criterionforum.org

I genuinely liked Joker 2, it was tense and eerie.The songs are mostly covers of 70s/80s hits, which is a bit timid as I was expecting a more full-on musical.

domino harvey wrote: Sat Oct 05, 2024 10:42 pm I haven’t seen his work to compare, but my guess is that Phillips deeply misunderstood what his fanbase would be willing to accept. On the one hand, it’s amusing that this is the sequel they get, but on the other hand, I find it hard to believe that no one stopped Phillips from leaning into the worst aspects of the first film, its unintentionally comic miserableness, and then ending with a message of

I don't think he misunderstood his audience at all, the movie seems clearly designed to displease the core audience of the first film. Every decision made on the script seems intentional to do the exact opposite of what comic book fans and teenage boys would want to see.

Okay? Is that a big deal? Good movies piss off comic book fans too

domino harvey wrote: Sat Oct 12, 2024 2:41 am Okay? Is that a big deal? Good movies piss off comic book fans too

I don't know, I thought it was kind of a big deal. I can't remember another instance of a director trying to alienate his core audience to this extent, and certainly not with a 200 million price tag. It's like he looked at the fans of the first movie and said "I don't like you. This movie is not for you." And it's insane that he actually got to make this, that any studio would approve it as a sequel to an one-billion dollar movie.

felipe wrote:I can't remember another instance of a director trying to alienate his core audience to this extent

Like I said earlier in the thread, Hideaki Anno did it with The End of Evangelion, a big middle finger to the otaku culture that had grown out of the original series. Not only does it include footage of actual hate mail and vandalism the studio had received from irate fans, but it refigures its audience insert character as a violent misogynist and incel who sees the female characters as interchangeable dolls who exist only for his needs.

I avoided the Hangover movies, but I did vaguely recall that a very similar reaction happened when The Hangover Part II was released. So maybe Todd Phillips has an issue with "Part 2"s?

(I hear that one of the big criticisms of the second Joker film is that it makes clear whether everything was in the main character's head or not in the first film)

Actual article in Variety -

Paul Schrader Walked Out of ‘Joker 2’ After 15 Minutes to Go Buy Something, Then Returned and Could Only Last 10 Minutes: ‘A Really Bad Musical’

colinr0380 wrote: Sat Oct 12, 2024 7:19 pm I avoided the Hangover movies, but I did vaguely recall that a very similar reaction happened when The Hangover Part II was released. So maybe Todd Phillips has an issue with "Part 2"s?

The difference is that Hangover II was almost a complete replica of the original except less funny, whereas Joker: Folie à Deux doubles down and takes the audience to a different kind of uncomfortable place with its fatalism. It's a brave departure from what mass audiences think they want from the series, but it's exactly what should occur, with respect to the story being told, the character, the tone, etc.

I always thought The Hangover II was a sort of joke on being asked to make a sequel based on a unique/"original" premise that fulfilled it's promise to an ending. The sequel is a replica of the first with better shots, a more threatening location, and it introduces a sort of existential meta concept for the characters. I remember one of the characters saying how it's the second time something like this happened to him and he gains a confidence in saying "there's a demon in me" or something to that effect.

I always loved and thought it was such a confident move in a sequel, something he didn't follow with at all in that third one. Hangover 3 looked like a concession to the backlash of the previous installment, so it was trying to stay in the middle of trying to make money and trying to subvert expectation. I think Joker 2 was a bit more like that last film, to its detriment of course.

Having said all of that, I like that the guy takes a swing, or at least pantomimes one. Didn't like the first, didn't like second. Saw all those Hangover movies in theaters. Never loved them, ckuld talk about them like anyone else, but its the conceit of the 2nd I find amusing. And its like Phillips falls into this hole every couple films. His stock goes up in Hollywood-audience-critical terms, then it goes down, then goes up again. I find all of this pretty interesting obviously. Sorry about lack of comment on the newest Joker. I've seen it, but there are qualities to criticize or praise further after another viewing.

I thought this was way better shot than the first, I think Lady Gaga was surprisingly more subtle than the character audiences expected, and I think a lot of people might not love the main character talking about his past actions in a way contrary to what audiences may expect from the first. Many thoughts, looking forward to adding. But loved the discourse in the comments and figured would add some things.

From those paparazzi shots we got while the movie was being shot, it looks like quite a few of the musical numbers got cut, particularly the bigger ones involving Lady Gaga. I wonder how different the movie would feel with the grand scale numbers in it.

I need more time to think, but I actually liked this one and would say it’s better than first in a lot of key ways. In particular the stuff with Gaga is great and lives up to that description that Sausage was hoping for on an earlier page. It seems Phillips’ perspective is that his Joker is in the category of the pathetic and that the attempts to make him into an epic are misguided.

I also was deeply reminded of Bakshi and was constantly thinking that this is the movie of someone who sincerely and deeply prefers Cool World over Roger Rabbit.

Thought the new Joker accomplished what it aimed to do on every level. Acting is excellent throughout from every single actor on the call sheet. The cinematography should have received an Oscar nomination, with New York location shooting being a wonderful respite from the typical green screen warehouse slop at this level of budget. The songs are strange and compelling. Phillips' exploration of why performative mental illness is such a crowd pleaser while actual mental illness is something nobody wants to touch with a ten foot pole thankfully falls short of being a lecture but is still operating in space that no $200 million movie has operated in before. Seems to very clearly be the most interesting thing Phillips has done in his career, threading a needle between sneering at its financiers/viewers and aiming to give them something compelling on its own terms.

Failure, Fiasco, or Secret Success: Secret Success