I liked this too and it's not as bad as some people say! It was well acted, beautifully shot, and tried to do something original. It's not without flaws though, as it's too long (many movies seem to be these days), had too many songs, and the script should have been more focused. I think they should have leaned into showing Arthur's regret for what he did and how he has become a symbol of something he doesn't want to be. That switch was too fast, imo. I would have also wanted to see Harley better developed. Overall though, I appreciated what they tried to do.
Finally someone who appreciates the movie for what it is rather than what it could’ve been. I also preferred it over the first one too, I’m sure in a decade from now people will realize it’s not half bad.
really hated this fucking film because it's so different from the first one which i really liked. but after awhile, you realize that this movie is not even half bad if you stop comparing it to the first film. the cinematography is even one of the best i've seen from a comic book movie. point is, this is a great film but a very different and inconsistent sequel
Wasn't it a time when people were just hating on the first movie then the critics turned around and said it was a masterpiece? This movie reached the wrong audience!
The first one was absolutely brilliant and was quickly recognized for that, so of this one takes a decade for people to realize that it's not half bad....
Having just got back from the theater, I have to say, I'm very confused. I feel like I watched a completely different film from the one everyone is describing. Based on my viewing experience, Joker 2 was very good; even edging on brilliant in places. Mainly, I felt the film did an excellent job at exploring and even deconstructing the Shadow Self as defined by Carl Jung. What's more is how this film drives home the current meta of the character that many people haven't caught on to yet: There. Is. No. REAL. Joker. The Joker is an entity; an idea. Not a single individual person. He is a manifestation of our repressed Shadow side. Since Arthur rejected the Joker, it will manifest in someone else. Because Gotham's underbelly must always have a Joker. He is inevitable. I have a sneaking suspicion that something else is afoot here. Because Folie a` Deux isn't even close to being as bad as people are making it out to be. Something's off.
The opening animation (which I loved) basically set the stage for what to expect from the movie. Arthur Fleck vs his shadow self, Joker. The constantle struggle between the two really made you think, plus Harley Quinn and her foil, the lawyer. The former pushes Arthur to embrace his shadow self and he does, but when he realizes its not really him and he turns away from his shadow, he gets completely abandoned, and no one left to help him as he pushed away his only advocate, the lawyer, in favor of his shadow self. In the end, he dies alone, by someone who personifies his shadow much more than arthur could himself. Brilliant movie, but I wish they showed Arthur embracing his Joker persona a bit more in the prison
It honestly didn't bother me that at least in this iteration, Joker was a symbol. Whether or not other people wanted it that way is completely up to them. But I kind of already knew that from the first Joker movie that Arthur Fleck wasn't really the Joker that Batman will fight. And maybe it's just me, but the same feeling I got with Barry Keoghan' Joker in The Batman. When we actually got a tease for the Joker in that movie, I personally didn't really feel on board with that actually being the Joker of that universe. So much subtlety since that scene was at a prison behind closed doors and we couldn't really make him out entirely.
I was saying this last night as i left the theater, wow that was brilliant. That literal death stare into the camera, was pretty mesmerizing. I enjoyed the singing. People are being way too negative about the film. Its kinda sad people cant appreciate the arts, they chop it up to, ohhh the director didnt even wanna make a sequel, its a slap to the face to the fans.
What you described is what i interpretation i had when he is talking with harlee in jail, sips the cigar and breaths the smoke into her mouth. Like his essence is possessing her. The other scene is the obviohs one at the end.
The visceral hatred for this is crazy. If you don't like musicals and like seeing yourself in mentally unhinged guys, then ok. But don't start berating people for liking it.
I don’t hate musicals, but the musical elements in Joker 2 feel nearly all pointless. They often just tell the audience emotions that Arthur/Joker is feeling that we already knew (except when the movie shows that Harley pulls out the gun on Arthur, which actually would’ve come full circle at the end if the superior back up ending with Harley was used) and slow down the story
It's genuinely better than the 1st movie. You got 20 minutes of Joker in the original. The rest was carried by Joaquin. Other than that, it was a pretty basic story. Joker 2 is so much better. It's mainly hated by Men who feel uncomfortable because there's musical scenes.
Wait... could that be referring to the dichotomy between Arthur and Joker? Because my original issue with the title was that the film really isn't about Harley in any major capacity.
@@ChannelPup I doubt so. Yes, the movie is not about Harley, but she is the catalyst for Arthur to try to accept the Joker as his "true" self (like when she puts make up on him). If she wouldn't have interfered, he would kept taking his medicine, and would follow his attorney's plan. Maybe he would survive having actual healthcare. But embracing the "Joker" persona ruined all of that.
I personally didn’t interpret the ending as “oh this guys the REAL joker” more of its cementing that in this universe the joker is more of a role than an actual single entity
Slicing in his smile was a bit on the nose. I get that it’s a homage to “wanna know how I got these scars?” Which took me out of it for a sec. That being said I also quite liked the movie
@@producedproductions I think that if they didn't include the slicing face bit, it would've been less obvious that he's the "real" joker. i feel like it needed to be obvious to hammer home that idea that the Joker still exists
The way I understood it is that in this universe, the real Joker will happen through copycats. Arthur inspired the look and what Joker is, but not enough as a sociopath or psychopath to be THE Joker. That new one at the end will add his spice to the persona but might be too much of a goof, not smart enough, and a third one would be the real Joker, something like that.
Definitely. Arthur's killer represents the audience who turns their back on him and his story after learning he isn't the Joker he wanted to be. A moment of self-reflection: Does the viewer really want to become someone with a Joker-like attitude towards society?
@@loerl Arthur was a fine character on his one, the audience knew he wasn't THE JOKER at least I hope so. The first film was fine on it's own as a standalone, this was a cash grab sole purpose of ill gains and now it TANKED XD
It already is to me, this movie is so terribly over-hated it’s sad. Joker 2 was such a refreshing and new take on the character that I loved it. It’s better than the first one.
I also really liked Joker 2. I believe it's one of the most intentional big budget movies of the last couple of years. The movie has a strong message to send and it does!
@@nullakjg767It has a lot to do with DC's Gotham City lore, whether intentional or not. Both Todd Phillips movies depict Gotham City creating a societal atmosphere that invariably will breed misery, frustration, anger, violence, hate and madness, laying the foundation for THE JOKER to emerge. It's merely a matter of time. "Joker" showed that on a personal level, but taking the example of an ordinary citizen who never had it in him to become THE JOKER. But it showed how a person who started out with a personality as far removed from THE JOKER as one could think, under the corrosive influence of an uncaring Gotham City rife with social decay, how EVEN that innocent person could be sent over the edge, metaphysically infected by Gotham City's spirit of malignant darkness. "Joker" showed that on the micro level of merely one person's descent into darkness, delusion and aggression. "Follie a Deux" takes this theme to a macro level by including Gotham's public institutions like Arkham Asylum, the justice court system, the media, the sensation seekers and people living vicariously by idolizing or demonizing others into painting a broader picture of Gotham's society as a breeding ground for multiple Joker-like characters to merge, for a violent cult emerging that expects THE JOKER to arise like a messianic leader of violence and chaos. It is a movie about the concept of the shadow as theorized by psychologist philosopher Carl Jung, a movie about projecting suppressed frustrations and prohibited dreams of escape and salvation onto others, never seeing them for what they are.
@@nullakjg767we have tons of movies with the Batman and joker, did you really miss out on this one proving the first one to be even more true. The first movie was about a neglected mentally ill man who built a character that actually received lots of attention for the role he was playing. The second movie brought him back down to earth and proves that same point.
Its quite ironic how hype joker fanboys are shitting on this movie becaue it wasnt exactly what they wanted. All while its literally the main trope of the movie that Arthur gets left alone by everyone becase he doesnt feliver the exact fantasy of a psycho killer alter ego they wanted him to play. The people in the courtroom and harley leaving him because he said there is no fantasy. Do they even realize the movie is a mirror reflection of them? They wanted arthur fleck an underweight traumatized riddled with mental problems middle aged man to fight batman or something?
I get this point but you cant really be mad at them, this movie wasn't originally going to happen and for the makers of the first film was the intention of making the first and letting the viewer imagine what came after... and after decades of traditional joker media showcasing him become a tragic villain and torturing batman is what most people would gravitate towards in their minds, the first movie never hinted to this being the future of the joker and many fans got slapped in the face with this execution, I appreciate the angle of the movie but it just seems like its the makers way of saying how they didn't really want to make this movie and it makes the angle you see it as as coincidental and not with any purpose in that direction.
I mean one could expect, that as far as artistic visions go, for this movie to get some respect. We usually complain about movies being about cash grabs first & art pieces later. But this movie its the opposite. In the end Arthur was just a pahetic little man that pulled a guns trigger. Theres nothing grandiose or revolutionary about it. And he got a lonely end without snyone caring.
It's not misunderstood its quite clearly not a good film that was made to make sure another Joker film won't be made. The director CLEARLY didn't wanna make this movie and it shows
@@ElMachoMucho or some simple minded people just wanted to see the joker being an edge lord bagasse and whined when they realised its a film criticising social alienation, neglect and chiefly about mental health 🤷♂️
@@timc6669 explain how it criticized those things cause from what I hear it did the opposite by showing how a man socially alienated, neglected, and suffering from mental health issues died anti climatically to some other nut after getting gang r*ped/bum rushed by some corrupt prison guards representing the system going unpunished while laying the smack down on anyone who dares to challenge it's hypocrisy?
I think the ending is just an extension of the themes of the movie. Arthur Fleck might have "created" the Joker but he doesn't end up to be THE joker, he'll most-likely just end up forgotten. Arthur dies but the Joker lives, whatever happens.
Exactly Joker is not a person. In the last scene.... SPOILERS... Where that guy stabs Arthur he slices his mouth in de background creating the iconic smile/scars. Joker lives on in him, his son and his 'fans'. The i think rando that placed the bomb car and the guys driving him away in the taxi for example. This movie has so much to appreciate. Its just not an action movie like the goop that is suicide squad
My interpretation of the ending: Maybe the court explosion wasn't real. Or it doesn't matter if it was real. The "explosion" signifies the exact moment when the Joker is exorcised out of Arthur, the moment when he is framed as guilty. What happens next? The make up is gone, he leaves the courtroom and meets the "joker", embodied outside of him through a fan. He enters the car with him, but ultimately runs away from his old persona that he can't stand anymore. After the staircase scene (that might be real or not, maybe she really did it in the previous scene?) we see arthur meeting the new Joker in the corridor, who ends up killing him. In conclusion: Arthur exorcises the joker out of his body, tries to run always from him, but ultimately the Joker finds arthur through a new, more appropriate vessel, and takes revenge on him, for neglecting him on the first place. Thats my take.
Heres my take In this version of Joker, Joker lasted short period of time, because he tried to pull himself into sanity while living in an cruel world In the anime, games, comics and other movies that version of Joker lasted much much longer because it was pulled into insanity while living in an cruel world So message is, the only way to last in the cruel and evil world is to become evil and cruel yourself
People wanted an unhinged Joker breaking out of Arkham fighting GCPD with his clown gang. I never really imagined Arthur Fleck becoming the criminal mastermind of the Joker, I respect that the director and the actors wanted to experiment and do something unexpected. That being said, the sequel could've been better, but a Joker without Batman can only go so far.
They must have not seen the first film where literally we see a young Bruce Wayne who is like 10 years old. That alone makes the ending of JOKER 2 perfect. The guy he faces in the future is different.
See the movie should be called Arthur Fleck the pathetic loser. Instead they named it joker and expect people to say yeah that’s the real joker and be happy with this garbage movie
@@Captaiesqueleto arthur was always a loser, a victim, we always felt pity when watching him, society made him a monster, that was the first movie message. This one was to show that even tho he sufferd a lot, killing people wont make things better, far worst actually since the 2 movie is him just "getting what he deserves" after all the bad he as done, still he is a victim and doenst deserve all that suffering, but acting like Arthur who is not smart at all, very fragile, mentaly hill, and was going to kill himself in the murray show, as if he was some tuff crime lord is crazy. This is a diferent look at joker, and mentaly ilness. While the first is far better the second does is thing well enough, could be better? For sure, but it wasnt that bad.
