Todd Phillips and Joaquin Phoenix revive the Clown Prince of Crime in a musical whatsit of a sequel while Jason Reitman revisits the earliest days of 'Saturday Night Live.'
OLD MAN YELLS AT CLOUD time: the original "Joker" might be my least-favourite bit of pop culture ever. "Wouldn't Taxi Driver have been so much cooler if it had Batman stuff in it? And then instead of psychological complexity, the Batman villain just does a dance?" Like, I'm sure there's been some art made at some point that I've hated more, but I can't think what it might be.
Yet I've been intrigued by the ads for the sequel. I love Gaga an amount, and anything she's in is going to be better than the original, by default. (Also, anything is going to be original, by default.) Or at least more interesting.
Yeah I think the first Joker is probably the movie that would pop in my head if I was asked what the worst movie I’ve ever seen was on any given day. Just a really stupid movie, recycling movies made for adults fifty years ago into a movie made for adult children now. Plus it was boring.
Agreed. Before I start sounding too much like Martin Scorsese, I'll note that I really liked e.g. the Nolan Batman movies, the Burton Batman movie, etc. Comic book movies can be lots of fun, if that's what they're trying to be. Joker was trying to be a Flintstone's vitamin, a worst-of-both-worlds watered-down version of a comic book movie *and* a serious drama. Hated it.
It's weird that the sequel is apparently neither for people who liked the first movie or disliked the first movie, despite being made by the same exact people.
Though I did just watch Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, and while I liked both movies, I could maybe see a similar dynamic happening with that franchise.
Going by Letterboxd, JOKER is the most popular film I've never seen. Literally nothing I've heard about it has made me more than mildly curious.
FOLIE À DEUX sounds ... even less interesting.
(Second most popular that I haven't seen is SALTBURN. I think my window of interest has closed on that one, but I'm more likely to get to it than JOKER.)
I eventually watched Joker just to see what the fuss was about. I didn't need to. The stuff I didn't like about Promising Young Woman (which I liked overall) seemed like it would be worse in Saltburn so I skipped it.
SALTBURN is also an incredibly bad movie, but mostly in a love-to-hate way, and I ultimately think the aspect I hated the most about it was intentional and meant to elicit the reaction it did. I would enjoy talking to Emerald Fennell about what the hell she was thinking. I'm fairly convinced that the JOKER team *wasn't* thinking. That's the difference.
As a big fan of the comedy/writing of Michael O'Donoghue, I was raucously inspired by his portrayal. As a big fan of Andy Kaufman, I was confused and left wanting by his portrayal. And as a big Carlin fan, I felt like I needed a drink (in a good way). So, apt all around on those accounts.
Everyone else felt like good to great impressions; not a bad thing - just a 'hey look here!' thing.
I hated the first Joker film (Taxi Driver already exists, so adding a knockoff version of the Joker just subtracts from it), but at least the idea of a Lady Gaga musical was at least interesting. But why make this a courtroom drama, one of the most consistently boring movie genres when it isn't done well? Why make Harley Quinn just an inmate instead of a licensed psychiatrist, which is one of the most interesting parts of her backstory? Why have Joaquin Phoenix sing a bunch?
I have friends who like Joker quite a lot, and I can usually understand where people are coming from, but I’m with Scorsese: it’s fine. At best. I really can’t understand what people see in it and I wonder if they’re just unfamiliar with the films that do something similar, but much better. Maybe it’s the only Taxi Driver they know.
It’s funny, even before I got to Scott’s words “hollow soul”, I was already planning to say here that Reitman’s films always just feel empty to me. Almost as if AI is already making movies; a collection of tropes applied to a plot description he was given, or to random IP.
I really liked Reitman's first three movies, but I saw them as a much younger cinephile and have been afraid to revisit them for fear they won't hold up. Still kind of interested in SATURDAY NIGHT for both the cast and the 35mm look
Averages out to 2.25 out of 5 for two of the more visible theatrical releases. I kind of expected it, but still, a shame.
I have an old DVD of the first season of SNL; I watched the first episode a while back for the first time. It's a very different show, which should come as no surprise -- I mean it's 50 years old. Astonishing, really, that it's been on for that long. I read somewhere that Tina Fey will take over after Lorne leaves...but will Lorne ever leave (on his own accord)?
Is it controversial to say that I’m glad Joaquin Phoenix dropped out of the Todd Haynes movie? I haven’t liked a performance from him in seven years (granted I have not seen C’Mon C’Mon).
Will never bother with Joker 2, hated the first and am baffled by any praise he got - that whole laugh/cry thing he does is such a forced affectation, didn’t buy it for a second.
Todd Phillips didn't want to make the same film all over again, so he sabotaged "The Hangover: Part III" by giving it no jokes and underlying how bad these people are and killed the franchise. In retrospect it's a bit amazing he didn't do that with Part II, instead making a very safe sequel, "the same as the first, with different jokes".
It sounds like he did the exact same thing with "Joker": it could have been a franchise, but that idea bored him. He seems to have found it important to point out, in case viewers missed it: "these are bad people".
I can picture an alternate universe where a new "Hangover" movie alternates years with a new "Joker" film, for a full decade, but under a totally new director. And they are all totally predictable but not openly trying to sabotage the franchise.
OLD MAN YELLS AT CLOUD time: the original "Joker" might be my least-favourite bit of pop culture ever. "Wouldn't Taxi Driver have been so much cooler if it had Batman stuff in it? And then instead of psychological complexity, the Batman villain just does a dance?" Like, I'm sure there's been some art made at some point that I've hated more, but I can't think what it might be.
