If you’re new here, check out some of my other videos! 😍🎬✨ - Only Baz Luhrmann Could Make An ELVIS Biopic ✨CINEMA✨ (Video Essay - Starring Austin Butler) th-cam.com/video/Q_j8M4tok98/w-d-xo.html - Glen Powell + Sydney Sweeney ANYONE BUT YOU Interview on Rom Coms and Shakespeare! (+ Will Gluck!) th-cam.com/video/MjXMatL4M74/w-d-xo.html - Glen Powell & Sydney Sweeney's "ANYONE BUT YOU" and the Modern Literary Adaptation (Video Essay) th-cam.com/video/L-9HYwLKBKw/w-d-xo.html - Anyone But You (Starring Glen Powell & Sydney Sweeney): The Perfect Rom Com for Shakespeare Girlies th-cam.com/video/fMh1AlREMO4/w-d-xo.html - Anyone But You, Natasha Bedingfield, and the Art of the Rom Com Musical Needle Drop 🥰💋🎶🎞✨ th-cam.com/video/NinueP59Big/w-d-xo.html - What Bridgerton Should Have Learned from Brandy & Paolo Montalban’s CINDERELLA th-cam.com/video/twHP0Lt-Djg/w-d-xo.html - Karen Fukuhara Interview on The Boys Season 4, Kimiko Speaking, Kimchie Romance, Season 5 Finale th-cam.com/video/EsFvRcsv8u0/w-d-xo.html - Kate and Anthony’s Library Scene: Why Bridgerton Fans Are Still Upset th-cam.com/video/x2QyZ9qH8h0/w-d-xo.html - Benedict Bridgerton’s An Offer from a Gentleman made me love ASIAN Sophie Baek! (Season 4 Review) th-cam.com/video/DA3YJMqwtIA/w-d-xo.html - Yerin Ha & Luke Thompson's Benophie Era is here! (+ Sophie's Family!) | Bridgerton Season 4 Review th-cam.com/video/Q328E2UfOe8/w-d-xo.html
Tom Phillips said in an article a couple of months ago, "this movie is not a musical." and made a pseudo-rant about how Joker 2 wouldn't be a campy and chessy musical like "In the Heights" in such a way that he thinks musicals is beneath this "deep and dark" film. So I am not a fan of Phillips.
LMAO, if he's not a fan of the genre, I would much rather he do the film the way he did because it's better suited to what he's interested in. Once I got over the fact that they weren't going to utilise Gaga's capabilities for a bunch of elaborate musical numbers, I could take the film for what it is. 😂
@@LadyJenevia Agreed. I would rather have a film that plays into his strengths, but it just rubs me the wrong way that he wrote off musicals as unserious and lesser than his pseudo-supervillan films that took lots of inspirations from some other films. it just puts a sour taste in my mouth of a pretentious director who wants to taken seriously as a visionary, but I am still going to watch the film because I'm curious about the story and I know that a lot of other people contributed to this movie as a film student myself.
No, it's just musicals are completely different from this, and yes musicals are cheesy and cringy often. But in this movie the musical aspect is all in his head and that makes these musical bits depressing instead of what musicals usually aim for
@@LadyJenevia I will say, he later admitted it was and that he likes musicals but didn’t want to mislead people that the film would be uplifting or something. He also said he loved In The Heights.
The point of the movie is to show the lack of empathy on both sides, both the system and the anarchists, the anarchists don't care about Arthur as a person, they just see him as a mean to an end, a vessel to fulfill their fantasy, as he can no longer fulfill his role as he realizes his actions weren't really the best, they cast him out, if he's dying, they would walk right over him just like the rich people would. It's poetic how the real fans treat him the exact same way the anarchists in the movie do.
I really don’t get all the people who leave bad reviews or walk out of the theater on the basis of “it’s a prissy musical and not the edgy power fantasy from the first movie”. It was already well established that Arthur tried to cultivate a sense of theatrics in himself, he’s a performer at heart. And as tragically as that ended up I thought that was what was so empowering to so many in the first movie: that no matter how far down the pit of despair he gets pushed, no matter how many out-of-thier-depth service workers tell him it’s in bad taste he’ll keep singing and laughing because he feels there is no real way out of that pit and you might as well have some fun
Art doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The audience brings themselves into any encounter with any type of art. If people want their movies and movie reviews to have less connections to real world trauma, then they are going to have to fix the world.
yes, but also consider the fact, that its not without precedent, that filmmakers, writers etc have spoken out against the interpretation of their respective movies, take fight club, for instance, from which many young men took a similar message and arguably missed the same point- or more recently, breaking bad- phillips just went one, or rather several steps, step further, because not only did he attach an original IP to it, but during folie a deux, theres several moments, that lead the audience on a bit.... i saw people walk out, during different points in the movie and though i think, it was mostly due to them, having had enough of the singing portions, it was clear to me, that many thought, until arthurs confession in court, even up to the prison rape, that this will bring out joker/they will get what they fucking deserve....and as a fan myself, i can understand why some might feel righteously pissed, it didnt happen, but also, because they probably dont want to admit, they were invested, up to a point, in the now so popular narrative of critics, that it hates its fans....its made really clear, that this regards only a certain sub-set of the first jokers fan base and it mostly gets addressed directly, after the court explosion....not a whole lot of time is devoted, to showing how unhinged some of his followers are, so i dont buy into the movie existing purely out of spite, i think phillips may have actually trusted his audience too much, because he gives several chances for an out, only to pull you back in- the unfortunate thing about that is, that it really only works once, thankfully it worked for me, that first time and that i rewatched the movie today- i think some fans are taking it so personal, that they take too much of the narrative, at face value, theres a lot more going on here, underneath what some assume is the reality, within the movie....i can explain, for anyone who is interested, but for now, let me just say, that neither the argument that this movie exists only to spite people (it was joaquins first oscar win and his first sequel and he wouldnt have done it, if he hadnt known about the risk), as a cynical cash grab, its simply too big of an outlier and the claim, that the character of arthur ends, exactly where he started, really makes me question if we watched the same movie
@@jenniferreinhart7670 I thought movies were for escapism, real life has enough problems, most people go into movies to escape for that for awhile, to take a break from real life. That's how I see it anyway.
I was pumped for Joker 2 because they could've done a Natural Born Killers thing with Joker and Harley but Todd and Phoenix wanted to get all pretentious on us and here we are.
@@lukaszzylik4437 it was definitely a lightning in a bottle kind of situation. It was vague and ambiguous enough for people to project what they wanted in it. The beautiful cinematography and music added to the enjoyment and emotion. I don't think Phillips is as good as many gave him credit for.
I wanted this movie to consolidate Joker was the power Arthur never had. Him taking more and more control of this persona until it was all that he had. Instead, we see him after 2 years in prison, broken and disconnected again, exactly like the beginning of the first movie. I wanted him to be less kind to Lee, I wanted Lee to be more enamored and less controlling and commanding, so we could really delve into how he is still toxic to the people around him, even if he feels better about himself, even if he has someone who actually loves him. I liked the use of music numbers to represent their joint insanity, I like how not every number was in perfect pitch, I loved the visuals but... It's Folie À DEUX. It's supposed to be evenly split, and yet we barely see Lady Gaga to understand her motivations; it really felt like she was just doing things for the sake of the plot. We barely saw her outside Joker's POV.
There is a saying "Art imitates life" and sometimes you hear "Life imitates art". I think both are true and there is something to be said about how art has a ways of examining parts of life we often don't want to talk about. More about the movie itself, I think I would have been more excited for a musical Joker if it wasn't a sequel to a non musical. I had a feeling that the music could be good, but it wasn't going to be the highlight when it's only ever meant to be a vehicle for a story. Musicals are meant to BE the story, not enhance it. It's suppose to embody it and leave you feeling like the music gave you something a simple story couldn't. Shame. I would like to see a true musical about the themes in Joker or about comic book characters.
Given how hard the corporations are pushing out superhero IP films/series it wouldn’t surprise me if a full musical superhero project (a film seems more doable than a series) gets released. 😆🤷🏻♀️
I agree the songs should be original, but I can picture (with some thought) it having jukebox songs in there. It is not the first time someone did a dark and gritty musical. Think Sweeny Todd. While more whimsical, Into the woods is still pretty dark. Joker being a musical that explores the characters’ delusions as well as some of the social aspects in. And imagine an upbeat, yet subtly dark song of Joker embracing his persona just to be shot at the end and having the new “joker” finishing the verse and you are left with an ambiguous ending. I just hate that a team (maybe not the whole team) who hated musicals made this. While I am not interested in watching the films, I would still listen with curiosity at an original soundtrack that explores these themes.
