good at. But the trailer makes it look like it's another insanity power fantasy, and I'm just not into that.
Can anyone who's seen it weight in with no big spoilers?
small spoilers, no big spoilers;
Spoiler:
So, the thing of this movie is that it is legit made to destroy the first, if you liked the first, this movie WILL disappoint you if not make you lose all interest in watching movies made by its cast and actors in spite for having aided in this insult.
This movie is a rewriting of the main character, not a sequel. It reverts the main character into his timid form and suggests that the joker is not him but a kind of shadow that just posesses people, which is emediately shown in a retroesc cartoon at the very start of the film to set the stage.
It is echoed many times over in this movie that this is the case.
"lady" gaga plays a decent role, the music and everything isn't that bad either, but everything else is a massive slap in the face of everyone who was expecting more depth to arthur or the joker personality. It's not there, what this movie ultimately is is just a literal waste of time dragging out everything until it shoves the middle finger into your face.
And that is putting it kindly, without spoilers.
Spoiler:
With how often DC/Marvel re-invent characters or have them pass the role to a new generation/individual the idea of a "shadow controlling/influencing" is almost exactly how they treat almost their entire roster of characters.
Can anyone who's seen it weight in with no big spoilers?
small spoilers, no big spoilers;
Spoiler:
So, the thing of this movie is that it is legit made to destroy the first, if you liked the first, this movie WILL disappoint you if not make you lose all interest in watching movies made by its cast and actors in spite for having aided in this insult.
This movie is a rewriting of the main character, not a sequel. It reverts the main character into his timid form and suggests that the joker is not him but a kind of shadow that just posesses people, which is emediately shown in a retroesc cartoon at the very start of the film to set the stage.
It is echoed many times over in this movie that this is the case.
"lady" gaga plays a decent role, the music and everything isn't that bad either, but everything else is a massive slap in the face of everyone who was expecting more depth to arthur or the joker personality. It's not there, what this movie ultimately is is just a literal waste of time dragging out everything until it shoves the middle finger into your face.
And that is putting it kindly, without spoilers.
Spoiler:
With how often DC/Marvel re-invent characters or have them pass the role to a new generation/individual the idea of a "shadow controlling/influencing" is almost exactly how they treat almost their entire roster of characters.
It's a good thing there's no gotham (series) thread on here, doing a rewatch of that lately, once quit @ S3, now sitting it through but my word I thought Joker 2 and ROP were attrocious.. I am constantly -sacrastically- applauding every .. ..sigh..ok it's hard to not lose my mind here.. 'scene'.. in which the most deadhorsebeaten generic nonsense is employed (such as bad guy #10.000 being shot from behind at the 'standing over main character aiming gun at' moment, or the amount of 'all men bad' inserts that are incremental in season 4's barbara siren's guild, admittedly to its theme.. but it's still done obnoxiously.. or the fact that literally NOBODY ever dies and isn't emediately brought back from the dead the next ep even when shot in the forehead (with the wound gone in the next ep LOL, even ROP wasn't that bad with that)
Ok, so Joker 2 does the posession thing, so does Gotham with ra's al ghul, and it is suggested somewhat that in ROP Sauron is also "actually a pretty cool guy yall' he wuz just a prisoner! look, he's crying .jpg", yes, its cheap to make characters so calledly 'incentivized evil', zoning in on the "rough childhood" makes everyone a victim of their later actions or something.. but were it so.. truly' then the entire world would be full (or by now empty) of people like that, as everyone has bad experiences as much as good.
It is also so that most people who had the worst childhood end up trying the hardest to do something good, with the experience as a deterrent, and wanting that better enviroment to live in and amongst', I know I do.
You can create a good story that is not onedimensional of 'hero good, opponent bad' without making the antagonist a child of tragedy, for instance making someone evil because of their actions secondary effects still holds guilt, setting fire inside a flying airplane isn't the same as killing everyone on that plane in person but it certainly is the cause of everyone's death. You can also make someone evil indirectly by what their pressence does to an enviroment, we all know how people who produce drugs aren't going around killing people in person either but they cause massive mayhem.
These are just two thematical examples that can be (and have been) used to write good evil characters that cannot be simply excused as "they wuz poor and parent's beat them". Breaking bad is one of such that did it right.
Perhaps people themselves are trying too hard to find reasoning in someone's actions, which is testament to a good person not being able to fathom how someone could possibly be evil because it is so alien to them. When you let someone without morals write an evil character, they are a lot less defined.. and that makes for a proper villain; someone that cannot be redeemed or reasoned with.
"Why would i be lying for Wechhudrs sake man.., i do not write fiction!"
Conventionally I don't watch Pitch Meetings of movies I haven't seen as I find the references to be more amusing with knowledge of the movie in question (also because of spoilers), but I'm happy that I made an exception this time. It's a good one, probably the best entertainment I'm going to get out of Joker 2, and largely works on a meta level instead of delving into the details of the movie. So it's actually a good standalone watch.
Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone?
Geifer wrote: Conventionally I don't watch Pitch Meetings of movies I haven't seen as I find the references to be more amusing with knowledge of the movie in question (also because of spoilers), but I'm happy that I made an exception this time. It's a good one, probably the best entertainment I'm going to get out of Joker 2, and largely works on a meta level instead of delving into the details of the movie. So it's actually a good standalone watch.
I just watched the pitch vid and agree with its sentiment. Good synopsis.
"Why would i be lying for Wechhudrs sake man.., i do not write fiction!"