Joker fans aren’t used to thinking. They want black and white like nearly every other version of the character. When faced with a perspective change and a mirror looking back at them, they blame everything else.
joker fans dont exist. the joker hasnt really existed since the dark knight. ever since then its been nothing but trash depiction after trash depiction. penguin is our new boo now.
Loved it. People are angry that Arthur isn’t The Joker. It’s called “joker”, he is A joker. If you removed the “Arkham” sign and any reference to Gotham, there’s nothing that makes this the DC Joker. He’s an abused kid grown up into a mentally ill man in a terrible city. Anything else is projecting our expectation of The Joker onto him. (Har)Lee’s reaction to him later in the film is the audiences’ misunderstanding of the movie and the character. She wanted the Joker and he was only ever Arthur (just like the critics) Speaking of the music… the reason for the music? He first saw Lee in music therapy and she sang to him. If it was art therapy, Arthur would have been dancing through paintings to woo her in his hallucinations. Lee’s love language is music. She was a privileged upper East sider. She probably had music, voice, dance lessons as the girl of rich parents. This isn’t a musical, it’s the fever dream of a lovestruck, obsessive mental patient. He’s mentally ill, not a mastermind anarchist. Can anyone honestly say that you could see Arthur from Joker1 planning the downfall of Gotham? Outsmarting any of the batmans we’ve seen (Pattinson’s?!). Do you see him making penguin or the riddler bend the knee? Would Bane freeze at the sight of him?See him walk into a room full of mob bosses and walk out unscathed? Manufacture timed explosives, p0is0n gas, fight Batman hand to hand? He was full of swagger as joker, but he wasn’t smarter; he didn’t demonstrate any greater competency, he had no skills other than a good strut. He’s not even more articulate than Arthur; his legal defense was a disaster and what an uneducated person would cook up overnight. Like arguing that describing a white car as silver on a speeding ticket means that it should automatically be thrown out, Heck, this was even shown in the 1st movie. Joker’s super moment on the stairs is shown as him just dancing like an idiot (lots of pelvic thrusts) hearing his own music. He was never The Joker. Even at the end of Joker1 we see him in police custody with no sign of a fight. He probably just sat down on the couch and waited for the police. Remember his plan was self h@rm, not murd3r. He didn’t know what to do next. Then he gets rescued by his followers and he stands on top of the car (again, just a strut) Then we see him hunched over, laughing his painful Arthur laugh smoking a cigarette with another counselor in Arkham. He was caught again. The audience wanted to see him powerful, so it did, but he was still Arthur just playing more roles for atttention and love. They wanted Hannibal Lechter but he was always Buffalo Bill
I really laughed at the scene with the guards? Asking to please stop the singing, imagining all the haters screaming the same thing waiting for the big action scenes lmao
nailed it. I feel like young men who wanted him to be the joker really liked the empowered narrative of the kicked dog getting his way through violence; its depressing to be reminded that arthur cannot take down a social system so they complain
It's because it went nowhere, Arthur's story was told at the end of Joker. The director wanted a cash grab by shoe horning in "harley quinn" and "harvey dent" and their getups when in fact it led nowhere. 200 million dollars of a "dream" that phoenix had. And now they're negative, they get what they fucking deserve, not only that but he also withheld calling it a musical for the sole purpose of generating more money. If he was so proud of it he'd call it what it is, garbage.
I thought that the story stayed grounded in reality just like the first one, the villain normally doesn't win and the events on Folie A Deux make sense in a way of Arthur has gone to prison and he is a very vulnerable person trying to live up to a murderous alter ego he donned at the worst time in his life. Of course Arthur can't live up to that, like it or hate it the way the story unfolded was in line with his character. Personally I preferred the first one but the second one was alright to be honest.
The thing is in the 1st movie he reaches slef actualization by becoming the joker personality. " I thought my life was a tragedy now I realise its a comedy" the sequel completely destroys this philosophy and the progress he made
One thing I picked up on is that the lawyer and social worker didn’t really see Aurthur either. They wanted to portray him as that abused and traumatized boy and wanted him to see himself that way as well. Joker and that abused boy are both aspects of who Arthur fleck ultimately is but no characters in the film allow him any complexity of character. The crowds want him to completely embody the joker, while those “on his side” like the lawyer want him to completely reject it as a completely separate person. So in the end it feels like all we can really be is who others view us as then aurthurs joke “Aurthur fleck who?” Really resonates. On a side note aside from Arthur himself it Ironically may be Harvey dent who comes closest to recognizing who Arthur actually is. It was Arthur who killed those people.
16:32 I’d say u missed something. I think it was his friend getting killed that did it, cuz after they beat and violated him they strangled n killed the guy he kissed(who became a friend to Arthur) n as he’s getting choked out Arthur rembers when he almost took it all off before he went full joka mode in the end of the first one, ik u just watched the movie once but I thought that was an amazing catalyst for him cuz I think it was the first time he’d seen the persona or fantasy of the joker killed someone he deemed unworthy of being hurt. N right before he had just realized puddles had actually been traumatized and hurt by his actions even tho he was spared, so now he’s seen his only 2 real friends, forever scarred at best and at worst permanently killed directly because of him giving into tho fantasy of joker, thought it was really well done
I didn't see the ending as a tease like a "oooh look cool comic book movie fanservice/refrence" I saw it more as Tod Phillips poking one more jab at the audience, like in this movie we've proven that noone really cares about Arthur they only want the Joker and the same is obvious of the majority of real people watching these films, so Tod with the ending was basically going "oh you wanted the "real Joker" okay fine here you go then here's the character you all actually wanted right?" And making it essentially Ledger's Joker makes sense because he is the definitive version of the character to most people and general audiences. At least that's how I saw it and don't think it should be taken seriously at all.
love this take. I feel like the mob at the courthouse could totally be a stand in for the audience of these films. Arthur was never supposed to be the joker; even in the first movie you realize he would be way too old by the time Bruce grows up. The Phoenix spin off was always supposed to be a more humanized, realistic portrayal of the idea of the joker and what actually happens to genuinely downtrodden people who find empowerment through violence. I think people forget that because they were just disappointed he didn't take to the streets and kill people. They just wanted a show and arthur losing his power and being abused by the guards wasn't as fun for them to watch.
Great review! Legitimately didn’t understand most of the hate after coming out of the theater. Like you said, it has its flaws- but I don’t think it’s boring like many people are saying. my girlfriend and I both agreed that we would want watch the movie again at some point. The first joker film left a weird taste in my mouth, and i never really knew how to feel about it. I think this new film really helps me understand what the first one was trying to say, and now I really appreciate the first film more. I will also say, I think I do like the ending. Arthur was never the joker, the joker was an idea created by those who felt Arthur’s crimes were justified. People will forgot Arthur and his crimes eventually, especially with the amount of crime happening in Gotham everyday. Although, They will never forget the idea of the joker. That lives on, There is an Empty spot now, and the bad people in Gotham will want someone to stand behind to make them feel better about their own sins. I think if that is what the inmate that killed Arthur becomes, it’s a perfect continuation of that idea. The inmate isn’t a copycat, he’s the next in line to embrace the idea of the joker. You can kill a man, but you can’t kill an idea. P.s. I absolutely love the new animations! They look great!
Thanks Biotyn! Good to see you again, bud, glad you're liking the new animations too. You've been a big part of this channel's aesthetic evolution so it means a lot to hear your thoughts.
Watched your whole video and it's so refreshing hearing someone with fair points actually discussing the logic of the movie, great job! I loved the movie and the themes it brought up were not something I was expecting.
First HiTop Films says he didn't hate it and now Channel Pup says he liked it (2 reviewers I respect)... Maybe I *will* actually give the film a chance.
I don't know if I've ever watched a film that's more "you need to watch it for yourself to make an opinion" than this one. I walked in expecting an absolute trainwreck and came out confused because I thought, at worst, the film was kinda slow and a bit boring. But it's nowhere near as bad as they say. I just don't get the ratings... Go watch it and for your own opinion
@tbx12frnku22 I mean, that's kind of what happens when you have different expectations. The fan crowd came in expecting the first joker, were let down, and proceeded to call it a train wreck, which leads to lower expectations. Do you think your reaction would be different if you expected a masterpiece?
@@heyitsgabe1093 To be honest I don't know if I really had any real expectations. I just knew people were hating on it and that made me curious to watch it. The reason why I say I "expected a train wreck is because, most of the time, I can agree with the general public and critic scores of a film. But turns out I didn't here.
I disagree with the harley point. Her being a physiatrist works perfectly Imo. Cause based off the normal origin for Harley it would make more sense for her to be the manipulator. Joker, a mentally ill patient in a vulnerable position, is more likely to be manipulated by his physiatrist then the other way round due to the inherent power inbalances. Joker 2 keeps the physiatrist part of harley cause Arthur is vulnerable and fragile and susceptible to someone who understands what's going on in his mind and using that understanding maliciously. On her being rich it just goes to the point of harley trying to live out her own fantasy. She doesn't lie solely to get Joker to like her. She wants to fully embrace the Joker and in doing so she lies about her upbringing to better live that fantasy. The reveal isn't just to show that she lied but how completly different there lives are. Arthur thought he'd found someone who he could relate to, so them having similar childhoods was important. When we find out that harley lying whatever connected them kinda severed as well, hence the whole kid thing.
I agree, without Lee present Fleck might actually have had a chance at living. When she shows up and notices during the movie-date he is not even an ounce as deadly as herself, she takes that as her cue to make things happen the way she wants them to. Even her going into his isolation cell and (imo) assaulting him when she KNOWS she's lying about having to leave because "he's a bad influence on her" is a huge sign that she wants to push him back into this dangerous persona. That's what she wants and she can manipulate him at every turn and make the people for him, like his lawyer, seem like the enemy. Fleck tries to have a serious conversation with Lee through the visitor glass, she sings. He tries again on the steps, she sings. When he tries to sing just to her over the phone, she won't even pick up and just listens. She's integral to this sequel and her backstory really helps add to the delusions they both had.
Just like people attack me for saying I give the first Sonic movie a 7.5/10 and not a 6 or below because I don’t know humans bad so movie gets downvoted. I thought second movie was great. 8/10. I like the wedding scene. I watch the movie twice before I learned people have a big issue towards the wedding scene and I thought it was fine. People really hate humans. I bet those people never saw live action transformers movies before bumblebee, at least 70% of humans were so suffering in those movies. First movie was really good and humans were fine in that movie.
To add on to my thoughts. Joker 1 was heavily inspired by King of Comedy, a film that was hated when it came out. By the time Joker 1 came out, that film's message had become more accepted, and Todd Phillips was able to reap the benefits. Now the sequel is his turn for a socially provocative story.
The only people who hated the sequel was the people who lionized and justified everything he did in the first movie. They turned him into their under dog and lived through him and with the sequel their fantasy was destroyed
I watched the film before looking online for any reviews, and I ADORED it. I loved the cinematography, the performances and I’ve listened to the soundtrack on repeat since I saw it. My very favourite thing was the very controversial message behind it, about not idolising figureheads like the Joker and instead understanding them as human beings, and I thought the ending was a very clever twist. Then I went online to see others praise this great movie and just found hate. Upsetting!
Actually, I'd argue that the "real" Joker could still have a Harley Quinn. As you pointed out, this Harley is still a psychiatrist. Perhaps she eventually gets a job as a doctor at Arkham meets the man who's taken up the Joker mantle and falls for him.
I can easily see this film gaining a cult following over time. I enjoyed it. Not every second of it, but the fair majority of it. No one is talking about that opening sequence. I was captivated from the second it started. Most people, overall, agree it's well-made, artistically unique at the very least, and I'm sure when people decide to watch it at home, some positive reception might pop up here and there. It's a mess, but so is the Joker.
Really enjoyed the first one, watched the second one without any insight about it at and had no idea it had musical numbers in it. I thought it was brilliant, I thoroughly enjoyed it.
I am not a fan of comic book movies and characters but I thoroughly enjoyed both of these Joker movies. I would say that it's actually one of my favorite movies this year.
Thank God for this video. I'm sick of the overt narrative. I wanted to drop this info for people who can more readily accept it. Phillips pitched DC Black to DC and was shot down. It would've been him making origin movies for each of Gothams villains setting the stage for Batman. They shoot down the idea but give him a minimal budget for one film- Joker. Fast forward after Snyderverse fails and they allow Reeves to start his own verse they beg Phillips to take creative control. All that considered I'd say Foil Le Deux makes a lot of sense. He let his character rest and it still stayed true to all the themes presented in the first film.