Just got out of it, and my only hope is that-if they decide to do a sequel/spin-off film, it focuses on Harley/Harlee/Harleigh and she meets Poison Ivy, lol.
I felt the young inmate at the end was gonna turn into the Heath Ledgers Joker and maybe solve the issue I had with the movie, Harley seemed to have the upper hand in the relationship the whole time, Joker usually has the upper hand with Harley loving him and him not really caring about her.. So I could see them making a movie with Gaga as Harley and that inmate becoming the Joker, that would also work with them having Harvey Dent's face getting disfigured at the end of the trial. I liked the old movie clip basically telling the audience 'Hey anything can be in musical'
@@LauraSomeNumber My bestie and I saw this yesterday, and I completely agree with the aforementioned. I watched it with my husband first and tbf, I grew up watching movies like Jane Eyre, All About Eve, Hollywood Shuffle and Raisin in the Sun-while also watching movies from the MST3K-verse, (or Svengoolie-verse for my younger millennials and Gen Z). I have an affinity for constructive cinematic classics as I do camp. So with this movie, I treated it as a zero on the number line of integers, neither positively, nor negatively. But seeing it through another lens a second time; with someone who is an avid DC/Marvel fan, she was able to help me conceptualize the universe where Harley would have the upper hand over Joker, and thus reversing the narcissistic controlling hold that Joker usually has over Harley. And then the visuals building up to its Broadway style climax made it resonate and connect so much clearer for me. And YES, can we get a Harvey Dent spinoff from this??? 😃 I would love that. I didn’t see an Easter egg at the end though, so I don’t think they will unfortunately.
Unfortunately, people didn't realize, or want to realize that this movie is brilliant. Lee, is a villain which I didn't mind. Lee is us, if you think about it. We want Joker and when we don't get what we want we bash him for not playing the role we want him too. I think most of us at some point in our lives/life acted like Lee and all the joker sycophants. It's an excellent film yea... I still preferred the first. But I felt the second had even more depth of character. I hated the guards and I was hoping arthur or one of the other inmates would have killed one of the guards for revenge for all the abuse they took.. specially arthur, that made me mad, arthur was like a wimp and didn't care,but i get it, he was so far gone by time this film took place. Like with the rape scene I was hoping arthur, as joker would have snapped and killed Jackie.. I hated him. Did you all noticed arthur's next door inmate the fat short bloke with the glasses,he looked like penguin. You see him a few times. Anyway I liked joker 2, I know I'm part of a small percentage of stupid people who liked it but whatever...I don't care. Joaquin is my favourite actor and he was brilliant as always..Hildur's music was sexy, she's brilliant, cinematography was breathtaking 👍🏻💯 I saw it twice and about to watch it on this streaming called "mannic" it free, good copy, I saw a piece of it. Dont understand what all the hate is for, it's not that bad...lol..smh.. bloody hell it's not the crow 22.😅 In the end it doesn't matter..you think Joaquin or Gaga care? Phoenix received$20 million, gaga $12 I think.. Todd another$20million.. they are laughing to the bank. Guess people just follow the opinion of what they're told to have. Good review mate cheers.🙏🏻💯🃏
i left the theater, feeling totally defeated, so i guess the movie did its job. im taking a shot of addressing the problems, ive had with it, since this feeling of utter defeat is heavily boosted, by the backlash, it received. to address it, ill dive into SPOILERS!!!!! this film was frustrating, its definitely flawed and the way the musical aspects are woven into the narrative, makes said narrative stops dead in its tracks, every time the musical fantasy becomes more elaborate- and by design, it will be jarring, theres a contrast, especially in the last act, that reinforces said effect. with all that out of the way, i will say, that this movie emotionally affected me, far more, than the first one ever did and i was on board, with that one, empathizing with arthur, every step of the way. this movie deconstructs most of the first film, in some very frustrating ways- my main issues were, as follows 1. if youre going the route of integrating musical elements and portraying it as an elaborate fantasy, i think its a missed opportunity, to write original music, for your characters, especially when your composer previously won an oscar. i got why they chose to go with old fashioned american songbook tunes and imo it works half of the time, but theres definitely some instances, of the song not furthering the narrative, or stopping it dead in its tracks. they couldve cut about 4 songs out of the movie and it wouldve benefited the flow. 2. while on the subject of cut material, its clear from the trailers alone, that portions of the film were cut, especially regarding lee- gaga does good, with what shes given, but i cant help but feel, that she was originally a more rounded character (a pun on her clearly having a baby bump, in one of the cut scenes), but that she got sidelined, because this is ultimately arthurs story and they didnt want to lose sight of that fact. 3. it being arthurs story is an exact mirror image of the first films narrative- where youre led to believe, that the first ends with arthur transforming into the joker, this film is about his letting go, of this construct, letting go of the fantasy. you can argue the point, since a good bit of the first one was only playing out in his head, that it should have been more of a struggle, for him, to let go, of his persona. 4. the way hes quite literally forced, to let go of the joker persona, is frankly tasteless. the heavily implied rape from the guards seemed like an overreaction, to what was merely an unspecified name drop, in the courtroom- what seems to break him, is that they kill his only friend and this, in combination with garys testimony, finally makes him realize, the kind of impact hes had. while i appreciated, that it showed arthur still had some empathy left, (despite the state psychiatrist claiming, one of his psychological issues, being a lack of such), it felt like a quick, brutal solution, that i feel couldve been achieved more organically, in court. 5. while on the court topic, i will say that harvey dent seemed like a caricature, of a smug lawyer- its yet another missed opportunity, to have dent be the one, to make the case against arthurs dual identity, when harvey dent traditionally has his own struggles, with said diagnosis, arguably to a much heavier degree. one can make the case, that after this case and him being minimally disfigured, by the bomb going off, said events may influence his stance, on duality, further down the road, also furthering the theme of arthurs influence, on people. as it stands, hes just this smug guy, who seems to think the courtroom is his audition, for a modelling gig. 6. addendum to the courtroom scenes- i realize, im probably very much in the minority, but i actually appreciated, that some of the events of the first movie were clarified. i never was a fan of the read, that the whole first movie might have been in his head, a theory, heavily argued for, by a majority, as being the joke, that arthur replies to, with you wouldnt get it. getting that isnt clever, it was always dumb, because it not only destroys any purpose for a narrative, it also goes against the idea, of empathizing with arthur, which was my big takeaway, of both movies. i will also say, that for the attentive viewer, theres quite a few examples, when it can be seen, that arthur is imagining things, which purposefully have been edited- one example of that, comes in the very beginning of the movie, during the bus scene, with the kid. when the camera pans back, after the argument with the kids mother, the kid isnt there anymore. i also never felt, that sophie and her kid surviving, was left ambigious, in the context of what weve come to know, about arthur. 7. last, but definitely not least, ill address the elephant in the room- the ending. it baffles me, how many people tried to tie this in, with heath ledgers joker, despite neither timelines, nor events, nor actors ages and appearances, line up with the nolan trilogy. while on the subject of the nolan trilogy, it had a pretty similar ending, to this one and i for one, found it way harder, to buy into the idea, of john robin blake taking up the bat-mantle, when comparing it, to the joker, as being this shadow, that will always be there, as an influence. it does make more sense to me, especially because the symbol of batman, is too specific to bruce, in my mind. while on the topic of bruce, i found it very interesting, that pretty much everyone from part 1, that survived, was brought back, except him. in retrospect, it does make the wayne family plot point of the first feel kind of tacked on, but i feel, it was done on purpose, to separate it further, from the source material. its not hard to understand, why many fans of comic book movies will feel, like theyre being pranked, but its a tragic prank, as written by arthur fleck. arthur fleck who? this point wouldve gone over better, if they didnt make harley closer to her source material, than expected, only to completely flip the dynamic, that joker and harley have, in said source material. everything gets turned on its head. so yes, its kind of a mess, on purpose and the decisions are often baffling, but for me at least, there was still genuine emotional investment and i knew, that this numbness, after leaving the theatre, was the point, not a clever, (like some have interpreted the ending of the first one), but a deeply emotionally resonant one. warts and all, this has genuinely touched me deeply, more than any film ive seen in the theatres, since the last one. arguing whats the point, is missing and proving said point- collectively we didnt care about arthur, we wanted to see joker. we wanted escapism and got something uncomfortably real and the contrast, in the fantastical musical numbers, made it land even heavier and ive felt anxious, every time the flick came to a grinding halt, when musical sequences faded to black and we got thrown back, into reality. as an audience weve been collectively taught, to expect certain things, from a franchise movie and this film, if nothing else, exists, to defy these expectations and i for one, cant help, but respect it, for that, while still understanding perfectly, why this wont go over well, for a lot of people. it has made me think and feel a lot, since i came out of the cinema- about the last 20 years and how these franchises have turned into the flogging of a dead horse, yet somehow, a flick like deadpool and wolverine taking up the mantle, of biggest R rated film off of joker, feels like a statement, about where we are, both artistically and collectively- easy sarcasm, cameos and even characters being reduced to memes- you contrast this with the honest sentiment, of an old timey song, sung slightly off key, but genuinely vulnerable, naked, stripped, like arthur was, of any pretense. and while i wont argue against todd phillips very own pretensions, the character of arthur fleck will stay with me and cast a shadow.
