First film was a great film if it were new IP, but a shit joker batman film. The second film was always likely to be shit, because they were always going for abstract and avant garde artistry without a clear connection to the underlying and far stronger story and IP people are expecting. I’m sure it’s a beautiful film and musical, but it’s dog shit attached to joker.
That’s what it was supposed to be, a gritty disconnected story about what a more realistic take on a joker would be, don’t think batman or super heroes was supposed to be in either one, not sure where that commenter is coming from.
Batman is a presence. The Wayne’s as a story element, they are supposed to be moral & ethical pillars. Solid truth. Batman does not kill and preserves an ethical truth.
All while the joker is a shifting description… an unreliable narrator. not a pillar not anything solid or true. The villains can shift and don’t have to hold true to anything. The killing joke is all about the lie and shifting excuses…
The movie may suck but a shifty joker hasn’t traditionally been the reason.
Bruce and Thomas Wayne were in the movies yes, they are part of that universe but it is not a superhero batman film or in that universe which is what I had mentioned
I think a lot of the Batman connections were completely unnecessary and felt jarring. There weren’t that many and they were brief but I just wish they weren’t there at all. It’s a great film flaws and all to me.
There were people suggesting given the age of Bruce Wayne in Joker, that the Phoenix character probably wasn’t The Joker, merely an inspiration for him. Harley showing up in the sequel would seem to refute this theory.
First film was a great film if it were new IP, but a shit joker batman film. The second film was always likely to be shit, because they were always going for abstract and avant garde artistry without a clear connection to the underlying and far stronger story and IP people are expecting. I’m sure it’s a beautiful film and musical, but it’s dog shit attached to joker.
I didn’t even view the first as anything related to Batman. Just a standalone movie to me.
That’s what it was supposed to be, a gritty disconnected story about what a more realistic take on a joker would be, don’t think batman or super heroes was supposed to be in either one, not sure where that commenter is coming from.
There is Bruce Wayne in the first one. He is the rich guy the main character meets in the public toilets then go stalk at his house.
That’s Thomas Wayne, Bruce is the kid he’s playing with at the gate
But that’s not the point.
Batman is a presence. The Wayne’s as a story element, they are supposed to be moral & ethical pillars. Solid truth. Batman does not kill and preserves an ethical truth.
All while the joker is a shifting description… an unreliable narrator. not a pillar not anything solid or true. The villains can shift and don’t have to hold true to anything. The killing joke is all about the lie and shifting excuses…
The movie may suck but a shifty joker hasn’t traditionally been the reason.
Bruce and Thomas Wayne were in the movies yes, they are part of that universe but it is not a superhero batman film or in that universe which is what I had mentioned
I think a lot of the Batman connections were completely unnecessary and felt jarring. There weren’t that many and they were brief but I just wish they weren’t there at all. It’s a great film flaws and all to me.
It’s a musical?
There are a handful of singing renditions and dressed up numbers with the two main actors.
But why?
They had Lady Gaga in the movie and gotta use her talents, a couple of the numbers were good and made sense, some were forced and unnecessary.
Because the staircase scene in the first one was popular. So quadruple down!
There were people suggesting given the age of Bruce Wayne in Joker, that the Phoenix character probably wasn’t The Joker, merely an inspiration for him. Harley showing up in the sequel would seem to refute this theory.