16:09 Personally, I interpreted the scene as this: For a while, the Joker persona has done nothing but "good" for Arthur. It's an escape, something that makes him feel "free," and another thing that makes people actually pay attention to him. But that scene happens, and it taints that fantasy. It shatters the idea that the persona is something he can hide behind, the scene was a direct consequence of him trying to play this character again. The scene was of course heartbreaking and hard to watch but, in a way, I'm glad that they didn't pull their punches with it. It's something that happens and it's horrible, and it's portrayed as such.
Agree I don't think it was out of place at all. The guards are kind of a stand in for society/institutions and the movie does a good job of continuing the theme of society abusing its power over its victims, with Arthur being right in the middle of that.
an aspect that always came to me while watching the movie, is that whenever it breaks into a musical, is that it happens when "a character goes into delusion state. The way i came to such case, is thinking on "how would this feel without the background music" Many times when Arthur goes into singing, it feels too convenient that background music is playing, making the scene of him singing like a proper musical. But what if instead, the music we witness is all in Arthur's head. We are experiencing it as how Arthur would experience it, with the grandiose orchestra behind him. (He did say the he really liked Murray's music band, maybe that aspect really stuck with him after the incident). But that is it, the music is in his head, and perhaps the reactions too. While in the perspective of someone else, you see this guy just springing into singing at acapella. The same scenes with Arthur singing acapella without the music, makes him look properly insane. Same deal with Harley. Her manipulative ways towards Arthur fuels his delusions further, because she wants to see Arthur's delusional shadow, The Joker. And whenever Arthur falls for her manipulations, the music starts playing. Imagine that moment when Harley and Arthur have that 5 minute visit. Harley's obvious manipulations towards Arthur breaks into a musical right there. It's Arthur falling into delusion again, while an also mentally ill Harley starts singing acapella by herself, on the visit booth. Or when in trial, he finally breaks after hearing about her mother's testimony of him, he goes fully delusional and just imagines a whole musical scene where he kills several people on the trial while singing. And then afterwards, he lashes out and fires his own lawyer. Empowered by the previous musical delusion. The strength of how the musical aspect goes, the more "Musical" is like, it's when Arthur is at his most stressed. He shields himself into falling into these "Musicals" and imaginary situations to escape it. And it is heavily influenced by them after he snaps out of them. An scene with music and without music can feel quite different when in comparison, and this duality made me understand the movie better. like, i am sure that eventually there's gonna be an edit for Joker 2 that cuts out all the full on musicals that happens within his dreams, and also cuts out the music on the musicals where's he's halfway delucional but includes the people in the moment. Y'know, the ones where it isn't a full on broadway musical, and it is instead a portrayal of what is happening there.
Also, the aspect about Harley being born in a wealthy family and also being trained as a psychiatrist. Being born into a wealthy family doesn't translate into good mental health. Quite the contrary i might add. It is often to witness that people born into wealth do become quite mentally ill as well. But it's a different way the likes of Arthur developed, being born in poverty and violence, considering that his family was, to say it shortly, being out right fucked up to start with.
the person who was in charge of the music group said that the music was about connecting with each other, when arthur finally had someone who connected with him, he started to have his musical delusions, and every time he has them it's when he is trying to connect with those that love him as the joker, which is why lee shoots him in the delusion when he found out that she might have been lying about loving him. and that delusion was put on hold when she convinced him that it didn't matter and she just wanted him to like her, which is also why it continues at the end, both arthur and his joker dies at the end, with nobody wanting him.
I watched Joker 2 tonight because I wanted to see how bad it was. Surprisingly, it turned out to be a great movie, with a lot of cleverly hidden commentary. I especially loved the court scenes-true crime fans should definitely give it a shot. For me, this is a horror movie.
It’s fascinating how anyone that likes this movie gets attacked and insulted. It shows just how soft the sheep really are. Herd mentality is an actual disease.
After hearing nothing but negative reviews I came to the conclusion that I would never watch Joker 2. I allowed myself to watch spoiler reviews and let the criticism fuel my second hand disappointment. Then the movie was released on HBO so I decided to watch. I didn't understand why the film was so hated. It seems like the people who hate the movie are represented within the movie itself, by characters such as Harley. They hate it for not being what they expected
Lee Quin now represents alot of people that disliked this movie. They were never interested in Arthur Fleck, they wanted him to be the joker, they wanted the fantasy.
People are saying that the "musical" parts are all over the place. When I actually went and watched the movie, out of the 6 songs that appear, 3 of them are just Harley singing to herself without any kind of back up. I swear 90% of people just want their opinions handed to them
I freaking loved this movie! It had the charm and mystery of the first one. And I love how music actually played a roll. And Joker asked why she sang. Like it was really good. The segment for “the clown is me” was SO, so so well made.
I loved the first Joker and I liked the second. I don't really understand why everyone is so against it. I guess lots of people who liked the first (but didn't understand it) thought he'd be a full blown Joker in the second. Though it was always obvious Arthur was never going to be the real Joker. In the first one Arthur was largely alone and so his poor grip on reality led him further down the road to becoming the Joker but he did clearly see himself as the good guy killing bullies, not really becoming the Joker. With all the focus on what he did there are basically 2 types of people, those who love the idea of the Joker that Arthur isn't and those that hate what Arthur did and want him dead. He isn't able to keep going down his own road to madness and it all falls apart for him. The first one was better but the second was still good.
I thougth the reveal of Harley being a psychiatrist, specially in the way the lawyer revealed, was to say "she was manipulating you, and she knew exactly how to do that"
It’s a masterpiece! & I don’t think people are deep enough to truly appreciate it. Arthur fleck is Batman’s half brother & Batman’s dad ironically created the inevitable real joker( the man who kills Arthur fleck). Arthur never experienced love , not from his mom or anyone, that sadness that loneliness and utter despair is the entire point. Arthur is a good person a victim , someone we all had empathy for in part 1 and throughout. He bottled up his emotions and trauma tried to laugh it off as his mom would try and have him do calling “happy” , but those emotions never went away , it could go to suicide or outward aggression and in part 1 he chose outward aggression. Something he is eventually remorseful for in part 2 . The Folie a deux is French for two crazy people delusional together . He’s delusional believing harley truly loves him for who he is as Arthur Fleck, and she’s delusional for loving the joker side of him even tho that’s not really him because he’s a good guy deep down inside because his true self is not the “joker “ psychopath , and not even the real joker after all. The midget even said you were always good to me. It was Arthur’s redemption, to be honest and true self, but when he went searching for Harley the tragedy is she doesn’t love who he really is and Arthur ends up dying alone never experiencing love. Just when you feel good for him that he finally is being loved. Arthur doesn’t make the direct connection that maybe he could get fake love if he continues the fake self joker persona and is never presented that opportunity, maybe he would have kept being the joker just to please her if it meant he could be fake loved by Harley, maybe that would have caused him the anger he needed to turn into the real joker, we will never know. At the end of it that’s all Arthur ever wanted , love. When he sees Harley his make up is faded away as Arthur fleck this weak man who came out at closing statement emerges as his true vulnerable unattractive true self to Harley, that’s why she left him alone in the courtroom as she herself realizes in the end that it was all a fantasy & he isn’t the joker, she studied to be a psychiatrist and realizes what he really is and leaves him & turns him in to the cops. Arthur betrayed and symbolically shot by Harley in the stomach comes to fruition. In the end he is the origin story & inspiration of the real joker , the guy who kills him in the end and cuts smile on his face in the background, which is the perhaps the Keith ledger Joker character who battles Batman not Arthur fleck. We all are him angry at the film angry at Arthur not giving him love and stabbing him to death. Even some happy he dies for being this weak man nobody loves. The musical aspect of the film is fitting since no singing occurs until he falls in fake love with lady Gaga, he never sings in his delusions prior to this, and he even sings in his real life in fitting and funny moments to his cell inmates. Singing is his delusional state feeling the perceived notion of love that he truly never receives and I don’t mind the music since he’s crazy singing to himself most of the time. We are the audience that hates him for not being funny , the point of this film is not to like him for being weak and vulnerable, that’s why you don’t like it, Arthur fleck still not being loved. The film is deeper then we think and horrible if you come in to it with pre conceived notions of what you thought it should be. In due time I hope people appreciate the beauty of the film and don’t look at it through a superficial lens.
This movie is genuinely better than the first in a few ways and of equal quality to the first in all others to me. And where I felt the need to shorthand the first movie as 8/10 worth watching, I want to actually talk about everything with the sequel. I fucking loved so much about it
This movie is getting hate for the joker not doing more stabby stabs and people feeling like after the first movie, his joker persona was 'complete" and we would get to see like a joker causing mayhem and setting up crazy plans. Than again people complain about movies being un crerative and sequels being uneccesary. i think if the sequel that would have done the latter than it would have been uneccessary becuase we already have that joker and that story. at least this sequel dared to spin something new in the narrative. The idea that arthur stopped being joker as much in the prison made sense ( loss of power, loss of control, loss of autonamy, the drug stiffling his brain)--and lee being his bridge into madness was great. joker is the identity he created and the one where he felt like people finally respected him, loved him. So she forced him to be the joker again to feel that love he never did, and when he realized that he isnt the joker (after understanding, he never had any power) she stopped loving him. he was right, no one ever did nor ever will love arthur, excpet the two people who he disregarded. puddles and his attorney ( maybe not love) but the only people who seemed to like arthur for himself. I think people just like to follow trends because this movie is not bad at all..its not perfect but i think the hate is unfounded mostly. hope this video gets more views to at least combat the overwhelming videos calling it horrible lol
"his joker persona was 'complete" and we would get to see like a joker causing mayhem and setting up crazy plans." I don't think Phoenix can play that Joker persona either. He is no Ledger.
@@chamindujanith6337 well yeah? this version of joker is almost completely different with another origin story if everything was the same it would be boring
I fall into the category of those who got to see Joker II later than most. That said, I went in with low expectations but I wanted to see for myself what the fuss is all about. Spoiler alert, the knee going in that Arthur would die in the end. With that out the way I was able to follow the story with that in mind. I have no doubt that was able me to enjoy the movie in a way that others missed. Joker is a product of society, when Arthur realizes that he has something to live for he wants to give up on the facades. He is quickly brushed aside (murdered) in order to not tarnish Joker’s reputation. A sad reflection on society. For me this could lay a foundation for the Rise of Joker, the handing over of the baton is when the young man who stabs Arthur says, “... you get what you deserve...” If 2019 Joker and Joker II existed outside the DC Universe I believe it may have been better received. Could it be that some of the fan boys were looking for more Batman links, but it works well as a musical drama. This could be groundbreaking, time will tell. I hope Todd Philips gets to share his vision by being given a chance to make the final installment, it could also introduce the Rise of Batman. No ?
I never thought the guy in the end was 'the real Joker' or ever would be, I thought it moreso symbolized that the idea of the Joker is out there now and the Joker will always exist because someone will always take on the concept I get the idea that you feel like that makes 'The Joker' feel like a copycat but personally I think there's no 'The Joker' in this world nor will there ever be, some will claim to be that and some will do heinous things in the name of Joker but he's not a character, he is a symbol
I just watched Joker Folie a Deux and i'd largly agree with your sentiment of it. It's a story about the dual nature of Arthur Fleck, which is encapsulated early in the animated skit during the start of the movie. I enjoyed that it's diffrent, it brings diffrent emotions than any movie i've seen in a long time, and i applaud the balls of directors for making this story more meaningful and thoughtful than an idiotic corpse-counter super-villain movie that the world has seen hundreds of times.
I saw the movie as a commentary on fandom, celebrity culture, corporations’ greed in making a sequel no one wanted, mental illness, and I could be wrong but I saw both Joker films as a tribute to Heath Ledger. Give it time and people will realize how good this film really is.
They won’t. Most of the people who hate it haven’t even done the bare minimum of pirating it to form their own opinion. They are just lost in the sauce. I’m not defending the movie so much as criticising the herd mentality of modern-day social media.