Heavily agree with point 4…I GET it, because assault like that (especially in prison) is more about power than anything, but having THAT be what essentially breaks Arthur was just blehhhhhhhhh…
@@toyosibee.mp3 well, its a culmination of things, as i read, but what really bothered me, was that and the killing of the prison sidekick was only down to arthur, ranting that the guards at arkham are fat, abuse and names were left unspecified- and then, they rape and kill a guy for that, because of ....the system and abuse of power being bad? way to drive the point home. yet, it emotionally still landed for me, because that kind of brutal power fantasy is what most people wanted, out of a joker sequel and the whole flick feels like a really messy breakup, including breaking up with some of the audience
Such an important comment here, just came out of the theatre feeling much the same way you did, then went to see online discussions only to find them filled with obnoxious comic purists who’s only takeaway from the film was that it was bad cause there wasn’t more “spooky clown man fights the police”
@@Sunny-oj8xj to be fair, i dig the source material, but underneath that and the theorizing about whats real, or not, this had a beating, bleeding heart and as a fan, i can understand, that a lot of people are righteously angry- personally, in the end, i was glad, this was primarily arthurs story and i couldnt tell you the last time, a theatre experience left me genuinely surprised and stunned, which is the magic trick, that even the first, which i really like, didnt pull off, for me, personally. on one hand, i do believe, that this film works best, for people, who have been through messy breakups, had their own struggles, with mental illness, or at least heavily empathize and that last point seems to be the most important, because while some of the backlash is arguably justified, i feel takes like this movie hates its audience (when it, in fact, probably asked too much of it), or that this was a cynical cash grab (which totally negates the other point)- all of that makes me feel, this is truly a movie the fans deserved- while the response to it is heartbreaking, i firmly believe, this will be re-evaluated, in time, when we hopefully, collectively have overcome the same kind of mentality, that is argued against, with both joker movies (you wouldnt believe the amount of reviews, that regularly throw out words like incel, loser, it being gay, as an insult- id rather stop there, its honestly disturbing stuff, at times)
@@Sunny-oj8xj if youre interested, i have been asked to defend my takes, to some people, who just wanted to start shit over the movie and i tried my best, to explain my reasoning and watched the movie again, to do so- some things are now clearer to me and for other scenes, ive come up with my own interpretation, which might clear up some of your own thoughts/interpretations, because i really dont think all of the scenes, that are portrayed as the real narrative, are to be taken, at face value- so here goes.... regarding the rape scene....after my second viewing of the film it felt even less ambigious, i think, that not only did this happen, it didnt just happen to arthur- pretty much near the beginning of the movie, theres an inmate called bullock (of all the names) who refuses, to come out of his cell and the guards carry him away, jackie telling them, to taking him to the other cell block, while the guy is kicking and screaming- after arthurs assault, the same guy yells out of his cell, arthur, what did they do to you, or something to that effect....i think its commonplace with the inmates, that step out of line- all of the above is mostly based on a feeling, but whats clear to me, is that the killing of arthur was indeed, without a doubt, an idea, by the guards, to get rid of him....jackie mockingly tips his hat to him, sings we three (me echo, my shadow and me), another one of the cops tells him not to sing that song (in a way to suggest, that its unnecessarily macabre)....after hearing the lyrics to build a mountain more clearly this time, i think the whole harley pregnancy, was always just meant, to foreshadow (pun intended) the arrival, of the inmate, taking over for arthur....the lyrics are Ah, what a fine young son to take my place and that part cuts back to new proto-joker (i think its the last, or second to last line, that arthur sings, while imagining harley shooting him)
also convinced that the narrative of the movie was either severely changed up, during the editing, or theres at least three harley scenes, two of them in close proximity to each other, that are in arthurs mind alone and not distinctly marked, as delusion....pretty sure, that despite phillips course correcting, by explaining, that certain scenes were real (which he also did, after the first movie) you cant take all of the surface story, at face value- one of the more obvious examples is harley telling him, shes pregnant and after the close to you sequence, hes dancing inside his cell, in a way, that this time around, suggested he might imagine the song in his head, due to the way, it cut immediately from the song, to the shot of arthur, dancing in dreamlike manner (and i think his delusion stars with the sex scene, hes thrown into solitary confinement, imagines them dancing on the rooftop, shes already there, when he wakes up, he makes it a point, to tell her, hes not taking his meds anymore, before they have sex and later on, in the courtroom, what causes him to snap and fire mary anne? the suggestion, during sophies testimony, that arthurs a virgin)- i also picked out, that at least half the time, if not more, the next song title, or a lyric, is suggested in the dialogue, by a person, that usually isnt arthur, or lee (an example would be mary anne, telling him she knows, what its like to love somebody, after telling arthur about lee and then him dreaming up the performance of to love somebody, during which arthur is shot)
I have not seen any review of this film that I have agreed with as much as I’ve agreed with yours. The narrative isn’t as bad as people are making it out to be, but I think with so much cut for the theatrical release the film’s overall story was lessened. Thanks for being the voice for us movie musical/Lady Gaga/real-world connection film fans out there ✨🩵 #releasethegagacut
I need to see the cutroom floor. 🤔Cuz ain't NO WAY this is the movie Lady F*King Gaga agreed to star in. But consider this my friends... They pulled this same sh*t with Margot in Suic*de squad, and we got Birds of Prey from it. 🤩😈 I give it a year and we will be receiving another stunning addition to the Harleen Lore Cinematic universe.
Warning- spoilers ahead. People wanted a more gritty realistic approach, they gave it to you. Most people like arthur die just like that because that's what happens in real life - it's messed up. But this can still be a Joker sequel if you analyze the ending. It also explains why "Joker" is way older than batman. Cuz Arthur is NOT the joker- he inspires someone to be a joker- and no surprise, it's an random guy with crazier reasons to k*ll. It makes sense cuz Joker is actually evil and demented. Not someone still with a heart and sympathy like Arthur. PS i understand not everyone is a fan of musicals- so I suggest those people just don't watch it. Simple as that.
Spoilers as well The "regression" of the character made sense to me too, i don't think it was such a bad idea as everyone is saying. Arthur was never going to be the Joker, he just embraced the persona since it got him what he needed: attention and validation from people that would have never noticed his existence. The heart and sympathy that you mention brought him "back" too, since it was the mention of his mother's lies and Gary's struggles (because of Arthur's actions) that cemented that he was Arthur, not Joker. Well, that and the abuse from the guards, which likely reminded him of how vulnerable he was, regardless of him embracing Joker. As a commentary piece on how badly people's influence can ruin someone's life, it kinda worked for me. That said... the execution WAS atrocious on the second half of the movie, which made me consider walking out of the theater because of how long it felt. The first hour went by pretty fast and got me invested, but it went downhill from there. Imho they went too far into the whole "let's break Arthur" thing, and they didn't use the music numbers properly, since they just interrupted the movie instead of enhancing it. Plus, the whole ending with "that's life" by gaga felt like a spit in the face to the fans of the first movie (like rubbing some kind of bad punchline on their face or something), so yeah... i can see why people are hating it to oblivion, even if on paper it isn't so bad.
Joker 2 was a good movie in my opinion, besides the ending. The ending was AWFUL. I don't think Arthur Fleck was ever meant to be THE Joker. I think Joker 1 was more of a character study on Arthur and his mental and physical struggles that led him into developing this alternate persona. The thing about Arthur, was he never killed innocent people. He always killed people that wronged him. THE Joker would kill anybody and everybody, just for shits and giggles. I don't think Folie a Deux was as good as the first one, but I see why they did what they did with it. I do think he had character growth. We sympathized with him throughout the first film, and we sympathized with him throughout the 2nd. He finally realized that he was the one that committed the crimes, and that "Joker" was all in his head. He wanted to be noticed. An ordinary man wearing trashy clothes with greasy hair isn't most likely going to be noticed. A guy wearing an original clown facepaint, with green hair dye, a vibrant dark pink suit, is bound to get noticed, especially if that said clown were to kill a couple people. When he killed the people on the subway and started to see the people on the news talking about a clown killer, that's when he realized that was his way to finally get noticed. Arthur wasn't right in the head. His mental trauma and his childhood really impacted his adult life. He was either going to live a depressing life in prison, get killed by someone, or kill himself. I think him coming to the realization and taking accountability for his own wrongdoings does show character development. That's what people don't realize about the first movie. The movie was never about THE Joker. It was about Arthur, and his desperate attempts to be noticed, so he became A Joker. That's why everyone laughed at him, and not with him.
