Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

I saw it. And while it was totally well-made and brilliantly acted, it's a very worthwhile once and done for me, just because I do not generally enjoy true villains as protagonists. The journey was a good one, but having made it that journey, the pace would likely suffer on rewatching. It didn't seem to have any of the one-sided political agenda that anyone claimed it did.

I feel pretty much the same way, in terms of not seeing it again. Maybe not never seeing it again, but I don't see myself watching it again anytime soon. It's not really one of those types of movies, in my opinion.

So, you saw him as a villain? He seemed to be a victim of his circumstances.

Anyone that mentally disturbed is just one bad incident away from being a villain, i.e. doing something villainous. But yeah, considering the depth of his delusions...

True.

After watching a few interviews with Todd Phillips, my guess would be that the Joker is a depiction of social justice warriors.

"Go try to be funny nowadays with this woke culture. There were articles written about why comedies don’t work anymore — I’ll tell you why, because all the fucking funny guys are like, 'Fuck this shit, because I don’t want to offend you.'"

It’s hard to argue with 30 million people on Twitter, you just can’t do it, right? So, you just go, 'I’m out.' I’m out, and you know what? With all my comedies — I think that what comedies, in general, all have in common — is they’re irreverent. So, I go, 'How do I do something irreverent, but fuck comedy? Oh, I know, let’s take the comic book movie universe and turn it on its head with this.' And so that’s really where that came from."—Todd Phillips

The Killing Joke

"The book explores Moore's assertion that, psychologically, "Batman and the Joker are mirror images of each other" by delving into the relationship between the two. The story itself shows how the Joker and Batman came to terms with their respective life-altering tragedies, which both eventually lead to their present lives and confrontation. Critic Geoff Klock further explained that "both Batman and the Joker are creations of a random and tragic 'one bad day'. Batman spends his life forging meaning from the random tragedy, whereas the Joker reflects the absurdity of life, and all its random injustice".

The torments that the Joker puts Commissioner Gordon through are meant to serve as "proof that there is something buried deep within each lunatic, a nugget of insanity, that is simply waiting for the right moment to spring forth". Unlike the Joker, however, Gordon emerges from his ordeal with his sanity and moral code intact. The story is also famous for changing how the Modern Age of Comics perceived Batman comics by bringing it back to its darker roots. The comic book, however, delves deeper in order to present Batman's own psychology—that he is, in his own way, just as insane as the Joker, and that he and the Joker perceive the world according to differing points of view, with the Joker's interpreted through a joke.

The Joker serves as an unreliable narrator. He admits to his own uncertainty, as he has disparate memories of the single event ("Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another ... If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"), accentuating the comic's depiction of "a world unraveling toward relentless urban violence and moral nihilism ..."

"It’s up to you how you want to interpret it and experience it. It’s less you being kind of presented with the facts than you being presented with these possibilities."—Todd Phillips

Ce la vie.

"It’s up to you how you want to interpret it and experience it. It’s less you being kind of presented with the facts than you being presented with these possibilities."—Todd Phillips

@ SS - Yea, the film does an awesome job in my opinion, of presenting its audience with possibilities, some that didn't jump out at me right away. Comparing Joker to American Psycho, which I viewed about a month back for the first time, seem to share some common ground in that both of the main characters, were cast aside by those around them. Ironically, Arthur Fleck in Joker was frail, skinny, and awkward in appearance - he looked disturbed, whereas Patrick Bateman in American Psycho (played by Christian Bale) was depicted as a good looking, successful businessman, but struggled to be accepted. So, he exaggerated his ''alpha'' behavior to seem like he had it all together, yet he didn't. He hid his psychopathic desires, but that movie failed at providing the same narrative and flow, as Joker. Of course, two entirely different plots, but both have main characters who are portrayed as psychotic. The director of American Psycho (I've read) realized that she did a poor job of convincing the audience that Bateman realy did commit multiple murders, but it simply didn't read that way to me. The crimes became more outlandish and absurd, and there came a point where it felt more like a slasher comedy - should I be cringing or laughing? Laughing not because it's funny, but because at times, looks like a cheaply made movie trying to be something deep. (Until the very end, when it all tied together, and was creepy as hell.)

If you haven't seen Joker yet, you should. It's a very interesting character study, if you come away with nothing else.

(Jan 22, 2020 08:30 PM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]"It’s up to you how you want to interpret it and experience it. It’s less you being kind of presented with the facts than you being presented with these possibilities."—Todd Phillips

@ SS - Yea, the film does an awesome job in my opinion, of presenting its audience with possibilities, some that didn't jump out at me right away. Comparing Joker to American Psycho, which I viewed about a month back for the first time, seem to share some common ground in that both of the main characters, were cast aside by those around them. Ironically, Arthur Fleck in Joker was frail, skinny, and awkward in appearance - he looked disturbed, whereas Patrick Bateman in American Psycho (played by Christian Bale) was depicted as a good looking, successful businessman, but struggled to be accepted. So, he exaggerated his ''alpha'' behavior to seem like he had it all together, yet he didn't. He hid his psychopathic desires, but that movie failed at providing the same narrative and flow, as Joker. Of course, two entirely different plots, but both have main characters who are portrayed as psychotic. The director of American Psycho (I've read) realized that she did a poor job of convincing the audience that Bateman realy did commit multiple murders, but it simply didn't read that way to me. The crimes became more outlandish and absurd, and there came a point where it felt more like a slasher comedy - should I be cringing or laughing? Laughing not because it's funny, but because at times, looks like a cheaply made movie trying to be something deep. (Until the very end, when it all tied together, and was creepy as hell.)