The problem with some of you apolagist is that you think these aspects make it a masterpiece. Literally none of these aspects enhance the film. Infact they all do the opposite especially when you factor in the other failures of this movie.
i disagree with your take on the ending. It was very obvious that Arthur was never gonna be the actual joker. Also I don't see it as there being a real joker. I see it as anyone can end up like arthur. From the first movie it was very obvious the Joker wasn't a person it was a movement. Once that Joker persona came out of Arthur, then people walked away from him. I find the ending to be perfect.
Lee was still a psychiatrist because she was actually very sane and willingly being evil and manipulating Arthur to be Joker for her fantasy. It’s to show us that even “Good people” can actually really for no reason or sob story just be evil. While Arthur a “bad person” is really a good person and was willing to die as that good person.
I can relate to having unpopular options. You can’t help what you like and dislike and neither can others. There’s nothing wrong with having different opinions, but it can be very hard to have a different view than seemingly everyone else. But people who cry about you liking something they don’t have no reason to do that.
It’s not hard I don’t care if I’m only person in world to like such a thing it doesn’t make my feelings for it invalid and don’t let anyone to tell me otherwise.
Musicals are a great vehicle for mental health stories where grandiosity or delusion/surrealness are present, CW's "Crazy Ex-Girlfriend" did that expertly. People thought this movie was boring, I thought it was ponderous and more philosophical. I found the message of the first movie reductive and kind of cringy/trite. Overall Joker 2 does generate the feeling of discomfort we get when the media and the court system try to pull apart and identify what creates and motivates a murderer. We never get full catharsis or satisfactory explanations. A movie like this should create some discomfort and admit there are no easy answers to these complex questions. Having been through serious mental health problems including hospitalization, I liked this movie better than the first for daring to interrogate where illness ends and personal responsibility begins.
I just didn't like most of it. Direction of photography, cinematography, script, plot, soundtrack, the lyrical performances (and not because "DC musical yack", I'm actually a huge fan of musical theater). And I understand its attempts at messaging, I just think the delivery, nuance and sincerity fall flat. All-around I just found it aggressively below average.
Hey Pup, i beg your pardon, but the endong isn't about teasing the real Joker going on to meet Barman in the future. It about the idea that they fantics put on Arthur still lives, he never had any power nor does Arther have Authority on it, so when he tries to destroy it, one possessed by it destroyed him. There is no need to be expecting Batman, rather dread that the idea of Joker cant end with Arthur, rather it lives on.
I liked arthur in the first one, i hated how he basically was a husk and he had people lead him from place to place, he never made decisions on his own. it was so bland and not needed.
20:20 On the Harley Quinn Psychologist/Psychiatrist thing, it's important to keep in mind that psychologists and psychiatrists are two different career paths that are often confused for each other. Psychologists go to college/university and get some type of psychology degree, and then often go on to get a master's degree or some special training. Psychiatrists go to college/university, get some type of science degree, and then go to medical school to learn medicine for 4 years, and then spend like 7-8 years training to become a psychiatrist. (At least this is how it works in the United States.) Both psychologists and psychiatrists work together to provide mental health care, but because it's so difficult to become a psychiatrist there's way more psychologists in practice. I hate how in Batman Universes it's never consistent, and I think it confuses people. In some universes she's a psychologist and in some she's a psychiatrist. In this movie though, she's a psychiatry student, which means she's in medical school, or in the later half of her training.
The court room aspect had tension with a lot of them which was good but just went to the next scene having no climax. As well flashback movements you wouldn’t get that in like other court room movies
The guy at the end is not there to tell you "I'm the real joker", they're not setting up a "real" joker, quite the opposite, that character is there to make clear that the Joker is not any one person in this story.
I loved it they actually had realistic characters for me at least because I have a few severe mental illnesses and alot of them amount to me believing the world is against me and I have a history of violence and being institutionalized when he turned from the joker back to Arthur I almost cried when everyone left
I entered this movie thinking it was bad... bro. The cinematography was amazing, the acting was phenomenal, the pacing and story weren't the best (the ending left a lot to be desired) but even the musical scenes weren't that bad or even as excessive as people made it out to be! My favorite scene in the whole movie was literally a musical number, it gave me goosebumps! Heck, the writing is better and more compelling than dozens of movies I've seen, people wanna compare it to the literal masterpiece of Joker 1 that outperforms almost any movie ever made. The level of vitriol is honestly unfair. I would give it a 7.5 out of 10, and not for the musicals at all, but the.. meh ending.
I watched it 2 days ago and loved it. Beautiful slow-paced psychological drama. I liked it better then the first one. In this movie half of it is his fantasies and dreams inside his head, which helps understand his psyche more. Harley Quinn was well adapted to this universe as well. In the end, was the Young inmate Jack Oswald White? But overall I enjoyed it. Btw: Harvey Dent. Can we trust him?
My theory is that some of the musical scenes in Joker Folie à Deux are not Arthur's, but in fact Harley's fantasies. Think about it, scene with a gun, she is a star on a stage (because she with him), she is in total control of some of the musical scenes and Arthur is just submissively dancing with her and she do all the talking. This is actually happening in Harley's head, coz she is also insane (Folie à Deux). She is fantasizing of killing him on stage as he did with Murray, because she is imitating him, "consuming" (dementor kiss smoking scene) his persona and fame. And did you notice that unreliable narrator in Folie à Deux is more subtle, but still present. How Harley slips through the guards in some scenes?
I think Harley being this privileged person kinda made her much more of a villain. She manipulated Arthur and she has much more awareness of her own evil. Shes a stand in for us, the audience, the ones who sway the world to entertain.
Honestly I love that you can see things in these movies that are often written off. As long as you see value in it that’s all that matters in the end of the day
I really loved this movie and I thought their was good Joker moments that felt like the character jumped off a comic book page and landed in a movie but I don’t really understand why people are hating it as much as they are when even if i didn’t like this film I would have still said it was ok
Could you consider a Kevin Conroy tribute? Nov 10th marks 2nd anniversary of his death. I got a voice acting background and his voice was an inspiration for me since Batman the Animated Series. I made a tribute to him using the classic BtAS toys with footage from Arkham and Injustice but I don't got ur reach, and he deserves much bigger tribute.
While I haven't done a devoted tribute video, I have paid tribute to Kevin Conroy a few times in other videos pertaining to his Batman. I don't think I have much to say that hasn't already been said by the countless fans he meant the world to. That being said, I'd love to do a video documenting every version of Batman he's played and cap it off with a nice tribute. So perhaps that's something for the pipeline! But also don't let this stop you from making your own tribute. Your words matter, no matter what number of people head them.
i saw it last Monday night and loved the movie so much and been listening to the soundtrack and reviews all week and it's been so surreal as a fan of the story and music
That’s why don’t count on others to tell ya to watch it when you can watch it yourself and give your own thoughts. Most movies receiving under 5/10 over on IMDb is usually bad. Sequels to the original with scores under 5/10 are sometimes because people don’t like the direction such as joker 2 movie. Nothing more beyond taht
This movie showed us that everyone who obsessed over the first and praised it were no better than the very people who helped in turning Arthur into the Joker. They don’t wanna see a man try they wanna see fail and fall further
I loved it, and I don’t understand all the hate this movie is getting.. I’m not a fan of musicals at all but this felt like all the music numbers fit into the story they were trying to tell. I’d go see this again. Thanks for the review 🙏
I actually liked it a fair bit as well- even as a MASSIVE fan of the original. The original is my favorite movie ever and even I wasn’t that upset. I suppose some of the ideas that the Gotham TV series setup (which I loved) already had me prepared for this kind of story in some ways. Perhaps I wouldn’t like the original so much if I had seen the movies that everyone claims it’s derivative of, but I absolutely loved it and still do. Nothing was really tarnished by the sequel for me, even though I’d still much rather just keep the original as its own story.
"Joker" got me interested in "King of Comedy". It's such a great film, do yourself a favor and make sure to check it out. Interestingly it has also quite some aspects in common with "Follie a Deux".
I agree with a lot that was said here. I have a theory for the title I think it was called it because it’s mean madness being transferred from one person to another in French. At the end of the movie you see that joker “madness” transferred into the prisoner who just killed him and the cycle begins again showing there’s no real cure to fix the system that created him.
My wife and i just got home from seeing it and we absolutely loved it! We really liked the first one but this movie is inna league of it's own. We both cried at parts and laughed out loud at some parts as well. I honestly can't understand how or why this movie is getting so much hate. Joaquin's performance is amazing and Gaga is very good. Don't let anyone tell you how to feel about a piece of media now in days. I don't was going to write this movie off after hearing all the bad reviews and my wife said "maybe we'll like it" and she was 100% right.
I liked it too. It was actually a great film. The cinematography, editing, acting were stellar. I’m not sure what people are seeing to say this is bad.
This movie isn’t very good, but it has so many interesting artistic ideas that I can’t help but admire it. I’d much rather see a movie that takes a big swing over safe lukewarm slop any day of the week
“So let me get this straight, you think Joker: Á Folie A Deux is good?”
Channel Pup: “I do, and I’m tired of pretending it’s not.”
“Movies are subjective, critics”
The same way they claim what’s Joker or not 😂
I liked this too and it's not as bad as some people say! It was well acted, beautifully shot, and tried to do something original. It's not without flaws though, as it's too long (many movies seem to be these days), had too many songs, and the script should have been more focused. I think they should have leaned into showing Arthur's regret for what he did and how he has become a symbol of something he doesn't want to be. That switch was too fast, imo. I would have also wanted to see Harley better developed. Overall though, I appreciated what they tried to do.
I liked it a lot it was great the acting made the movie great even if the story sucks the actors made it grey
Finally someone who appreciates the movie for what it is rather than what it could’ve been. I also preferred it over the first one too, I’m sure in a decade from now people will realize it’s not half bad.
I appreciate you! Thanks! Yeah I think once the initial whiplash has worn off, people will come around to Joker 2. It's a great film on its own terms.
really hated this fucking film because it's so different from the first one which i really liked. but after awhile, you realize that this movie is not even half bad if you stop comparing it to the first film. the cinematography is even one of the best i've seen from a comic book movie. point is, this is a great film but a very different and inconsistent sequel
Wasn't it a time when people were just hating on the first movie then the critics turned around and said it was a masterpiece?
This movie reached the wrong audience!
With what Hollywood is doing smth will beat it at the box office in the next few years fir worst grossing movie
The first one was absolutely brilliant and was quickly recognized for that, so of this one takes a decade for people to realize that it's not half bad....
Having just got back from the theater, I have to say, I'm very confused. I feel like I watched a completely different film from the one everyone is describing.
Based on my viewing experience, Joker 2 was very good; even edging on brilliant in places. Mainly, I felt the film did an excellent job at exploring and even deconstructing the Shadow Self as defined by Carl Jung.
What's more is how this film drives home the current meta of the character that many people haven't caught on to yet: There. Is. No. REAL. Joker. The Joker is an entity; an idea. Not a single individual person. He is a manifestation of our repressed Shadow side. Since Arthur rejected the Joker, it will manifest in someone else. Because Gotham's underbelly must always have a Joker. He is inevitable.
I have a sneaking suspicion that something else is afoot here. Because Folie a` Deux isn't even close to being as bad as people are making it out to be. Something's off.
The opening animation (which I loved) basically set the stage for what to expect from the movie. Arthur Fleck vs his shadow self, Joker. The constantle struggle between the two really made you think, plus Harley Quinn and her foil, the lawyer.
The former pushes Arthur to embrace his shadow self and he does, but when he realizes its not really him and he turns away from his shadow, he gets completely abandoned, and no one left to help him as he pushed away his only advocate, the lawyer, in favor of his shadow self. In the end, he dies alone, by someone who personifies his shadow much more than arthur could himself.
Brilliant movie, but I wish they showed Arthur embracing his Joker persona a bit more in the prison
It honestly didn't bother me that at least in this iteration, Joker was a symbol. Whether or not other people wanted it that way is completely up to them. But I kind of already knew that from the first Joker movie that Arthur Fleck wasn't really the Joker that Batman will fight. And maybe it's just me, but the same feeling I got with Barry Keoghan' Joker in The Batman. When we actually got a tease for the Joker in that movie, I personally didn't really feel on board with that actually being the Joker of that universe. So much subtlety since that scene was at a prison behind closed doors and we couldn't really make him out entirely.