Great video, as per usual! 😍I just love everything that Lady Gaga does because I am a huge fan of her. Even if this sequel had some flaws, her performance (and Joaquín Phoenix's as well, of course) would be enough. 🤩🥰 Lots of love from Rome💕
@@toyosibee.mp3 though i personally think, the guards just wanted him gone and arranged for it (or harley, if you chose to believe, she lived), that wouldve been a wholesome ending
@@fabianhammer2864 Yeah, I'm of two minds whether Harley died and whether the convo on the stairs was even with a real Harley and not just Arthur imagining....Either way!
@@toyosibee.mp3 if youre interested, i have been asked to defend my takes, to some people, who just wanted to start shit over the movie and i tried my best, to explain my reasoning and watched the movie again, to do so- some things are now clearer to me and for other scenes, ive come up with my own interpretation, which might clear up your own thoughts, regarding the last scene with harley. so here goes.... regarding the rape scene....after my second viewing of the film its even made less ambigious, that not only did this happen, it didnt just happen to arthur- pretty much near the beginning of the movie, theres an inmate called bullock (of all the names) who refuses, to come out of his cell and the guards carry him away, jackie telling them, to taking him to the other cell block, while the guy is kicking and screaming- after arthurs assault, the same guy yells out of his cell, arthur, what did they do to you, or something to that effect....i think its commonplace with the inmates, that step out of line- all of the above is mostly based on a feeling, but whats clear to me, is that the killing of arthur was indeed, without a doubt, an idea, by the guards, to get rid of him....jackie mockingly tips his hat to him, sings we three (me echo, my shadow and me), another one of the cops tells him not to sing that song (in a way to suggest, that its unnecessarily macabre)....after hearing the lyrics to build a mountain more clearly this time, i think the whole harley pregnancy, was always just meant, to foreshadow (pun intended) the arrival, of the inmate, taking over for arthur....the lyrics are Ah, what a fine young son to take my place and that part cuts back to new proto-joker (i think its the last, or second to last line, that arthur sings, while imagining harley shooting him) also convinced that the narrative of the movie was either severely changed up, during the editing, or theres at least three harley scenes, two of them in close proximity to each other, that are in arthurs mind alone and not distinctly marked, as delusion....pretty sure, that despite phillips course correcting, by explaining, that certain scenes were real (which he also did, after the first movie) you cant take all of the surface story, at face value- one of the more obvious examples is harley telling him, shes pregnant and after the close to you sequence, hes dancing inside his cell, in a way, that this time around, suggested he might imagine the song in his head, due to the way, it cut immediately from the song, to the shot of arthur, dancing in dreamlike manner (and i think his delusion stars with the sex scene, hes thrown into solitary confinement, imagines them dancing on the rooftop, shes already there, when he wakes up, he makes it a point, to tell her, hes not taking his meds anymore, before they have sex and later on, in the courtroom, what causes him to snap and fire mary anne? the suggestion, during sophies testimony, that arthurs a virgin)- i also picked out, that at least half the time, if not more, the next song title, or a lyric, is suggested in the dialogue, by a person, that usually isnt arthur, or lee (an example would be mary anne, telling him she knows, what its like to love somebody, after telling arthur about lee and then him dreaming up the performance of to love somebody, during which arthur is shot)
Awesome review, so glad to hear you enjoyed Folie A Deux more than most would you agree critics are being way too harsh on it? I'm so pumped to see it tomorrow Joaquin is my fav Joker and Lady Gaga looks electrifying as Harley Quinn!
Loved your review... I still want to watch this, regardless negative comments. When I watched first trailers of this movie I thought that joker's "fans" in the movie would find a way to get him out of prison and live a happy decadent life in anarchy😂free in the most dangerous areas in Gotham with support of criminals... but no, of course not, because this movie isn't part of the comics' thread
Glad to see other people liked it! I was one of many who weren't excited for the musical aspect but I still went in with an open mind and I actually thought it was pretty good. A nice balance of music and what the last one was like. It seems most fans missed the point of the movie ENTIRELY and not just the musical part.. I've seen many say they're disappointed we didn't see the characters fleshed out more or that they didn't go in the right direction with them when its clearly been made out to be a more psychological DC universe since how dark the last movie was.
People who hate musicals will still think this movie has too much singing in it, while people (like me) who love musicals will think this is blasphemously lacking. So I just don't understand who is supposed to enjoy this musical. I don't have any other main gripes with this film, honestly. Had it delivered on the musical part I might have liked it, but the singing that we did get was so bad that it made me actively dislike it.
@@irazorn3712 I think them singing off key makes sense though since no matter how hard they try to play along in their fantasy they are still broken, and mentally unstable.
LOL damn, the bad reviews for this movie from youtubers just keep rolling on out. I'm kinda glad to see it because if this movie was actually good I would've had to admit being wrong, because for over a year I thought this movie was gonna suck. Sure enough, it did.
This review was great! ❤ It's almost impossible to find a review that's at least trying to be as unbiased as much they can be, and it's refreshing to see that you managed so well in a sea of hate reviews from angry nerds or people with some kind of an agenda... I'm a nerdy guy that likes comic book stuff, but I also like movies for what they are and have respect for the artists vision, this movie was good (not amazing) and an interesting take on comic book villains, toxic relationships and other topics, yet most reviewers just cry about "character assassination" or other dumb stuff that this film was never interesting in depicting. Keep up the good work Jen ❤
And by the way, Deadpool and Wolverine wasn’t that good there wasn’t really a good villain, and it was nothing but cameos from pre-MCU marvel the only really good part of the movie is when Wolverine finally puts on the mask… I am not expecting any good superhero movie anymore… the fourth Spider-Man movie in the MCU is the only one I’m looking forward to and that’s it!
I didn't like the first Joker at all. It felt way too up its own ass with its themes. I was really hoping Joker 2 would be great. I was hoping for something more like Lars Von Triers "Dancer in the Dark"
It’s not just joker 2 it’s practically every superhero movie whether it’s from DC the MCU or Sony Marvel. We’re just getting shit movies one after another superhero movies became just like video game movies complete trash 🚮 and it doesn’t seem like it’s going to get better. I am not going to spend any more money going to the theaters and watching the garbage that they’re putting out… the only movie in the superhero genre that I might see is the next Spider-Man because that still has value
You're not alone. I liked it too. I feel as if Joker 1 and 2 are basically all one whole, just released in 2 parts. Kinda like Kill Bill 1 and 2. Two parts with very different styles but together tell the whole story.
@@GemR38 exactly I don’t know what people expected from part 2 he went to prison and court cause he killed and everyone fell in love with the alter ego aka joker from part 1 it was realistic once again lee fell in love with the joker not Arthur fleck and she broke up with him because she wanted this idea man women are actually like that in real life lol (not all) but you get my point they both sing to cope with life and to expression themselves and their experiences throughout the movie anyways the movie wasn’t bad people are never satisfied
![[ ออกกอง ] วัยหนุ่ม 2544 โลกหลังลูกกรง..ทัวร์กองถ่ายหนังใน "คุกของจริง" | JUSTดูIT.](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vB--aOkZCpw/mqdefault.jpg)
If you’re new here, check out some of my other videos! 😍🎬✨
- Only Baz Luhrmann Could Make An ELVIS Biopic ✨CINEMA✨ (Video Essay - Starring Austin Butler)
th-cam.com/video/Q_j8M4tok98/w-d-xo.html
- Glen Powell + Sydney Sweeney ANYONE BUT YOU Interview on Rom Coms and Shakespeare! (+ Will Gluck!)
th-cam.com/video/MjXMatL4M74/w-d-xo.html
- Glen Powell & Sydney Sweeney's "ANYONE BUT YOU" and the Modern Literary Adaptation (Video Essay)
th-cam.com/video/L-9HYwLKBKw/w-d-xo.html
- Anyone But You (Starring Glen Powell & Sydney Sweeney): The Perfect Rom Com for Shakespeare Girlies
th-cam.com/video/fMh1AlREMO4/w-d-xo.html
- Anyone But You, Natasha Bedingfield, and the Art of the Rom Com Musical Needle Drop 🥰💋🎶🎞✨
th-cam.com/video/NinueP59Big/w-d-xo.html
- What Bridgerton Should Have Learned from Brandy & Paolo Montalban’s CINDERELLA
th-cam.com/video/twHP0Lt-Djg/w-d-xo.html
- Karen Fukuhara Interview on The Boys Season 4, Kimiko Speaking, Kimchie Romance, Season 5 Finale
th-cam.com/video/EsFvRcsv8u0/w-d-xo.html
- Kate and Anthony’s Library Scene: Why Bridgerton Fans Are Still Upset
th-cam.com/video/x2QyZ9qH8h0/w-d-xo.html
- Benedict Bridgerton’s An Offer from a Gentleman made me love ASIAN Sophie Baek! (Season 4 Review)
th-cam.com/video/DA3YJMqwtIA/w-d-xo.html
- Yerin Ha & Luke Thompson's Benophie Era is here! (+ Sophie's Family!) | Bridgerton Season 4 Review
th-cam.com/video/Q328E2UfOe8/w-d-xo.html
@@LadyJenevia This sequel is for idiots.