Yet I've been intrigued by the ads for the sequel. I love Gaga an amount, and anything she's in is going to be better than the original, by default. (Also, anything is going to be original, by default.) Or at least more interesting.
But apparently...not?
Yeah I think the first Joker is probably the movie that would pop in my head if I was asked what the worst movie I’ve ever seen was on any given day. Just a really stupid movie, recycling movies made for adults fifty years ago into a movie made for adult children now. Plus it was boring.
Agreed. Before I start sounding too much like Martin Scorsese, I'll note that I really liked e.g. the Nolan Batman movies, the Burton Batman movie, etc. Comic book movies can be lots of fun, if that's what they're trying to be. Joker was trying to be a Flintstone's vitamin, a worst-of-both-worlds watered-down version of a comic book movie *and* a serious drama. Hated it.
It's weird that the sequel is apparently neither for people who liked the first movie or disliked the first movie, despite being made by the same exact people.
Though I did just watch Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, and while I liked both movies, I could maybe see a similar dynamic happening with that franchise.
Going by Letterboxd, JOKER is the most popular film I've never seen. Literally nothing I've heard about it has made me more than mildly curious.
FOLIE À DEUX sounds ... even less interesting.
(Second most popular that I haven't seen is SALTBURN. I think my window of interest has closed on that one, but I'm more likely to get to it than JOKER.)
I eventually watched Joker just to see what the fuss was about. I didn't need to. The stuff I didn't like about Promising Young Woman (which I liked overall) seemed like it would be worse in Saltburn so I skipped it.
SALTBURN is also an incredibly bad movie, but mostly in a love-to-hate way, and I ultimately think the aspect I hated the most about it was intentional and meant to elicit the reaction it did. I would enjoy talking to Emerald Fennell about what the hell she was thinking. I'm fairly convinced that the JOKER team *wasn't* thinking. That's the difference.
Which is funny considering who Saltburn's lead is...
As a big fan of the comedy/writing of Michael O'Donoghue, I was raucously inspired by his portrayal. As a big fan of Andy Kaufman, I was confused and left wanting by his portrayal. And as a big Carlin fan, I felt like I needed a drink (in a good way). So, apt all around on those accounts.
Everyone else felt like good to great impressions; not a bad thing - just a 'hey look here!' thing.
I hated the first Joker film (Taxi Driver already exists, so adding a knockoff version of the Joker just subtracts from it), but at least the idea of a Lady Gaga musical was at least interesting. But why make this a courtroom drama, one of the most consistently boring movie genres when it isn't done well? Why make Harley Quinn just an inmate instead of a licensed psychiatrist, which is one of the most interesting parts of her backstory? Why have Joaquin Phoenix sing a bunch?
I always liked this quote: ""I saw clips of it,” Scorsese told the New York Times. “I know it. So it’s like, why do I need to? I get it. It’s fine.”"
https://www.vulture.com/2020/01/martin-scorsese-joker-movie-its-fine.html
The animated Harley Quinn show incorporates her psychiatry nicely.
Yeah, the show is solid.
I have friends who like Joker quite a lot, and I can usually understand where people are coming from, but I’m with Scorsese: it’s fine. At best. I really can’t understand what people see in it and I wonder if they’re just unfamiliar with the films that do something similar, but much better. Maybe it’s the only Taxi Driver they know.
It’s funny, even before I got to Scott’s words “hollow soul”, I was already planning to say here that Reitman’s films always just feel empty to me. Almost as if AI is already making movies; a collection of tropes applied to a plot description he was given, or to random IP.
I really liked Reitman's first three movies, but I saw them as a much younger cinephile and have been afraid to revisit them for fear they won't hold up. Still kind of interested in SATURDAY NIGHT for both the cast and the 35mm look
Averages out to 2.25 out of 5 for two of the more visible theatrical releases. I kind of expected it, but still, a shame.
I have an old DVD of the first season of SNL; I watched the first episode a while back for the first time. It's a very different show, which should come as no surprise -- I mean it's 50 years old. Astonishing, really, that it's been on for that long. I read somewhere that Tina Fey will take over after Lorne leaves...but will Lorne ever leave (on his own accord)?
It honestly pretty remarkable achievement that movies about Joker and Saturday Night Live sound like two least-funny movies of 2024.
Is it controversial to say that I’m glad Joaquin Phoenix dropped out of the Todd Haynes movie? I haven’t liked a performance from him in seven years (granted I have not seen C’Mon C’Mon).
Will never bother with Joker 2, hated the first and am baffled by any praise he got - that whole laugh/cry thing he does is such a forced affectation, didn’t buy it for a second.
He's FANTASTIC in C'mon C'mon, less so in Napoleon. YMMV as to Beau is Afraid (not a fan of the movie but he did a good job with the material)
Thanks for watching these so I don't have to. The latter was tempting for some of the cast (Hunt, Sennott, Morris, Rhys) but not that tempting.
Todd Phillips didn't want to make the same film all over again, so he sabotaged "The Hangover: Part III" by giving it no jokes and underlying how bad these people are and killed the franchise. In retrospect it's a bit amazing he didn't do that with Part II, instead making a very safe sequel, "the same as the first, with different jokes".
It sounds like he did the exact same thing with "Joker": it could have been a franchise, but that idea bored him. He seems to have found it important to point out, in case viewers missed it: "these are bad people".
I can picture an alternate universe where a new "Hangover" movie alternates years with a new "Joker" film, for a full decade, but under a totally new director. And they are all totally predictable but not openly trying to sabotage the franchise.