I was saying this last night as i left the theater, wow that was brilliant. That literal death stare into the camera, was pretty mesmerizing. I enjoyed the singing. People are being way too negative about the film. Its kinda sad people cant appreciate the arts, they chop it up to, ohhh the director didnt even wanna make a sequel, its a slap to the face to the fans.
I can't trust or take anyone seriously on the internet anymore.
What you described is what i interpretation i had when he is talking with harlee in jail, sips the cigar and breaths the smoke into her mouth. Like his essence is possessing her. The other scene is the obviohs one at the end.
The visceral hatred for this is crazy. If you don't like musicals and like seeing yourself in mentally unhinged guys, then ok. But don't start berating people for liking it.
Actually think I like the second one more than the first 😅
I don’t hate musicals, but the musical elements in Joker 2 feel nearly all pointless. They often just tell the audience emotions that Arthur/Joker is feeling that we already knew (except when the movie shows that Harley pulls out the gun on Arthur, which actually would’ve come full circle at the end if the superior back up ending with Harley was used) and slow down the story
It's genuinely better than the 1st movie. You got 20 minutes of Joker in the original. The rest was carried by Joaquin. Other than that, it was a pretty basic story. Joker 2 is so much better. It's mainly hated by Men who feel uncomfortable because there's musical scenes.
The movie space is so polarizing now it’s either the best movie ever or the worst thing ever
@@bluetreacle I’ve seen plenty of men who claim to like musicals say they didn’t like Joker 2. It’s just not a very well done musical
The movie is called "Follie á Deux" because that's a term in psychiatry for a kind of psychosis which develops between two people.
Wait... could that be referring to the dichotomy between Arthur and Joker? Because my original issue with the title was that the film really isn't about Harley in any major capacity.
@@ChannelPup I doubt so. Yes, the movie is not about Harley, but she is the catalyst for Arthur to try to accept the Joker as his "true" self (like when she puts make up on him). If she wouldn't have interfered, he would kept taking his medicine, and would follow his attorney's plan. Maybe he would survive having actual healthcare. But embracing the "Joker" persona ruined all of that.
@@ChannelPupfolie a doo doo
@@ReviewerRandom
But what if it's a symbolic duel-meaning title? Where it's talking about both the relationships
alv el reviewer random!!
I personally didn’t interpret the ending as “oh this guys the REAL joker” more of its cementing that in this universe the joker is more of a role than an actual single entity
Slicing in his smile was a bit on the nose. I get that it’s a homage to “wanna know how I got these scars?” Which took me out of it for a sec. That being said I also quite liked the movie
@@producedproductions I think that if they didn't include the slicing face bit, it would've been less obvious that he's the "real" joker. i feel like it needed to be obvious to hammer home that idea that the Joker still exists
The way I understood it is that in this universe, the real Joker will happen through copycats. Arthur inspired the look and what Joker is, but not enough as a sociopath or psychopath to be THE Joker. That new one at the end will add his spice to the persona but might be too much of a goof, not smart enough, and a third one would be the real Joker, something like that.
Ironically the moral of the film is how it was majoritively received by people who watched it, that might have actually been the intention though.
Definitely. Arthur's killer represents the audience who turns their back on him and his story after learning he isn't the Joker he wanted to be. A moment of self-reflection: Does the viewer really want to become someone with a Joker-like attitude towards society?
@@loerlfacts, brilliant film absolutely brilliant. I think the way that it was received made the movie even better.
@@loerl Arthur was a fine character on his one, the audience knew he wasn't THE JOKER at least I hope so. The first film was fine on it's own as a standalone, this was a cash grab sole purpose of ill gains and now it TANKED XD
Joker 2 will become a cult classic.
It already is to me, this movie is so terribly over-hated it’s sad. Joker 2 was such a refreshing and new take on the character that I loved it. It’s better than the first one.
I agree a stone cold classic. It should be watched back to back
I also really liked Joker 2. I believe it's one of the most intentional big budget movies of the last couple of years. The movie has a strong message to send and it does!
read a text if you want a message that has nothing to do with batman/the joker.
@@nullakjg767you sound dumb lol
@@nullakjg767It has a lot to do with DC's Gotham City lore, whether intentional or not. Both Todd Phillips movies depict Gotham City creating a societal atmosphere that invariably will breed misery, frustration, anger, violence, hate and madness, laying the foundation for THE JOKER to emerge. It's merely a matter of time. "Joker" showed that on a personal level, but taking the example of an ordinary citizen who never had it in him to become THE JOKER. But it showed how a person who started out with a personality as far removed from THE JOKER as one could think, under the corrosive influence of an uncaring Gotham City rife with social decay, how EVEN that innocent person could be sent over the edge, metaphysically infected by Gotham City's spirit of malignant darkness. "Joker" showed that on the micro level of merely one person's descent into darkness, delusion and aggression. "Follie a Deux" takes this theme to a macro level by including Gotham's public institutions like Arkham Asylum, the justice court system, the media, the sensation seekers and people living vicariously by idolizing or demonizing others into painting a broader picture of Gotham's society as a breeding ground for multiple Joker-like characters to merge, for a violent cult emerging that expects THE JOKER to arise like a messianic leader of violence and chaos. It is a movie about the concept of the shadow as theorized by psychologist philosopher Carl Jung, a movie about projecting suppressed frustrations and prohibited dreams of escape and salvation onto others, never seeing them for what they are.
@@nullakjg767we have tons of movies with the Batman and joker, did you really miss out on this one proving the first one to be even more true. The first movie was about a neglected mentally ill man who built a character that actually received lots of attention for the role he was playing. The second movie brought him back down to earth and proves that same point.
@@giminaza007 who cares? penguin is so much better. i dont care about sad clowns
Well, I liked it. The psychology was interesting. The loss of hope and rawness felt true.
I agree.
Its quite ironic how hype joker fanboys are shitting on this movie becaue it wasnt exactly what they wanted. All while its literally the main trope of the movie that Arthur gets left alone by everyone becase he doesnt feliver the exact fantasy of a psycho killer alter ego they wanted him to play. The people in the courtroom and harley leaving him because he said there is no fantasy. Do they even realize the movie is a mirror reflection of them? They wanted arthur fleck an underweight traumatized riddled with mental problems middle aged man to fight batman or something?
I get this point but you cant really be mad at them, this movie wasn't originally going to happen and for the makers of the first film was the intention of making the first and letting the viewer imagine what came after... and after decades of traditional joker media showcasing him become a tragic villain and torturing batman is what most people would gravitate towards in their minds, the first movie never hinted to this being the future of the joker and many fans got slapped in the face with this execution, I appreciate the angle of the movie but it just seems like its the makers way of saying how they didn't really want to make this movie and it makes the angle you see it as as coincidental and not with any purpose in that direction.
Exactly the movie is genius in a way cause not only did he die alone unwanted in the movie but the same thing is happening in real life lol
I mean one could expect, that as far as artistic visions go, for this movie to get some respect. We usually complain about movies being about cash grabs first & art pieces later. But this movie its the opposite.
In the end Arthur was just a pahetic little man that pulled a guns trigger. Theres nothing grandiose or revolutionary about it. And he got a lonely end without snyone caring.
Exactly. I believe it’s brilliant for that reason alone.
YES IM NOT ALONE THANK YOU
Finally, a positive review on youtube of this greatly misunderstood movie, thanks for speaking it out.
It's not misunderstood its quite clearly not a good film that was made to make sure another Joker film won't be made. The director CLEARLY didn't wanna make this movie and it shows
If this movie is considered worse than madam web and morbius
Definitely not
@@ElMachoMucho or some simple minded people just wanted to see the joker being an edge lord bagasse and whined when they realised its a film criticising social alienation, neglect and chiefly about mental health 🤷♂️
@@timc6669 explain how it criticized those things cause from what I hear it did the opposite by showing how a man socially alienated, neglected, and suffering from mental health issues died anti climatically to some other nut after getting gang r*ped/bum rushed by some corrupt prison guards representing the system going unpunished while laying the smack down on anyone who dares to challenge it's hypocrisy?
I think the ending is just an extension of the themes of the movie. Arthur Fleck might have "created" the Joker but he doesn't end up to be THE joker, he'll most-likely just end up forgotten. Arthur dies but the Joker lives, whatever happens.
Exactly Joker is not a person. In the last scene.... SPOILERS... Where that guy stabs Arthur he slices his mouth in de background creating the iconic smile/scars. Joker lives on in him, his son and his 'fans'. The i think rando that placed the bomb car and the guys driving him away in the taxi for example.
This movie has so much to appreciate. Its just not an action movie like the goop that is suicide squad
The ending is dumb.
That's just lazy and not needed, much like this pretentious "film"
@@Sincere_3 no it isnt you just cant accept it
@@bioshock8787 It is. You just cant accept that
My interpretation of the ending:
Maybe the court explosion wasn't real. Or it doesn't matter if it was real. The "explosion" signifies the exact moment when the Joker is exorcised out of Arthur, the moment when he is framed as guilty.
What happens next? The make up is gone, he leaves the courtroom and meets the "joker", embodied outside of him through a fan. He enters the car with him, but ultimately runs away from his old persona that he can't stand anymore.
After the staircase scene (that might be real or not, maybe she really did it in the previous scene?) we see arthur meeting the new Joker in the corridor, who ends up killing him.
In conclusion: Arthur exorcises the joker out of his body, tries to run always from him, but ultimately the Joker finds arthur through a new, more appropriate vessel, and takes revenge on him, for neglecting him on the first place.
Thats my take.
that connects to the "me and my shadow" opening too tbh!
Great take.
Heres my take
In this version of Joker, Joker lasted short period of time, because he tried to pull himself into sanity while living in an cruel world
In the anime, games, comics and other movies that version of Joker lasted much much longer because it was pulled into insanity while living in an cruel world
So message is, the only way to last in the cruel and evil world is to become evil and cruel yourself
happened after he got raped...
People wanted an unhinged Joker breaking out of Arkham fighting GCPD with his clown gang. I never really imagined Arthur Fleck becoming the criminal mastermind of the Joker, I respect that the director and the actors wanted to experiment and do something unexpected. That being said, the sequel could've been better, but a Joker without Batman can only go so far.
They must have not seen the first film where literally we see a young Bruce Wayne who is like 10 years old. That alone makes the ending of JOKER 2 perfect. The guy he faces in the future is different.
It left me with the image of: "OK, fast forward 15-20 years and Wayne will be battling the Joker who killed Arthur.
See the movie should be called Arthur Fleck the pathetic loser. Instead they named it joker and expect people to say yeah that’s the real joker and be happy with this garbage movie
@@Captaiesqueletothat the point todd didnt try to make your comic book movie
@@Captaiesqueleto arthur was always a loser, a victim, we always felt pity when watching him, society made him a monster, that was the first movie message.
This one was to show that even tho he sufferd a lot, killing people wont make things better, far worst actually since the 2 movie is him just "getting what he deserves" after all the bad he as done, still he is a victim and doenst deserve all that suffering, but acting like Arthur who is not smart at all, very fragile, mentaly hill, and was going to kill himself in the murray show, as if he was some tuff crime lord is crazy.
This is a diferent look at joker, and mentaly ilness.
While the first is far better the second does is thing well enough, could be better? For sure, but it wasnt that bad.
Joker fans aren’t used to thinking. They want black and white like nearly every other version of the character.
When faced with a perspective change and a mirror looking back at them, they blame everything else.
joker fans dont exist. the joker hasnt really existed since the dark knight. ever since then its been nothing but trash depiction after trash depiction. penguin is our new boo now.
@@nullakjg767 Yeah Colin Farrell is a baddie
I don't think the joker has ever been in black and white
While I don’t LIKE this movie per se the backlash is kinda getting out of hand. I appreciate what it was trying to do and it’s a very ambitious film.
Loved it.
People are angry that Arthur isn’t The Joker. It’s called “joker”, he is A joker.
If you removed the “Arkham” sign and any reference to Gotham, there’s nothing that makes this the DC Joker. He’s an abused kid grown up into a mentally ill man in a terrible city.
Anything else is projecting our expectation of The Joker onto him. (Har)Lee’s reaction to him later in the film is the audiences’ misunderstanding of the movie and the character. She wanted the Joker and he was only ever Arthur (just like the critics)
Speaking of the music… the reason for the music? He first saw Lee in music therapy and she sang to him. If it was art therapy, Arthur would have been dancing through paintings to woo her in his hallucinations. Lee’s love language is music. She was a privileged upper East sider. She probably had music, voice, dance lessons as the girl of rich parents. This isn’t a musical, it’s the fever dream of a lovestruck, obsessive mental patient.