Tom Phillips said in an article a couple of months ago, "this movie is not a musical." and made a pseudo-rant about how Joker 2 wouldn't be a campy and chessy musical like "In the Heights" in such a way that he thinks musicals is beneath this "deep and dark" film. So I am not a fan of Phillips.
LMAO, if he's not a fan of the genre, I would much rather he do the film the way he did because it's better suited to what he's interested in. Once I got over the fact that they weren't going to utilise Gaga's capabilities for a bunch of elaborate musical numbers, I could take the film for what it is. 😂
@@LadyJenevia Agreed. I would rather have a film that plays into his strengths, but it just rubs me the wrong way that he wrote off musicals as unserious and lesser than his pseudo-supervillan films that took lots of inspirations from some other films.
it just puts a sour taste in my mouth of a pretentious director who wants to taken seriously as a visionary, but I am still going to watch the film because I'm curious about the story and I know that a lot of other people contributed to this movie as a film student myself.
No, it's just musicals are completely different from this, and yes musicals are cheesy and cringy often. But in this movie the musical aspect is all in his head and that makes these musical bits depressing instead of what musicals usually aim for
@@LadyJenevia I will say, he later admitted it was and that he likes musicals but didn’t want to mislead people that the film would be uplifting or something. He also said he loved In The Heights.
Like hello have you seen Sweeney Todd?
The point of the movie is to show the lack of empathy on both sides, both the system and the anarchists, the anarchists don't care about Arthur as a person, they just see him as a mean to an end, a vessel to fulfill their fantasy, as he can no longer fulfill his role as he realizes his actions weren't really the best, they cast him out, if he's dying, they would walk right over him just like the rich people would. It's poetic how the real fans treat him the exact same way the anarchists in the movie do.
Well said
I really don’t get all the people who leave bad reviews or walk out of the theater on the basis of “it’s a prissy musical and not the edgy power fantasy from the first movie”. It was already well established that Arthur tried to cultivate a sense of theatrics in himself, he’s a performer at heart. And as tragically as that ended up I thought that was what was so empowering to so many in the first movie: that no matter how far down the pit of despair he gets pushed, no matter how many out-of-thier-depth service workers tell him it’s in bad taste he’ll keep singing and laughing because he feels there is no real way out of that pit and you might as well have some fun
Art doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The audience brings themselves into any encounter with any type of art. If people want their movies and movie reviews to have less connections to real world trauma, then they are going to have to fix the world.
100 percent!! 🔥
Deep
Impossible
yes, but also consider the fact, that its not without precedent, that filmmakers, writers etc have spoken out against the interpretation of their respective movies, take fight club, for instance, from which many young men took a similar message and arguably missed the same point- or more recently, breaking bad- phillips just went one, or rather several steps, step further, because not only did he attach an original IP to it, but during folie a deux, theres several moments, that lead the audience on a bit.... i saw people walk out, during different points in the movie and though i think, it was mostly due to them, having had enough of the singing portions, it was clear to me, that many thought, until arthurs confession in court, even up to the prison rape, that this will bring out joker/they will get what they fucking deserve....and as a fan myself, i can understand why some might feel righteously pissed, it didnt happen, but also, because they probably dont want to admit, they were invested, up to a point, in the now so popular narrative of critics, that it hates its fans....its made really clear, that this regards only a certain sub-set of the first jokers fan base and it mostly gets addressed directly, after the court explosion....not a whole lot of time is devoted, to showing how unhinged some of his followers are, so i dont buy into the movie existing purely out of spite, i think phillips may have actually trusted his audience too much, because he gives several chances for an out, only to pull you back in- the unfortunate thing about that is, that it really only works once, thankfully it worked for me, that first time and that i rewatched the movie today- i think some fans are taking it so personal, that they take too much of the narrative, at face value, theres a lot more going on here, underneath what some assume is the reality, within the movie....i can explain, for anyone who is interested, but for now, let me just say, that neither the argument that this movie exists only to spite people (it was joaquins first oscar win and his first sequel and he wouldnt have done it, if he hadnt known about the risk), as a cynical cash grab, its simply too big of an outlier and the claim, that the character of arthur ends, exactly where he started, really makes me question if we watched the same movie
@@jenniferreinhart7670 I thought movies were for escapism, real life has enough problems, most people go into movies to escape for that for awhile, to take a break from real life. That's how I see it anyway.
I was pumped for Joker 2 because they could've done a Natural Born Killers thing with Joker and Harley but Todd and Phoenix wanted to get all pretentious on us and here we are.
The first Joker was beyond pretentious.. and boring.
@@lukaszzylik4437 Stick with the MCU.
@@lukaszzylik4437 pretentious yes but it was far from boring
@@lukaszzylik4437 it was definitely a lightning in a bottle kind of situation. It was vague and ambiguous enough for people to project what they wanted in it. The beautiful cinematography and music added to the enjoyment and emotion.
I don't think Phillips is as good as many gave him credit for.
Definitely wanted to see him embrace being Joker like he did at the end of the first movie but they went backwards
I wanted this movie to consolidate Joker was the power Arthur never had. Him taking more and more control of this persona until it was all that he had. Instead, we see him after 2 years in prison, broken and disconnected again, exactly like the beginning of the first movie. I wanted him to be less kind to Lee, I wanted Lee to be more enamored and less controlling and commanding, so we could really delve into how he is still toxic to the people around him, even if he feels better about himself, even if he has someone who actually loves him. I liked the use of music numbers to represent their joint insanity, I like how not every number was in perfect pitch, I loved the visuals but... It's Folie À DEUX. It's supposed to be evenly split, and yet we barely see Lady Gaga to understand her motivations; it really felt like she was just doing things for the sake of the plot. We barely saw her outside Joker's POV.
There is a saying "Art imitates life" and sometimes you hear "Life imitates art". I think both are true and there is something to be said about how art has a ways of examining parts of life we often don't want to talk about. More about the movie itself, I think I would have been more excited for a musical Joker if it wasn't a sequel to a non musical. I had a feeling that the music could be good, but it wasn't going to be the highlight when it's only ever meant to be a vehicle for a story. Musicals are meant to BE the story, not enhance it. It's suppose to embody it and leave you feeling like the music gave you something a simple story couldn't. Shame. I would like to see a true musical about the themes in Joker or about comic book characters.
Given how hard the corporations are pushing out superhero IP films/series it wouldn’t surprise me if a full musical superhero project (a film seems more doable than a series) gets released. 😆🤷🏻♀️
I agree the songs should be original, but I can picture (with some thought) it having jukebox songs in there.
It is not the first time someone did a dark and gritty musical. Think Sweeny Todd.
While more whimsical, Into the woods is still pretty dark.
Joker being a musical that explores the characters’ delusions as well as some of the social aspects in. And imagine an upbeat, yet subtly dark song of Joker embracing his persona just to be shot at the end and having the new “joker” finishing the verse and you are left with an ambiguous ending.
I just hate that a team (maybe not the whole team) who hated musicals made this.
While I am not interested in watching the films, I would still listen with curiosity at an original soundtrack that explores these themes.
Just got out of it, and my only hope is that-if they decide to do a sequel/spin-off film, it focuses on Harley/Harlee/Harleigh and she meets Poison Ivy, lol.
Been waiting for Gotham City Sirens since the 2016 Suicide Squad but got Birds of Prey instead.
I felt the young inmate at the end was gonna turn into the Heath Ledgers Joker and maybe solve the issue I had with the movie, Harley seemed to have the upper hand in the relationship the whole time, Joker usually has the upper hand with Harley loving him and him not really caring about her..
