• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

JOKER: THE MOVIE produced by Martin Scorsese (TBD)
1 1

1,790 posts in this topic

13 hours ago, paperheart said:
13 hours ago, Jaydogrules said:

What's the deal with the large discrepancy between RT and Metacritic on this ?

-J.

fairly typical, the RT is a yes/no toggle, the Metacritic is an actual average of critical scores. and there goes the RT below 70.  must've been something in the water in Venice.

When comparing the Tomatometer to the Metacritic score, yes, it's typical.  It's not typical to see a Rotten Tomatoes average rating of 7.4 and a Metacritic rating of 58 though since those metrics are compiled using the same method.  Without doing a critic-by-critic review of the scores the only assumption I can make is that the reviewers Metacritic samples just liked the movie a lot less for whatever reason than the Rotten Tomatoes ones did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

Of course people in the real world don't act like the Joker, but that the media "fear some will" really speaks to the mindset towards those with disabilities.

What's your magic bullet to stop the 50K or so suicides per year in the US?  Those are the people you're most concerned about, because it's a slice of them that are doing the mass shootings.  Prior to mass media these people may have just either killed themselves quietly or taken out their parent/spouse/neighbor first and THEN offed themselves or ended up in jail, but now thanks to the possibility of media glory some are choosing to off a room of people first to become infamous.

We've recently discovered the best solution to this already, and MOST of the press is implementing it--just stop using the shooter's name in the press, ENTIRELY.  Refer to mass killings in some other way, but do NOT use the killer's name or show their faces in media, EVER.  That way the lure of infamy is gone.  The legitimate news outlets are now doing this, but far more than enough less-reputable news sources continue to use killer's identities.

Edited by fantastic_four
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

To say it incites people is admitting people feel the way the Joker does or are prone to. Whether the Joker is justified in instance is left up to the audience and that scares people who have suffered in real life. And that goes for the rational and irrational alike.

Which creates a disturbance in the force to those who have never had to deal with imbalance. Calling the Joker movie real in the process will only incite even more fear I'm sad to say.

A lot of the opinions on this subject are polarized, but yours are more nuanced.  Yet I'm still unclear--are you saying that a film (or any other work of media) can have an impact on a person, or that it can't?

I don't really care how much this film, or a Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Rob Zombie film, glorifies violence, it should still be made.  But to say that they have ZERO impact on anyone, much less an imbalanced mind, isn't accurate.  

To reiterate a point I made a few weeks ago--ALL of these movies should be made, and I suspect a Devil's Rejects or a Joker has an overall positive effect on society as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, thunsicker said:

I should add that I'm a strong believer that Movies (or Video Games, or Rock and Roll, or Comic Books) do NOT lead to violence and delinquency.  And that my worry would be more like @ADAMANTIUM's that the worry is that this further stigmatizes mental health and not that it may lead some to violence.

It's the exponential increase in mass killings as mass media has proliferated that's doing 1000x more of that stigmatization than any film or its critics ever will, and the critical response to this film is entirely tied to that rise.  If we think of what goes into a killer as a bucket filled with water, I believe you're saying that violent media isn't what filled the bucket.  So how much of the water can it be responsible for?  A drop?  A cup?  Or are you suggesting that media just isn't capable of influencing anyone about anything?  Do words and images just bounce off of all humans and never sink in at all?

I'm a libertarian so I'd never suggest anyone not do anything they want that doesn't hurt someone else.  I'm also fascinated with crime and serial killers in particular, so movies like Joker are entirely my bag.  While I emphatically agree that violent media isn't responsible for how an individual develops into a killer, I also don't get the polar opposite perspective that they have NO effect on an individual.  We all wouldn't love movies so much if they didn't affect us.

I still REALLY want to hear Scorsese's opinion on all of this.  After he made Taxi Driver and John Hinckley shot Reagan after the film intertwined itself into his schizophrenic delusions he considered getting out of filmmaking for over a year due to the impact the film had on Hinckley, but obviously he had a change of heart.  Which is lucky, because Goodfellas probably wouldn't have been half as good as it was if his experience with Hinckley would have caused him to avoid including the more violent parts of that film.  :cloud9:

Edited by fantastic_four
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, punksdropdirtysrh said:

10/10 from me. I loved this movie. Phoenix is brilliant. One of the best performances I’ve ever seen. It made me feel unsure at first but after acclimating to his awkwardness I really enjoyed it. There were moments that seem to have went on too long but I think that’s just part of the films whole vibe and not a mistake. I didn’t think any movie would compete with Tarantino’s “Once Upon...” for my movie of the year but it comes pretty darn close. 

I’m so happy for Joaquin. He truly “went there” and gave a legendary character a true dedication. Who knows what Heath would’ve gave us if he had his own Joker movie. He’ll always be remembered. But Joaquin is the new Joker. Just perfect. 

%100 

Awesome review...(thumbsu

Problem is that the movie was set back in the 70s, but they can age Joaquin.

I'm still reeling over it, and I felt the same as you at the beggining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fantastic_four said:

...We've recently discovered the best solution to this already, and MOST of the press is implementing it--just stop using the shooter's name in the press, ENTIRELY.  Refer to mass killings in some other way, but do NOT use the killer's name or show their faces in media, EVER.  That way the lure of infamy is gone.  The legitimate news outlets are now doing this, but far more than enough less-reputable news sources continue to use killer's identities.

That'll stop some, yes. I don't follow news/media, since it's mostly just a bunch of bias and lies/misinformation, but glad to see they're doing this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure when the major press outlets started a policy of not releasing the names of mass killers, but I became aware of it after the New Zealand mosque shootings and their prime minister appealed to the press to stop using their identities to dissuade copycat killers.  I'm not sure her appeal is what started it, but it's definitely very new because the largest news sources were using killer names as recently as two years ago.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would caution those who haven't seen it yet to keep expectations lower than these reviews with 10/10 and "great"... because it is true for some, but there is no way everyone will enjoy this movie that much.  Even The Godfather averages about 8/10, so expect plenty of legitimate 6's to go with those legitimate 10's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, valiantman said:

I would caution those who haven't seen it yet to keep expectations lower than these reviews with 10/10 and "great"... because it is true for some, but there is no way everyone will enjoy this movie that much.  Even The Godfather averages about 8/10, so expect plenty of legitimate 6's to go with those legitimate 10's.

Agreed, I know it’s not a film for everyone and obviously brings up a lot of controversial points. If I wanted to get critical and nit picky I could find ways to give it a 9/10. But as I said, I just felt Joaquin’s performance was so good I had to give it a perfect score. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, valiantman said:

I would caution those who haven't seen it yet to keep expectations lower than these reviews with 10/10 and "great"... because it is true for some, but there is no way everyone will enjoy this movie that much.  Even The Godfather averages about 8/10, so expect plenty of legitimate 6's to go with those legitimate 10's.

Anyone saying a film is 10.0/10 I realize is in the thrill of the moment. And in this case with the violence, I get it that is going to disturb more than a few folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, theCapraAegagrus said:

Yup. Almost every theater does assigned seating, my area at least, now. It's great.

Same down here for VIP and because it was the premier last night it was assigned for every theatre.

You'll love it....

And you were %100 right when you said this is Joaquin role.

I've always liked him as an actor

We Own the night

Gladiator

Walk the line

He has such a conflicted demeanor 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1