He’s mentally ill, not a mastermind anarchist. Can anyone honestly say that you could see Arthur from Joker1 planning the downfall of Gotham? Outsmarting any of the batmans we’ve seen (Pattinson’s?!). Do you see him making penguin or the riddler bend the knee? Would Bane freeze at the sight of him?See him walk into a room full of mob bosses and walk out unscathed? Manufacture timed explosives, p0is0n gas, fight Batman hand to hand?
He was full of swagger as joker, but he wasn’t smarter; he didn’t demonstrate any greater competency, he had no skills other than a good strut. He’s not even more articulate than Arthur; his legal defense was a disaster and what an uneducated person would cook up overnight. Like arguing that describing a white car as silver on a speeding ticket means that it should automatically be thrown out,
Heck, this was even shown in the 1st movie. Joker’s super moment on the stairs is shown as him just dancing like an idiot (lots of pelvic thrusts) hearing his own music. He was never The Joker.
Even at the end of Joker1 we see him in police custody with no sign of a fight. He probably just sat down on the couch and waited for the police. Remember his plan was self h@rm, not murd3r. He didn’t know what to do next. Then he gets rescued by his followers and he stands on top of the car (again, just a strut) Then we see him hunched over, laughing his painful Arthur laugh smoking a cigarette with another counselor in Arkham. He was caught again. The audience wanted to see him powerful, so it did, but he was still Arthur just playing more roles for atttention and love.
They wanted Hannibal Lechter but he was always Buffalo Bill
I really laughed at the scene with the guards? Asking to please stop the singing, imagining all the haters screaming the same thing waiting for the big action scenes lmao
Spot on
The movie was trash anyone who likes this garbage deserves to get the same ending Arthur Fleck gets by the real joker
we wanted the joker, not lecter or buffalo bill. watch "the penguin" if you want to see the kind of thing we wanted.
nailed it. I feel like young men who wanted him to be the joker really liked the empowered narrative of the kicked dog getting his way through violence; its depressing to be reminded that arthur cannot take down a social system so they complain
THANK YOU, EVEN WHEN I LIKE A BAD MOVIE I CAN NORMALLY UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE THINK IT SUCKS BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE HATE FOR THIS
Truly I was just as confused, media literacy is dying!
It's because it went nowhere, Arthur's story was told at the end of Joker. The director wanted a cash grab by shoe horning in "harley quinn" and "harvey dent" and their getups when in fact it led nowhere. 200 million dollars of a "dream" that phoenix had. And now they're negative, they get what they fucking deserve, not only that but he also withheld calling it a musical for the sole purpose of generating more money. If he was so proud of it he'd call it what it is, garbage.
great review. I think this movie will be more appreciated in a few years.
I thought that the story stayed grounded in reality just like the first one, the villain normally doesn't win and the events on Folie A Deux make sense in a way of Arthur has gone to prison and he is a very vulnerable person trying to live up to a murderous alter ego he donned at the worst time in his life. Of course Arthur can't live up to that, like it or hate it the way the story unfolded was in line with his character.
Personally I preferred the first one but the second one was alright to be honest.
The thing is in the 1st movie he reaches slef actualization by becoming the joker personality. " I thought my life was a tragedy now I realise its a comedy" the sequel completely destroys this philosophy and the progress he made
@@c.s3369you thought that was going to last long?
@@ree3762literally it was clear he was just making rash decision after rash decision in the first film but eventually the character began to crack.
« To save myself the embarrassment »
To be fair to you, you pronounced it better than most of us Anglophones would.
One thing I picked up on is that the lawyer and social worker didn’t really see Aurthur either. They wanted to portray him as that abused and traumatized boy and wanted him to see himself that way as well. Joker and that abused boy are both aspects of who Arthur fleck ultimately is but no characters in the film allow him any complexity of character. The crowds want him to completely embody the joker, while those “on his side” like the lawyer want him to completely reject it as a completely separate person. So in the end it feels like all we can really be is who others view us as then aurthurs joke “Aurthur fleck who?” Really resonates.
On a side note aside from Arthur himself it Ironically may be Harvey dent who comes closest to recognizing who Arthur actually is. It was Arthur who killed those people.
16:32 I’d say u missed something. I think it was his friend getting killed that did it, cuz after they beat and violated him they strangled n killed the guy he kissed(who became a friend to Arthur) n as he’s getting choked out Arthur rembers when he almost took it all off before he went full joka mode in the end of the first one, ik u just watched the movie once but I thought that was an amazing catalyst for him cuz I think it was the first time he’d seen the persona or fantasy of the joker killed someone he deemed unworthy of being hurt. N right before he had just realized puddles had actually been traumatized and hurt by his actions even tho he was spared, so now he’s seen his only 2 real friends, forever scarred at best and at worst permanently killed directly because of him giving into tho fantasy of joker, thought it was really well done
Also this video is serving as a safe haven from the hate of the joker 2 for me so thank you
I didn't see the ending as a tease like a "oooh look cool comic book movie fanservice/refrence" I saw it more as Tod Phillips poking one more jab at the audience, like in this movie we've proven that noone really cares about Arthur they only want the Joker and the same is obvious of the majority of real people watching these films, so Tod with the ending was basically going "oh you wanted the "real Joker" okay fine here you go then here's the character you all actually wanted right?" And making it essentially Ledger's Joker makes sense because he is the definitive version of the character to most people and general audiences. At least that's how I saw it and don't think it should be taken seriously at all.
love this take. I feel like the mob at the courthouse could totally be a stand in for the audience of these films. Arthur was never supposed to be the joker; even in the first movie you realize he would be way too old by the time Bruce grows up. The Phoenix spin off was always supposed to be a more humanized, realistic portrayal of the idea of the joker and what actually happens to genuinely downtrodden people who find empowerment through violence. I think people forget that because they were just disappointed he didn't take to the streets and kill people. They just wanted a show and arthur losing his power and being abused by the guards wasn't as fun for them to watch.
Great review! Legitimately didn’t understand most of the hate after coming out of the theater. Like you said, it has its flaws- but I don’t think it’s boring like many people are saying. my girlfriend and I both agreed that we would want watch the movie again at some point. The first joker film left a weird taste in my mouth, and i never really knew how to feel about it. I think this new film really helps me understand what the first one was trying to say, and now I really appreciate the first film more. I will also say, I think I do like the ending. Arthur was never the joker, the joker was an idea created by those who felt Arthur’s crimes were justified. People will forgot Arthur and his crimes eventually, especially with the amount of crime happening in Gotham everyday. Although, They will never forget the idea of the joker. That lives on, There is an Empty spot now, and the bad people in Gotham will want someone to stand behind to make them feel better about their own sins. I think if that is what the inmate that killed Arthur becomes, it’s a perfect continuation of that idea. The inmate isn’t a copycat, he’s the next in line to embrace the idea of the joker. You can kill a man, but you can’t kill an idea.
P.s. I absolutely love the new animations! They look great!
Thanks Biotyn! Good to see you again, bud, glad you're liking the new animations too. You've been a big part of this channel's aesthetic evolution so it means a lot to hear your thoughts.
Watched your whole video and it's so refreshing hearing someone with fair points actually discussing the logic of the movie, great job! I loved the movie and the themes it brought up were not something I was expecting.
First HiTop Films says he didn't hate it and now Channel Pup says he liked it (2 reviewers I respect)... Maybe I *will* actually give the film a chance.
I don't know if I've ever watched a film that's more "you need to watch it for yourself to make an opinion" than this one.
I walked in expecting an absolute trainwreck and came out confused because I thought, at worst, the film was kinda slow and a bit boring. But it's nowhere near as bad as they say. I just don't get the ratings...
Go watch it and for your own opinion
@tbx12frnku22 I mean, that's kind of what happens when you have different expectations. The fan crowd came in expecting the first joker, were let down, and proceeded to call it a train wreck, which leads to lower expectations. Do you think your reaction would be different if you expected a masterpiece?
You should always expect the movie to be good. Not always be better than what came before it because sometimes original is better
@@heyitsgabe1093 To be honest I don't know if I really had any real expectations. I just knew people were hating on it and that made me curious to watch it. The reason why I say I "expected a train wreck is because, most of the time, I can agree with the general public and critic scores of a film. But turns out I didn't here.
Honestly after his Deadpool and Wolverine video I kind of lost all respect for Hitop, but I do respect Pup so there’s that
This movie does a good job at provoking a laugh but then making you feel bad about it. I audibly laughed at “I HOPE YOU GET CANCER.”
I disagree with the harley point. Her being a physiatrist works perfectly Imo. Cause based off the normal origin for Harley it would make more sense for her to be the manipulator. Joker, a mentally ill patient in a vulnerable position, is more likely to be manipulated by his physiatrist then the other way round due to the inherent power inbalances. Joker 2 keeps the physiatrist part of harley cause Arthur is vulnerable and fragile and susceptible to someone who understands what's going on in his mind and using that understanding maliciously. On her being rich it just goes to the point of harley trying to live out her own fantasy. She doesn't lie solely to get Joker to like her. She wants to fully embrace the Joker and in doing so she lies about her upbringing to better live that fantasy. The reveal isn't just to show that she lied but how completly different there lives are. Arthur thought he'd found someone who he could relate to, so them having similar childhoods was important. When we find out that harley lying whatever connected them kinda severed as well, hence the whole kid thing.
I agree, without Lee present Fleck might actually have had a chance at living. When she shows up and notices during the movie-date he is not even an ounce as deadly as herself, she takes that as her cue to make things happen the way she wants them to. Even her going into his isolation cell and (imo) assaulting him when she KNOWS she's lying about having to leave because "he's a bad influence on her" is a huge sign that she wants to push him back into this dangerous persona. That's what she wants and she can manipulate him at every turn and make the people for him, like his lawyer, seem like the enemy.
Fleck tries to have a serious conversation with Lee through the visitor glass, she sings. He tries again on the steps, she sings. When he tries to sing just to her over the phone, she won't even pick up and just listens. She's integral to this sequel and her backstory really helps add to the delusions they both had.
I think Joker 2 is a film that people will come to understand in the years ahead. I really enjoyed it and saw what it was going for.
Like the Star Wars sequels!
Just like people attack me for saying I give the first Sonic movie a 7.5/10 and not a 6 or below because I don’t know humans bad so movie gets downvoted. I thought second movie was great. 8/10. I like the wedding scene. I watch the movie twice before I learned people have a big issue towards the wedding scene and I thought it was fine. People really hate humans. I bet those people never saw live action transformers movies before bumblebee, at least 70% of humans were so suffering in those movies. First movie was really good and humans were fine in that movie.
To add on to my thoughts. Joker 1 was heavily inspired by King of Comedy, a film that was hated when it came out. By the time Joker 1 came out, that film's message had become more accepted, and Todd Phillips was able to reap the benefits. Now the sequel is his turn for a socially provocative story.
@@SonGOKU-DA1MA Only the Last Jedi.
The only people who hated the sequel was the people who lionized and justified everything he did in the first movie.
They turned him into their under dog and lived through him and with the sequel their fantasy was destroyed
I loved it too ..... and don't care who knows it
I watched the film before looking online for any reviews, and I ADORED it. I loved the cinematography, the performances and I’ve listened to the soundtrack on repeat since I saw it.
My very favourite thing was the very controversial message behind it, about not idolising figureheads like the Joker and instead understanding them as human beings, and I thought the ending was a very clever twist.
Then I went online to see others praise this great movie and just found hate. Upsetting!
Actually, I'd argue that the "real" Joker could still have a Harley Quinn. As you pointed out, this Harley is still a psychiatrist. Perhaps she eventually gets a job as a doctor at Arkham meets the man who's taken up the Joker mantle and falls for him.
I can easily see this film gaining a cult following over time. I enjoyed it. Not every second of it, but the fair majority of it. No one is talking about that opening sequence. I was captivated from the second it started. Most people, overall, agree it's well-made, artistically unique at the very least, and I'm sure when people decide to watch it at home, some positive reception might pop up here and there. It's a mess, but so is the Joker.
Go into all movies expecting nothing and you’ll enjoy it way more.