So I could see them making a movie with Gaga as Harley and that inmate becoming the Joker, that would also work with them having Harvey Dent's face getting disfigured at the end of the trial.
I liked the old movie clip basically telling the audience 'Hey anything can be in musical'
@@LauraSomeNumber My bestie and I saw this yesterday, and I completely agree with the aforementioned. I watched it with my husband first and tbf, I grew up watching movies like Jane Eyre, All About Eve, Hollywood Shuffle and Raisin in the Sun-while also watching movies from the MST3K-verse, (or Svengoolie-verse for my younger millennials and Gen Z). I have an affinity for constructive cinematic classics as I do camp. So with this movie, I treated it as a zero on the number line of integers, neither positively, nor negatively.
But seeing it through another lens a second time; with someone who is an avid DC/Marvel fan, she was able to help me conceptualize the universe where Harley would have the upper hand over Joker, and thus reversing the narcissistic controlling hold that Joker usually has over Harley. And then the visuals building up to its Broadway style climax made it resonate and connect so much clearer for me.
And YES, can we get a Harvey Dent spinoff from this??? 😃 I would love that. I didn’t see an Easter egg at the end though, so I don’t think they will unfortunately.
Unfortunately, people didn't realize, or want to realize that this movie is brilliant. Lee, is a villain which I didn't mind. Lee is us, if you think about it. We want Joker and when we don't get what we want we bash him for not playing the role we want him too. I think most of us at some point in our lives/life acted like Lee and all the joker sycophants.
It's an excellent film yea... I still preferred the first. But I felt the second had even more depth of character.
I hated the guards and I was hoping arthur or one of the other inmates would have killed one of the guards for revenge for all the abuse they took.. specially arthur, that made me mad, arthur was like a wimp and didn't care,but i get it, he was so far gone by time this film took place.
Like with the rape scene I was hoping arthur, as joker would have snapped and killed Jackie.. I hated him.
Did you all noticed arthur's next door inmate the fat short bloke with the glasses,he looked like penguin. You see him a few times.
Anyway I liked joker 2, I know I'm part of a small percentage of stupid people who liked it but whatever...I don't care. Joaquin is my favourite actor and he was brilliant as always..Hildur's music was sexy, she's brilliant, cinematography was breathtaking 👍🏻💯
I saw it twice and about to watch it on this streaming called "mannic" it free, good copy, I saw a piece of it.
Dont understand what all the hate is for, it's not that bad...lol..smh.. bloody hell it's not the crow 22.😅
In the end it doesn't matter..you think Joaquin or Gaga care? Phoenix received$20 million, gaga $12 I think.. Todd another$20million.. they are laughing to the bank.
Guess people just follow the opinion of what they're told to have. Good review mate cheers.🙏🏻💯🃏
i left the theater, feeling totally defeated, so i guess the movie did its job. im taking a shot of addressing the problems, ive had with it, since this feeling of utter defeat is heavily boosted, by the backlash, it received. to address it, ill dive into SPOILERS!!!!!
this film was frustrating, its definitely flawed and the way the musical aspects are woven into the narrative, makes said narrative stops dead in its tracks, every time the musical fantasy becomes more elaborate- and by design, it will be jarring, theres a contrast, especially in the last act, that reinforces said effect. with all that out of the way, i will say, that this movie emotionally affected me, far more, than the first one ever did and i was on board, with that one, empathizing with arthur, every step of the way.
this movie deconstructs most of the first film, in some very frustrating ways- my main issues were, as follows
1. if youre going the route of integrating musical elements and portraying it as an elaborate fantasy, i think its a missed opportunity, to write original music, for your characters, especially when your composer previously won an oscar. i got why they chose to go with old fashioned american songbook tunes and imo it works half of the time, but theres definitely some instances, of the song not furthering the narrative, or stopping it dead in its tracks. they couldve cut about 4 songs out of the movie and it wouldve benefited the flow.
2. while on the subject of cut material, its clear from the trailers alone, that portions of the film were cut, especially regarding lee- gaga does good, with what shes given, but i cant help but feel, that she was originally a more rounded character (a pun on her clearly having a baby bump, in one of the cut scenes), but that she got sidelined, because this is ultimately arthurs story and they didnt want to lose sight of that fact.
3. it being arthurs story is an exact mirror image of the first films narrative- where youre led to believe, that the first ends with arthur transforming into the joker, this film is about his letting go, of this construct, letting go of the fantasy. you can argue the point, since a good bit of the first one was only playing out in his head, that it should have been more of a struggle, for him, to let go, of his persona.
4. the way hes quite literally forced, to let go of the joker persona, is frankly tasteless. the heavily implied rape from the guards seemed like an overreaction, to what was merely an unspecified name drop, in the courtroom- what seems to break him, is that they kill his only friend and this, in combination with garys testimony, finally makes him realize, the kind of impact hes had. while i appreciated, that it showed arthur still had some empathy left, (despite the state psychiatrist claiming, one of his psychological issues, being a lack of such), it felt like a quick, brutal solution, that i feel couldve been achieved more organically, in court.
5. while on the court topic, i will say that harvey dent seemed like a caricature, of a smug lawyer- its yet another missed opportunity, to have dent be the one, to make the case against arthurs dual identity, when harvey dent traditionally has his own struggles, with said diagnosis, arguably to a much heavier degree. one can make the case, that after this case and him being minimally disfigured, by the bomb going off, said events may influence his stance, on duality, further down the road, also furthering the theme of arthurs influence, on people. as it stands, hes just this smug guy, who seems to think the courtroom is his audition, for a modelling gig.
6. addendum to the courtroom scenes- i realize, im probably very much in the minority, but i actually appreciated, that some of the events of the first movie were clarified. i never was a fan of the read, that the whole first movie might have been in his head, a theory, heavily argued for, by a majority, as being the joke, that arthur replies to, with you wouldnt get it. getting that isnt clever, it was always dumb, because it not only destroys any purpose for a narrative, it also goes against the idea, of empathizing with arthur, which was my big takeaway, of both movies. i will also say, that for the attentive viewer, theres quite a few examples, when it can be seen, that arthur is imagining things, which purposefully have been edited- one example of that, comes in the very beginning of the movie, during the bus scene, with the kid. when the camera pans back, after the argument with the kids mother, the kid isnt there anymore. i also never felt, that sophie and her kid surviving, was left ambigious, in the context of what weve come to know, about arthur.
7. last, but definitely not least, ill address the elephant in the room- the ending. it baffles me, how many people tried to tie this in, with heath ledgers joker, despite neither timelines, nor events, nor actors ages and appearances, line up with the nolan trilogy. while on the subject of the nolan trilogy, it had a pretty similar ending, to this one and i for one, found it way harder, to buy into the idea, of john robin blake taking up the bat-mantle, when comparing it, to the joker, as being this shadow, that will always be there, as an influence. it does make more sense to me, especially because the symbol of batman, is too specific to bruce, in my mind. while on the topic of bruce, i found it very interesting, that pretty much everyone from part 1, that survived, was brought back, except him. in retrospect, it does make the wayne family plot point of the first feel kind of tacked on, but i feel, it was done on purpose, to separate it further, from the source material. its not hard to understand, why many fans of comic book movies will feel, like theyre being pranked, but its a tragic prank, as written by arthur fleck. arthur fleck who? this point wouldve gone over better, if they didnt make harley closer to her source material, than expected, only to completely flip the dynamic, that joker and harley have, in said source material. everything gets turned on its head. so yes, its kind of a mess, on purpose and the decisions are often baffling, but for me at least, there was still genuine emotional investment and i knew, that this numbness, after leaving the theatre, was the point, not a clever, (like some have interpreted the ending of the first one), but a deeply emotionally resonant one. warts and all, this has genuinely touched me deeply, more than any film ive seen in the theatres, since the last one. arguing whats the point, is missing and proving said point- collectively we didnt care about arthur, we wanted to see joker. we wanted escapism and got something uncomfortably real and the contrast, in the fantastical musical numbers, made it land even heavier and ive felt anxious, every time the flick came to a grinding halt, when musical sequences faded to black and we got thrown back, into reality. as an audience weve been collectively taught, to expect certain things, from a franchise movie and this film, if nothing else, exists, to defy these expectations and i for one, cant help, but respect it, for that, while still understanding perfectly, why this wont go over well, for a lot of people. it has made me think and feel a lot, since i came out of the cinema- about the last 20 years and how these franchises have turned into the flogging of a dead horse, yet somehow, a flick like deadpool and wolverine taking up the mantle, of biggest R rated film off of joker, feels like a statement, about where we are, both artistically and collectively- easy sarcasm, cameos and even characters being reduced to memes- you contrast this with the honest sentiment, of an old timey song, sung slightly off key, but genuinely vulnerable, naked, stripped, like arthur was, of any pretense. and while i wont argue against todd phillips very own pretensions, the character of arthur fleck will stay with me and cast a shadow.