If you haven't seen Joker yet, you should. It's a very interesting character study, if you come away with nothing else.

I've seen it. Think about his laughter, though. He has a laugh when he’s trying to fit into society. He has a hysterical laugh that's he's developed to deal with society. The only time his laughter is real is at the end of the movie when he says that you wouldn’t get it.

IMHO, I think that Phillips is attempting to say that we’re all clowns, we’re the unreliable narrators. 

"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact."—Sherlock Holmes 

Biases, my dear wegs—biases!

"It’s up to you how you want to interpret it and experience it. It’s less you being kind of presented with the facts than you being presented with these possibilities."—Todd Phillips

Life is such.

(Jan 22, 2020 09:04 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]

(Jan 22, 2020 08:30 PM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]"It’s up to you how you want to interpret it and experience it. It’s less you being kind of presented with the facts than you being presented with these possibilities."—Todd Phillips

@ SS - Yea, the film does an awesome job in my opinion, of presenting its audience with possibilities, some that didn't jump out at me right away. Comparing Joker to American Psycho, which I viewed about a month back for the first time, seem to share some common ground in that both of the main characters, were cast aside by those around them. Ironically, Arthur Fleck in Joker was frail, skinny, and awkward in appearance - he looked disturbed, whereas Patrick Bateman in American Psycho (played by Christian Bale) was depicted as a good looking, successful businessman, but struggled to be accepted. So, he exaggerated his ''alpha'' behavior to seem like he had it all together, yet he didn't. He hid his psychopathic desires, but that movie failed at providing the same narrative and flow, as Joker. Of course, two entirely different plots, but both have main characters who are portrayed as psychotic. The director of American Psycho (I've read) realized that she did a poor job of convincing the audience that Bateman realy did commit multiple murders, but it simply didn't read that way to me. The crimes became more outlandish and absurd, and there came a point where it felt more like a slasher comedy - should I be cringing or laughing? Laughing not because it's funny, but because at times, looks like a cheaply made movie trying to be something deep. (Until the very end, when it all tied together, and was creepy as hell.)

If you haven't seen Joker yet, you should. It's a very interesting character study, if you come away with nothing else.

I've seen it. Think about his laughter, though. He has a laugh when he’s trying to fit into society. He has a hysterical laugh that's he's developed to deal with society. The only time his laughter is real is at the end of the movie when he says that you wouldn’t get it.

IMHO, I think that Phillips is attempting to say that we’re all clowns, we’re the unreliable narrators. 

"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact."—Sherlock Holmes 

Biases, my dear wegs—biases!

"It’s up to you how you want to interpret it and experience it. It’s less you being kind of presented with the facts than you being presented with these possibilities."—Todd Phillips

Life is such.

Yesss! That's right. I hadn't thought of his laughter quite like that, but you're right. 

I may have to see it again, are you sure you'd be one and done, Syne? lol Why? There may be new things to discover the second time around.

(Jan 22, 2020 09:19 PM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]Yesss! That's right. I hadn't thought of his laughter quite like that, but you're right. 

It ends with THAT'S LIFE.

(Jan 22, 2020 05:19 PM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]So, how would we feel if society discarded us because we were mentally unstable and socially awkward? Would we reach a point of darkness so real, that concocting a fantasy world would be our only escape? I look at social media, for example. Quite a few people masquarading as wanna-be celebs, adding filters to their selfies (kinda like Arthur's clown makeup, as he wanted to be a successful stand up comedian), hoping to get enough attention to fulfill them, because their offline life isn't fulfilling enough. Are we all that different, after all? Aren't we all looking to be liked and loved? Unfortunately for many, they're looking for it in all the wrong places and from the wrong people. Kind of like Arthur. He learned that the people he wanted affirmation and validation from, were really just ''awful,'' at the end of the day. He actually had a good heart, it seemed...it was his mind that needed help.

The things is that it's always our reaction to how we perceive society to treat us, real or not, that then causes society to treat us that way. It doesn't matter whose to blame. People just react to what they observe. If you're off-putting, people will avoid you. Then you can either try to learn better behaviors, think somethings inherently wrong with you, or blame others. Only one has a chance of eventually garnering a more positive response from others.

Maybe that's why I have no interest in social media. Not looking for external validation or fulfillment. But then, compared to others, I'm a mutant, as I do not feel any need for attention...and the inane interactions often necessary to maintaining it. I generally prefer my anonymity. If I'm not liked, so be it.

(Jan 22, 2020 09:04 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]Think about his laughter, though. 

That was brilliantly acted. His laughter was really a sob.