Go into the movie without a brain and you’ll enjoy it
❗
Sounds likes something a mentally challenged person would do.
Really enjoyed the first one, watched the second one without any insight about it at and had no idea it had musical numbers in it.
I thought it was brilliant, I thoroughly enjoyed it.
I am not a fan of comic book movies and characters but I thoroughly enjoyed both of these Joker movies. I would say that it's actually one of my favorite movies this year.
Thank God for this video. I'm sick of the overt narrative.
I wanted to drop this info for people who can more readily accept it.
Phillips pitched DC Black to DC and was shot down. It would've been him making origin movies for each of Gothams villains setting the stage for Batman.
They shoot down the idea but give him a minimal budget for one film- Joker.
Fast forward after Snyderverse fails and they allow Reeves to start his own verse they beg Phillips to take creative control.
All that considered I'd say Foil Le Deux makes a lot of sense. He let his character rest and it still stayed true to all the themes presented in the first film.
Fandoms have overdosed on fan service, so anything that doesn’t fall exactly in line with their preconceived expectations gets shouted down.
16:09 Personally, I interpreted the scene as this:
For a while, the Joker persona has done nothing but "good" for Arthur. It's an escape, something that makes him feel "free," and another thing that makes people actually pay attention to him. But that scene happens, and it taints that fantasy. It shatters the idea that the persona is something he can hide behind, the scene was a direct consequence of him trying to play this character again.
The scene was of course heartbreaking and hard to watch but, in a way, I'm glad that they didn't pull their punches with it. It's something that happens and it's horrible, and it's portrayed as such.
Agree I don't think it was out of place at all. The guards are kind of a stand in for society/institutions and the movie does a good job of continuing the theme of society abusing its power over its victims, with Arthur being right in the middle of that.
an aspect that always came to me while watching the movie, is that whenever it breaks into a musical, is that it happens when "a character goes into delusion state.
The way i came to such case, is thinking on "how would this feel without the background music"
Many times when Arthur goes into singing, it feels too convenient that background music is playing, making the scene of him singing like a proper musical.
But what if instead, the music we witness is all in Arthur's head. We are experiencing it as how Arthur would experience it, with the grandiose orchestra behind him. (He did say the he really liked Murray's music band, maybe that aspect really stuck with him after the incident). But that is it, the music is in his head, and perhaps the reactions too. While in the perspective of someone else, you see this guy just springing into singing at acapella.
The same scenes with Arthur singing acapella without the music, makes him look properly insane.
Same deal with Harley. Her manipulative ways towards Arthur fuels his delusions further, because she wants to see Arthur's delusional shadow, The Joker. And whenever Arthur falls for her manipulations, the music starts playing.
Imagine that moment when Harley and Arthur have that 5 minute visit. Harley's obvious manipulations towards Arthur breaks into a musical right there. It's Arthur falling into delusion again, while an also mentally ill Harley starts singing acapella by herself, on the visit booth.
Or when in trial, he finally breaks after hearing about her mother's testimony of him, he goes fully delusional and just imagines a whole musical scene where he kills several people on the trial while singing. And then afterwards, he lashes out and fires his own lawyer. Empowered by the previous musical delusion.
The strength of how the musical aspect goes, the more "Musical" is like, it's when Arthur is at his most stressed. He shields himself into falling into these "Musicals" and imaginary situations to escape it. And it is heavily influenced by them after he snaps out of them.
An scene with music and without music can feel quite different when in comparison, and this duality made me understand the movie better.
like, i am sure that eventually there's gonna be an edit for Joker 2 that cuts out all the full on musicals that happens within his dreams, and also cuts out the music on the musicals where's he's halfway delucional but includes the people in the moment. Y'know, the ones where it isn't a full on broadway musical, and it is instead a portrayal of what is happening there.
Also, the aspect about Harley being born in a wealthy family and also being trained as a psychiatrist. Being born into a wealthy family doesn't translate into good mental health. Quite the contrary i might add. It is often to witness that people born into wealth do become quite mentally ill as well. But it's a different way the likes of Arthur developed, being born in poverty and violence, considering that his family was, to say it shortly, being out right fucked up to start with.
I feel the same way about the musical. I think it exists to figuratively brainwash listener , including Arthur himself.
the person who was in charge of the music group said that the music was about connecting with each other, when arthur finally had someone who connected with him, he started to have his musical delusions, and every time he has them it's when he is trying to connect with those that love him as the joker, which is why lee shoots him in the delusion when he found out that she might have been lying about loving him. and that delusion was put on hold when she convinced him that it didn't matter and she just wanted him to like her, which is also why it continues at the end, both arthur and his joker dies at the end, with nobody wanting him.
I liked it, something new for once. I didn't expect the shit at the end to happen,
not a predictable marvel movie
I watched Joker 2 tonight because I wanted to see how bad it was.
Surprisingly, it turned out to be a great movie, with a lot of cleverly hidden commentary. I especially loved the court scenes-true crime fans should definitely give it a shot.
For me, this is a horror movie.
It’s fascinating how anyone that likes this movie gets attacked and insulted. It shows just how soft the sheep really are. Herd mentality is an actual disease.
After hearing nothing but negative reviews I came to the conclusion that I would never watch Joker 2. I allowed myself to watch spoiler reviews and let the criticism fuel my second hand disappointment. Then the movie was released on HBO so I decided to watch. I didn't understand why the film was so hated. It seems like the people who hate the movie are represented within the movie itself, by characters such as Harley. They hate it for not being what they expected
Finally someone else who agrees. I really loved it as well. The hate feels so overblown
Lee Quin now represents alot of people that disliked this movie. They were never interested in Arthur Fleck, they wanted him to be the joker, they wanted the fantasy.
Hack Phillips should have called it Arthur Fleck instead of Joker but he called it Joker even though he says Arthur was never joker he was a poser
Spot on!
People are saying that the "musical" parts are all over the place. When I actually went and watched the movie, out of the 6 songs that appear, 3 of them are just Harley singing to herself without any kind of back up. I swear 90% of people just want their opinions handed to them
I freaking loved this movie! It had the charm and mystery of the first one. And I love how music actually played a roll. And Joker asked why she sang. Like it was really good. The segment for “the clown is me” was SO, so so well made.
The music was thrown in at random, 40 mins of it.
I loved the first Joker and I liked the second. I don't really understand why everyone is so against it. I guess lots of people who liked the first (but didn't understand it) thought he'd be a full blown Joker in the second. Though it was always obvious Arthur was never going to be the real Joker. In the first one Arthur was largely alone and so his poor grip on reality led him further down the road to becoming the Joker but he did clearly see himself as the good guy killing bullies, not really becoming the Joker. With all the focus on what he did there are basically 2 types of people, those who love the idea of the Joker that Arthur isn't and those that hate what Arthur did and want him dead. He isn't able to keep going down his own road to madness and it all falls apart for him. The first one was better but the second was still good.
I thougth the reveal of Harley being a psychiatrist, specially in the way the lawyer revealed, was to say "she was manipulating you, and she knew exactly how to do that"
It’s a masterpiece! & I don’t think people are deep enough to truly appreciate it. Arthur fleck is Batman’s half brother & Batman’s dad ironically created the inevitable real joker( the man who kills Arthur fleck). Arthur never experienced love , not from his mom or anyone, that sadness that loneliness and utter despair is the entire point. Arthur is a good person a victim , someone we all had empathy for in part 1 and throughout. He bottled up his emotions and trauma tried to laugh it off as his mom would try and have him do calling “happy” , but those emotions never went away , it could go to suicide or outward aggression and in part 1 he chose outward aggression. Something he is eventually remorseful for in part 2 . The Folie a deux is French for two crazy people delusional together . He’s delusional believing harley truly loves him for who he is as Arthur Fleck, and she’s delusional for loving the joker side of him even tho that’s not really him because he’s a good guy deep down inside because his true self is not the “joker “ psychopath , and not even the real joker after all. The midget even said you were always good to me. It was Arthur’s redemption, to be honest and true self, but when he went searching for Harley the tragedy is she doesn’t love who he really is and Arthur ends up dying alone never experiencing love. Just when you feel good for him that he finally is being loved. Arthur doesn’t make the direct connection that maybe he could get fake love if he continues the fake self joker persona and is never presented that opportunity, maybe he would have kept being the joker just to please her if it meant he could be fake loved by Harley, maybe that would have caused him the anger he needed to turn into the real joker, we will never know. At the end of it that’s all Arthur ever wanted , love. When he sees Harley his make up is faded away as Arthur fleck this weak man who came out at closing statement emerges as his true vulnerable unattractive true self to Harley, that’s why she left him alone in the courtroom as she herself realizes in the end that it was all a fantasy & he isn’t the joker, she studied to be a psychiatrist and realizes what he really is and leaves him & turns him in to the cops. Arthur betrayed and symbolically shot by Harley in the stomach comes to fruition. In the end he is the origin story & inspiration of the real joker , the guy who kills him in the end and cuts smile on his face in the background, which is the perhaps the Keith ledger Joker character who battles Batman not Arthur fleck. We all are him angry at the film angry at Arthur not giving him love and stabbing him to death. Even some happy he dies for being this weak man nobody loves. The musical aspect of the film is fitting since no singing occurs until he falls in fake love with lady Gaga, he never sings in his delusions prior to this, and he even sings in his real life in fitting and funny moments to his cell inmates. Singing is his delusional state feeling the perceived notion of love that he truly never receives and I don’t mind the music since he’s crazy singing to himself most of the time. We are the audience that hates him for not being funny , the point of this film is not to like him for being weak and vulnerable, that’s why you don’t like it, Arthur fleck still not being loved. The film is deeper then we think and horrible if you come in to it with pre conceived notions of what you thought it should be. In due time I hope people appreciate the beauty of the film and don’t look at it through a superficial lens.
This movie is genuinely better than the first in a few ways and of equal quality to the first in all others to me. And where I felt the need to shorthand the first movie as 8/10 worth watching, I want to actually talk about everything with the sequel. I fucking loved so much about it
This movie is getting hate for the joker not doing more stabby stabs and people feeling like after the first movie, his joker persona was 'complete" and we would get to see like a joker causing mayhem and setting up crazy plans. Than again people complain about movies being un crerative and sequels being uneccesary. i think if the sequel that would have done the latter than it would have been uneccessary becuase we already have that joker and that story. at least this sequel dared to spin something new in the narrative. The idea that arthur stopped being joker as much in the prison made sense ( loss of power, loss of control, loss of autonamy, the drug stiffling his brain)--and lee being his bridge into madness was great. joker is the identity he created and the one where he felt like people finally respected him, loved him. So she forced him to be the joker again to feel that love he never did, and when he realized that he isnt the joker (after understanding, he never had any power) she stopped loving him. he was right, no one ever did nor ever will love arthur, excpet the two people who he disregarded. puddles and his attorney ( maybe not love) but the only people who seemed to like arthur for himself. I think people just like to follow trends because this movie is not bad at all..its not perfect but i think the hate is unfounded mostly. hope this video gets more views to at least combat the overwhelming videos calling it horrible lol
"his joker persona was 'complete" and we would get to see like a joker causing mayhem and setting up crazy plans."
I don't think Phoenix can play that Joker persona either. He is no Ledger.
@@chamindujanith6337 well yeah? this version of joker is almost completely different with another origin story
if everything was the same it would be boring
@@kiwiana444 Maybe he can appear as a villain in a batman movie set between Joker 1 and Joker 2.
I fall into the category of those who got to see Joker II later than most. That said, I went in with low expectations but I wanted to see for myself what the fuss is all about.
Spoiler alert, the knee going in that Arthur would die in the end. With that out the way I was able to follow the story with that in mind. I have no doubt that was able me to enjoy the movie in a way that others missed.
Joker is a product of society, when Arthur realizes that he has something to live for he wants to give up on the facades. He is quickly brushed aside (murdered) in order to not tarnish Joker’s reputation. A sad reflection on society.
For me this could lay a foundation for the Rise of Joker, the handing over of the baton is when the young man who stabs Arthur says, “... you get what you deserve...”
If 2019 Joker and Joker II existed outside the DC Universe I believe it may have been better received. Could it be that some of the fan boys were looking for more Batman links, but it works well as a musical drama.
This could be groundbreaking, time will tell. I hope Todd Philips gets to share his vision by being given a chance to make the final installment, it could also introduce the Rise of Batman. No ?