Heavily agree with point 4…I GET it, because assault like that (especially in prison) is more about power than anything, but having THAT be what essentially breaks Arthur was just blehhhhhhhhh…
@@toyosibee.mp3 well, its a culmination of things, as i read, but what really bothered me, was that and the killing of the prison sidekick was only down to arthur, ranting that the guards at arkham are fat, abuse and names were left unspecified- and then, they rape and kill a guy for that, because of ....the system and abuse of power being bad? way to drive the point home. yet, it emotionally still landed for me, because that kind of brutal power fantasy is what most people wanted, out of a joker sequel and the whole flick feels like a really messy breakup, including breaking up with some of the audience
Such an important comment here, just came out of the theatre feeling much the same way you did, then went to see online discussions only to find them filled with obnoxious comic purists who’s only takeaway from the film was that it was bad cause there wasn’t more “spooky clown man fights the police”
@@Sunny-oj8xj to be fair, i dig the source material, but underneath that and the theorizing about whats real, or not, this had a beating, bleeding heart and as a fan, i can understand, that a lot of people are righteously angry- personally, in the end, i was glad, this was primarily arthurs story and i couldnt tell you the last time, a theatre experience left me genuinely surprised and stunned, which is the magic trick, that even the first, which i really like, didnt pull off, for me, personally. on one hand, i do believe, that this film works best, for people, who have been through messy breakups, had their own struggles, with mental illness, or at least heavily empathize and that last point seems to be the most important, because while some of the backlash is arguably justified, i feel takes like this movie hates its audience (when it, in fact, probably asked too much of it), or that this was a cynical cash grab (which totally negates the other point)- all of that makes me feel, this is truly a movie the fans deserved- while the response to it is heartbreaking, i firmly believe, this will be re-evaluated, in time, when we hopefully, collectively have overcome the same kind of mentality, that is argued against, with both joker movies (you wouldnt believe the amount of reviews, that regularly throw out words like incel, loser, it being gay, as an insult- id rather stop there, its honestly disturbing stuff, at times)
@@Sunny-oj8xj if youre interested, i have been asked to defend my takes, to some people, who just wanted to start shit over the movie and i tried my best, to explain my reasoning and watched the movie again, to do so- some things are now clearer to me and for other scenes, ive come up with my own interpretation, which might clear up some of your own thoughts/interpretations, because i really dont think all of the scenes, that are portrayed as the real narrative, are to be taken, at face value- so here goes....
regarding the rape scene....after my second viewing of the film it felt even less ambigious, i think, that not only did this happen, it didnt just happen to arthur- pretty much near the beginning of the movie, theres an inmate called bullock (of all the names) who refuses, to come out of his cell and the guards carry him away, jackie telling them, to taking him to the other cell block, while the guy is kicking and screaming- after arthurs assault, the same guy yells out of his cell, arthur, what did they do to you, or something to that effect....i think its commonplace with the inmates, that step out of line-
all of the above is mostly based on a feeling, but whats clear to me, is that the killing of arthur was indeed, without a doubt, an idea, by the guards, to get rid of him....jackie mockingly tips his hat to him, sings we three (me echo, my shadow and me), another one of the cops tells him not to sing that song (in a way to suggest, that its unnecessarily macabre)....after hearing the lyrics to build a mountain more clearly this time, i think the whole harley pregnancy, was always just meant, to foreshadow (pun intended) the arrival, of the inmate, taking over for arthur....the lyrics are Ah, what a fine young son to take my place and that part cuts back to new proto-joker (i think its the last, or second to last line, that arthur sings, while imagining harley shooting him)
also convinced that the narrative of the movie was either severely changed up, during the editing, or theres at least three harley scenes, two of them in close proximity to each other, that are in arthurs mind alone and not distinctly marked, as delusion....pretty sure, that despite phillips course correcting, by explaining, that certain scenes were real (which he also did, after the first movie) you cant take all of the surface story, at face value-
one of the more obvious examples is harley telling him, shes pregnant and after the close to you sequence, hes dancing inside his cell, in a way, that this time around, suggested he might imagine the song in his head, due to the way, it cut immediately from the song, to the shot of arthur, dancing in dreamlike manner (and i think his delusion stars with the sex scene, hes thrown into solitary confinement, imagines them dancing on the rooftop, shes already there, when he wakes up, he makes it a point, to tell her, hes not taking his meds anymore, before they have sex and later on, in the courtroom, what causes him to snap and fire mary anne? the suggestion, during sophies testimony, that arthurs a virgin)-
i also picked out, that at least half the time, if not more, the next song title, or a lyric, is suggested in the dialogue, by a person, that usually isnt arthur, or lee (an example would be mary anne, telling him she knows, what its like to love somebody, after telling arthur about lee and then him dreaming up the performance of to love somebody, during which arthur is shot)
I have not seen any review of this film that I have agreed with as much as I’ve agreed with yours. The narrative isn’t as bad as people are making it out to be, but I think with so much cut for the theatrical release the film’s overall story was lessened. Thanks for being the voice for us movie musical/Lady Gaga/real-world connection film fans out there ✨🩵 #releasethegagacut
I recently watched the movie and found it to be quite enjoyable. The ending was a bit bittersweet, but overall, I had a positive experience.
I need to see the cutroom floor. 🤔Cuz ain't NO WAY this is the movie Lady F*King Gaga agreed to star in.
But consider this my friends... They pulled this same sh*t with Margot in Suic*de squad, and we got Birds of Prey from it. 🤩😈 I give it a year and we will be receiving another stunning addition to the Harleen Lore Cinematic universe.
After watching it i think this is the only realistic and true to the character way a sequel to the first one could have gone. In every way
Warning- spoilers ahead.
People wanted a more gritty realistic approach, they gave it to you. Most people like arthur die just like that because that's what happens in real life - it's messed up. But this can still be a Joker sequel if you analyze the ending. It also explains why "Joker" is way older than batman. Cuz Arthur is NOT the joker- he inspires someone to be a joker- and no surprise, it's an random guy with crazier reasons to k*ll. It makes sense cuz Joker is actually evil and demented. Not someone still with a heart and sympathy like Arthur.
PS i understand not everyone is a fan of musicals- so I suggest those people just don't watch it. Simple as that.
@@LiliLycoris Dude, who is paying to watch an Arthur Fleck film?!?
Spoilers as well
The "regression" of the character made sense to me too, i don't think it was such a bad idea as everyone is saying. Arthur was never going to be the Joker, he just embraced the persona since it got him what he needed: attention and validation from people that would have never noticed his existence. The heart and sympathy that you mention brought him "back" too, since it was the mention of his mother's lies and Gary's struggles (because of Arthur's actions) that cemented that he was Arthur, not Joker. Well, that and the abuse from the guards, which likely reminded him of how vulnerable he was, regardless of him embracing Joker. As a commentary piece on how badly people's influence can ruin someone's life, it kinda worked for me.
That said... the execution WAS atrocious on the second half of the movie, which made me consider walking out of the theater because of how long it felt. The first hour went by pretty fast and got me invested, but it went downhill from there. Imho they went too far into the whole "let's break Arthur" thing, and they didn't use the music numbers properly, since they just interrupted the movie instead of enhancing it. Plus, the whole ending with "that's life" by gaga felt like a spit in the face to the fans of the first movie (like rubbing some kind of bad punchline on their face or something), so yeah... i can see why people are hating it to oblivion, even if on paper it isn't so bad.
@@magnusmotor1364people who saw the first joker
You hit the nail on the head when you mentioned expectations affecting the viewing experience. Im curious how this film will be regarded over time
Joker 2 was a good movie in my opinion, besides the ending. The ending was AWFUL. I don't think Arthur Fleck was ever meant to be THE Joker. I think Joker 1 was more of a character study on Arthur and his mental and physical struggles that led him into developing this alternate persona. The thing about Arthur, was he never killed innocent people. He always killed people that wronged him. THE Joker would kill anybody and everybody, just for shits and giggles. I don't think Folie a Deux was as good as the first one, but I see why they did what they did with it. I do think he had character growth. We sympathized with him throughout the first film, and we sympathized with him throughout the 2nd. He finally realized that he was the one that committed the crimes, and that "Joker" was all in his head. He wanted to be noticed. An ordinary man wearing trashy clothes with greasy hair isn't most likely going to be noticed. A guy wearing an original clown facepaint, with green hair dye, a vibrant dark pink suit, is bound to get noticed, especially if that said clown were to kill a couple people. When he killed the people on the subway and started to see the people on the news talking about a clown killer, that's when he realized that was his way to finally get noticed. Arthur wasn't right in the head. His mental trauma and his childhood really impacted his adult life. He was either going to live a depressing life in prison, get killed by someone, or kill himself. I think him coming to the realization and taking accountability for his own wrongdoings does show character development. That's what people don't realize about the first movie. The movie was never about THE Joker. It was about Arthur, and his desperate attempts to be noticed, so he became A Joker. That's why everyone laughed at him, and not with him.
Great video, as per usual! 😍I just love everything that Lady Gaga does because I am a huge fan of her. Even if this sequel had some flaws, her performance (and Joaquín Phoenix's as well, of course) would be enough. 🤩🥰
Lots of love from Rome💕
I've never seen either one of them give less than 100% in a performance. 😂
@@LadyJenevia Absolutely! 🤩 Thank you for your kind reply💕🫶🏻
what im asking myself....who do you think was arthurs visitor, at the end, if there was one?
@@fabianhammer2864 I’m guessing Puddles?
@@toyosibee.mp3 though i personally think, the guards just wanted him gone and arranged for it (or harley, if you chose to believe, she lived), that wouldve been a wholesome ending
@@fabianhammer2864 Yeah, I'm of two minds whether Harley died and whether the convo on the stairs was even with a real Harley and not just Arthur imagining....Either way!
@@toyosibee.mp3 if youre interested, i have been asked to defend my takes, to some people, who just wanted to start shit over the movie and i tried my best, to explain my reasoning and watched the movie again, to do so- some things are now clearer to me and for other scenes, ive come up with my own interpretation, which might clear up your own thoughts, regarding the last scene with harley. so here goes....
regarding the rape scene....after my second viewing of the film its even made less ambigious, that not only did this happen, it didnt just happen to arthur- pretty much near the beginning of the movie, theres an inmate called bullock (of all the names) who refuses, to come out of his cell and the guards carry him away, jackie telling them, to taking him to the other cell block, while the guy is kicking and screaming- after arthurs assault, the same guy yells out of his cell, arthur, what did they do to you, or something to that effect....i think its commonplace with the inmates, that step out of line-
all of the above is mostly based on a feeling, but whats clear to me, is that the killing of arthur was indeed, without a doubt, an idea, by the guards, to get rid of him....jackie mockingly tips his hat to him, sings we three (me echo, my shadow and me), another one of the cops tells him not to sing that song (in a way to suggest, that its unnecessarily macabre)....after hearing the lyrics to build a mountain more clearly this time, i think the whole harley pregnancy, was always just meant, to foreshadow (pun intended) the arrival, of the inmate, taking over for arthur....the lyrics are Ah, what a fine young son to take my place and that part cuts back to new proto-joker (i think its the last, or second to last line, that arthur sings, while imagining harley shooting him)
also convinced that the narrative of the movie was either severely changed up, during the editing, or theres at least three harley scenes, two of them in close proximity to each other, that are in arthurs mind alone and not distinctly marked, as delusion....pretty sure, that despite phillips course correcting, by explaining, that certain scenes were real (which he also did, after the first movie) you cant take all of the surface story, at face value-
one of the more obvious examples is harley telling him, shes pregnant and after the close to you sequence, hes dancing inside his cell, in a way, that this time around, suggested he might imagine the song in his head, due to the way, it cut immediately from the song, to the shot of arthur, dancing in dreamlike manner (and i think his delusion stars with the sex scene, hes thrown into solitary confinement, imagines them dancing on the rooftop, shes already there, when he wakes up, he makes it a point, to tell her, hes not taking his meds anymore, before they have sex and later on, in the courtroom, what causes him to snap and fire mary anne? the suggestion, during sophies testimony, that arthurs a virgin)-
i also picked out, that at least half the time, if not more, the next song title, or a lyric, is suggested in the dialogue, by a person, that usually isnt arthur, or lee (an example would be mary anne, telling him she knows, what its like to love somebody, after telling arthur about lee and then him dreaming up the performance of to love somebody, during which arthur is shot)
Lady Gaga movie, with Joker as supporting actor?
Great video, also as a sidenote I loved your performance in Beatlejuice 2
Awesome review, so glad to hear you enjoyed Folie A Deux more than most would you agree critics are being way too harsh on it? I'm so pumped to see it tomorrow Joaquin is my fav Joker and Lady Gaga looks electrifying as Harley Quinn!
This sequel is for Arthur.
Loved your review... I still want to watch this, regardless negative comments. When I watched first trailers of this movie I thought that joker's "fans" in the movie would find a way to get him out of prison and live a happy decadent life in anarchy😂free in the most dangerous areas in Gotham with support of criminals... but no, of course not, because this movie isn't part of the comics' thread
Glad to see other people liked it! I was one of many who weren't excited for the musical aspect but I still went in with an open mind and I actually thought it was pretty good. A nice balance of music and what the last one was like. It seems most fans missed the point of the movie ENTIRELY and not just the musical part.. I've seen many say they're disappointed we didn't see the characters fleshed out more or that they didn't go in the right direction with them when its clearly been made out to be a more psychological DC universe since how dark the last movie was.
People who hate musicals will still think this movie has too much singing in it, while people (like me) who love musicals will think this is blasphemously lacking. So I just don't understand who is supposed to enjoy this musical.
I don't have any other main gripes with this film, honestly. Had it delivered on the musical part I might have liked it, but the singing that we did get was so bad that it made me actively dislike it.
@@irazorn3712 I think them singing off key makes sense though since no matter how hard they try to play along in their fantasy they are still broken, and mentally unstable.
It was a FORCED sequel todd phillips never wanted to make it....money money money
I didn't know it was a musical which I think was good. It was a nice surprise.
JOKER- FULLY A FOO
LOL damn, the bad reviews for this movie from youtubers just keep rolling on out. I'm kinda glad to see it because if this movie was actually good I would've had to admit being wrong, because for over a year I thought this movie was gonna suck. Sure enough, it did.
REALEASE THE LEE CUT!!!!!!
I cant believe im this early.
Glad to have you here! 🥳
Joker: Fondle A Deuce
🤡👋🏻💩🧻
This review was great! ❤
It's almost impossible to find a review that's at least trying to be as unbiased as much they can be, and it's refreshing to see that you managed so well in a sea of hate reviews from angry nerds or people with some kind of an agenda...
I'm a nerdy guy that likes comic book stuff, but I also like movies for what they are and have respect for the artists vision, this movie was good (not amazing) and an interesting take on comic book villains, toxic relationships and other topics, yet most reviewers just cry about "character assassination" or other dumb stuff that this film was never interesting in depicting.
Keep up the good work Jen ❤
Honestly, I have no interest in the film because the last one had all this fuss about it and when I saw it, I went "Wait, that's it?" 🤷
Morticia Addams has a TH-cam channel 😬
And by the way, Deadpool and Wolverine wasn’t that good there wasn’t really a good villain, and it was nothing but cameos from pre-MCU marvel the only really good part of the movie is when Wolverine finally puts on the mask… I am not expecting any good superhero movie anymore… the fourth Spider-Man movie in the MCU is the only one I’m looking forward to and that’s it!
All the Jokerbros coping hard over this being a Musical.
I don't think it's the musical aspect that fans don't like.
Musicals suck
#ReleaseTheHighKick
gender neutral
I didn't like the first Joker at all. It felt way too up its own ass with its themes.
I was really hoping Joker 2 would be great. I was hoping for something more like Lars Von Triers "Dancer in the Dark"
It's for the Studio.
It’s not just joker 2 it’s practically every superhero movie whether it’s from DC the MCU or Sony Marvel. We’re just getting shit movies one after another superhero movies became just like video game movies complete trash 🚮 and it doesn’t seem like it’s going to get better. I am not going to spend any more money going to the theaters and watching the garbage that they’re putting out… the only movie in the superhero genre that I might see is the next Spider-Man because that still has value
I like the movie that’s just me tho 🤷🏽♂️
You're not alone. I liked it too.
I feel as if Joker 1 and 2 are basically all one whole, just released in 2 parts. Kinda like Kill Bill 1 and 2. Two parts with very different styles but together tell the whole story.
@@GemR38 exactly I don’t know what people expected from part 2 he went to prison and court cause he killed and everyone fell in love with the alter ego aka joker from part 1 it was realistic once again lee fell in love with the joker not Arthur fleck and she broke up with him because she wanted this idea man women are actually like that in real life lol (not all) but you get my point they both sing to cope with life and to expression themselves and their experiences throughout the movie anyways the movie wasn’t bad people are never satisfied