I never thought the guy in the end was 'the real Joker' or ever would be, I thought it moreso symbolized that the idea of the Joker is out there now and the Joker will always exist because someone will always take on the concept
I get the idea that you feel like that makes 'The Joker' feel like a copycat but personally I think there's no 'The Joker' in this world nor will there ever be, some will claim to be that and some will do heinous things in the name of Joker but he's not a character, he is a symbol
There is no "Real Joker". The idea is that the joker is an idea, anyone can be "Joker".
I just watched Joker Folie a Deux and i'd largly agree with your sentiment of it. It's a story about the dual nature of Arthur Fleck, which is encapsulated early in the animated skit during the start of the movie. I enjoyed that it's diffrent, it brings diffrent emotions than any movie i've seen in a long time, and i applaud the balls of directors for making this story more meaningful and thoughtful than an idiotic corpse-counter super-villain movie that the world has seen hundreds of times.
you earned a sub as literally the only person with a positive review that i could find
I saw the movie as a commentary on fandom, celebrity culture, corporations’ greed in making a sequel no one wanted, mental illness, and I could be wrong but I saw both Joker films as a tribute to Heath Ledger.
Give it time and people will realize how good this film really is.
Hopefully not
They won’t. Most of the people who hate it haven’t even done the bare minimum of pirating it to form their own opinion. They are just lost in the sauce.
I’m not defending the movie so much as criticising the herd mentality of modern-day social media.
@@Kwazy-mojo or- hey, hear me out, I know it’s gonna sound crazy but maybe, maybe we just collectively agreed the movie is just *bad*
The problem with some of you apolagist is that you think these aspects make it a masterpiece. Literally none of these aspects enhance the film. Infact they all do the opposite especially when you factor in the other failures of this movie.
@@Kwazy-mojo it’s f’n crazy. Tbh, it proves the point Todd Phillips was trying to make. It went over everybody like a flock of birds.
i disagree with your take on the ending. It was very obvious that Arthur was never gonna be the actual joker. Also I don't see it as there being a real joker. I see it as anyone can end up like arthur. From the first movie it was very obvious the Joker wasn't a person it was a movement. Once that Joker persona came out of Arthur, then people walked away from him. I find the ending to be perfect.
Lee was still a psychiatrist because she was actually very sane and willingly being evil and manipulating Arthur to be Joker for her fantasy. It’s to show us that even “Good people” can actually really for no reason or sob story just be evil. While Arthur a “bad person” is really a good person and was willing to die as that good person.
I can relate to having unpopular options. You can’t help what you like and dislike and neither can others. There’s nothing wrong with having different opinions, but it can be very hard to have a different view than seemingly everyone else. But people who cry about you liking something they don’t have no reason to do that.
It’s not hard I don’t care if I’m only person in world to like such a thing it doesn’t make my feelings for it invalid and don’t let anyone to tell me otherwise.
Musicals are a great vehicle for mental health stories where grandiosity or delusion/surrealness are present, CW's "Crazy Ex-Girlfriend" did that expertly. People thought this movie was boring, I thought it was ponderous and more philosophical. I found the message of the first movie reductive and kind of cringy/trite. Overall Joker 2 does generate the feeling of discomfort we get when the media and the court system try to pull apart and identify what creates and motivates a murderer. We never get full catharsis or satisfactory explanations. A movie like this should create some discomfort and admit there are no easy answers to these complex questions. Having been through serious mental health problems including hospitalization, I liked this movie better than the first for daring to interrogate where illness ends and personal responsibility begins.
‼️‼️
I just didn't like most of it. Direction of photography, cinematography, script, plot, soundtrack, the lyrical performances (and not because "DC musical yack", I'm actually a huge fan of musical theater). And I understand its attempts at messaging, I just think the delivery, nuance and sincerity fall flat. All-around I just found it aggressively below average.
Completely fair!
Ur 100 percent right and a horrible ending
And joker 1 sucks😂😂😂😂
Hey Pup, i beg your pardon, but the endong isn't about teasing the real Joker going on to meet Barman in the future. It about the idea that they fantics put on Arthur still lives, he never had any power nor does Arther have Authority on it, so when he tries to destroy it, one possessed by it destroyed him. There is no need to be expecting Batman, rather dread that the idea of Joker cant end with Arthur, rather it lives on.
It sort of feels like the people who didn’t like this movie didn’t like it because they never really cared about Arthur Fleck
I liked arthur in the first one, i hated how he basically was a husk and he had people lead him from place to place, he never made decisions on his own. it was so bland and not needed.
If it was called “Arthur” it would’ve been received much better
Glad I’m not the only one who liked it
20:20 On the Harley Quinn Psychologist/Psychiatrist thing, it's important to keep in mind that psychologists and psychiatrists are two different career paths that are often confused for each other. Psychologists go to college/university and get some type of psychology degree, and then often go on to get a master's degree or some special training. Psychiatrists go to college/university, get some type of science degree, and then go to medical school to learn medicine for 4 years, and then spend like 7-8 years training to become a psychiatrist. (At least this is how it works in the United States.) Both psychologists and psychiatrists work together to provide mental health care, but because it's so difficult to become a psychiatrist there's way more psychologists in practice.
I hate how in Batman Universes it's never consistent, and I think it confuses people. In some universes she's a psychologist and in some she's a psychiatrist. In this movie though, she's a psychiatry student, which means she's in medical school, or in the later half of her training.
Thank you!!! Finally people who like this movie i absolutely loved it so this is refreshing
The court room aspect had tension with a lot of them which was good but just went to the next scene having no climax. As well flashback movements you wouldn’t get that in like other court room movies
The guy at the end is not there to tell you "I'm the real joker", they're not setting up a "real" joker, quite the opposite, that character is there to make clear that the Joker is not any one person in this story.
I loved it they actually had realistic characters for me at least because I have a few severe mental illnesses and alot of them amount to me believing the world is against me and I have a history of violence and being institutionalized when he turned from the joker back to Arthur I almost cried when everyone left
I also have the ability to be incredibly charismatic but when I'm like that it does feel like playing a character like I am on stage
I didn’t want to see this movie, but you’re making a pretty strong case on liking it so thanks
I entered this movie thinking it was bad... bro. The cinematography was amazing, the acting was phenomenal, the pacing and story weren't the best (the ending left a lot to be desired) but even the musical scenes weren't that bad or even as excessive as people made it out to be! My favorite scene in the whole movie was literally a musical number, it gave me goosebumps! Heck, the writing is better and more compelling than dozens of movies I've seen, people wanna compare it to the literal masterpiece of Joker 1 that outperforms almost any movie ever made. The level of vitriol is honestly unfair. I would give it a 7.5 out of 10, and not for the musicals at all, but the.. meh ending.
I agree 💯
I watched it 2 days ago and loved it. Beautiful slow-paced psychological drama. I liked it better then the first one. In this movie half of it is his fantasies and dreams inside his head, which helps understand his psyche more. Harley Quinn was well adapted to this universe as well. In the end, was the Young inmate Jack Oswald White? But overall I enjoyed it. Btw: Harvey Dent. Can we trust him?
My theory is that some of the musical scenes in Joker Folie à Deux are not Arthur's, but in fact Harley's fantasies. Think about it, scene with a gun, she is a star on a stage (because she with him), she is in total control of some of the musical scenes and Arthur is just submissively dancing with her and she do all the talking. This is actually happening in Harley's head, coz she is also insane (Folie à Deux).
She is fantasizing of killing him on stage as he did with Murray, because she is imitating him, "consuming" (dementor kiss smoking scene) his persona and fame.
And did you notice that unreliable narrator in Folie à Deux is more subtle, but still present. How Harley slips through the guards in some scenes?
I think Harley being this privileged person kinda made her much more of a villain. She manipulated Arthur and she has much more awareness of her own evil. Shes a stand in for us, the audience, the ones who sway the world to entertain.
Honestly I love that you can see things in these movies that are often written off. As long as you see value in it that’s all that matters in the end of the day
I actually don't mind the new joker killing Arthur.
def the best possible out come for the worst possible joker. at least we have the penguin now.
@@nullakjg767he's not the worst and never will be, Jared Leto cults go away
I really loved this movie and I thought their was good Joker moments that felt like the character jumped off a comic book page and landed in a movie but I don’t really understand why people are hating it as much as they are when even if i didn’t like this film I would have still said it was ok
I watched it yesterday and I liked it! I don’t really get all the hate
Could you consider a Kevin Conroy tribute? Nov 10th marks 2nd anniversary of his death. I got a voice acting background and his voice was an inspiration for me since Batman the Animated Series. I made a tribute to him using the classic BtAS toys with footage from Arkham and Injustice but I don't got ur reach, and he deserves much bigger tribute.
While I haven't done a devoted tribute video, I have paid tribute to Kevin Conroy a few times in other videos pertaining to his Batman. I don't think I have much to say that hasn't already been said by the countless fans he meant the world to. That being said, I'd love to do a video documenting every version of Batman he's played and cap it off with a nice tribute. So perhaps that's something for the pipeline!
But also don't let this stop you from making your own tribute. Your words matter, no matter what number of people head them.
@@ChannelPup Thnx so much for the reply and the kind words.
i saw it last Monday night and loved the movie so much and been listening to the soundtrack and reviews all week and it's been so surreal as a fan of the story and music
If you like it so what what the others say about the movie
Same i thought it was awsome how they went for something different and unique with the music.( dark musical)
i Agree it is a amazing movie about real trauma , trauma bond and what abuse and bullying leads to
That’s why don’t count on others to tell ya to watch it when you can watch it yourself and give your own thoughts. Most movies receiving under 5/10 over on IMDb is usually bad. Sequels to the original with scores under 5/10 are sometimes because people don’t like the direction such as joker 2 movie. Nothing more beyond taht
I watched the movie today. I loved it. I am curious as to why the movie was disliked by so many people.
This movie showed us that everyone who obsessed over the first and praised it were no better than the very people who helped in turning Arthur into the Joker. They don’t wanna see a man try they wanna see fail and fall further
Saw it yesterday and I truly loved it! Will watch again once it hits streaming services. 8.5 / 10 for me
I loved it, and I don’t understand all the hate this movie is getting.. I’m not a fan of musicals at all but this felt like all the music numbers fit into the story they were trying to tell. I’d go see this again. Thanks for the review 🙏
There's nothing to be sorry for Pup. We can't always have good opinions. /j
No ones opinion on what they like is objective.
I actually liked it a fair bit as well- even as a MASSIVE fan of the original. The original is my favorite movie ever and even I wasn’t that upset. I suppose some of the ideas that the Gotham TV series setup (which I loved) already had me prepared for this kind of story in some ways.
Perhaps I wouldn’t like the original so much if I had seen the movies that everyone claims it’s derivative of, but I absolutely loved it and still do. Nothing was really tarnished by the sequel for me, even though I’d still much rather just keep the original as its own story.
"Joker" got me interested in "King of Comedy". It's such a great film, do yourself a favor and make sure to check it out. Interestingly it has also quite some aspects in common with "Follie a Deux".
I agree with a lot that was said here. I have a theory for the title I think it was called it because it’s mean madness being transferred from one person to another in French. At the end of the movie you see that joker “madness” transferred into the prisoner who just killed him and the cycle begins again showing there’s no real cure to fix the system that created him.
My wife and i just got home from seeing it and we absolutely loved it! We really liked the first one but this movie is inna league of it's own. We both cried at parts and laughed out loud at some parts as well. I honestly can't understand how or why this movie is getting so much hate. Joaquin's performance is amazing and Gaga is very good. Don't let anyone tell you how to feel about a piece of media now in days. I don't was going to write this movie off after hearing all the bad reviews and my wife said "maybe we'll like it" and she was 100% right.
I liked it too. It was actually a great film. The cinematography, editing, acting were stellar. I’m not sure what people are seeing to say this is bad.
This movie isn’t very good, but it has so many interesting artistic ideas that I can’t help but admire it. I’d much rather see a movie that takes a big swing over safe lukewarm slop any day of the week
Well Well Well looks like we got a reverse Knuckles (2024) huh
Why does it have to be like this? I can never tell. 🎵
@@bandicootsauce4569 Ah it's alright. I think PlaystationFreak719 is chill. I appreciate you!