Here's my Joker 2 Ending video. Post all your reactions in the comments. I'll do a longer WTF Easter Eggs and Breakdown video tomorrow. Here's my Joker 2 Movie Review too! th-cam.com/video/EQOGhvcxJpo/w-d-xo.html
i mean... either he does it or they take the next guy and it's gonna be even more s**t than the thing we got now. i can see how someone feels "forced" to do it.
@@xMrMayhemx Maybe maybe not. Alien vs Aliens. Both great movies. Two different directors. With Phoenix and Lady Gaga. I really don't think you could go much worse than what we got with a really motivated director building off the first film.
You would be surprised how annoying a studio that you want to keep working for but doing other director and passionate film making for. They probably kept throwing joker 2 in his face
No, that’s just an idiotic excuse. No idea why he’s taking the stance that somehow Todd isn’t responsible for this like it’s not his fault. Wtf are you on about dude YIKES
Congratulations to Todd Phillips, he may be one of the few who made a movie where critics and audience agree on a 33% Rotten Tomatoes score, that's very rarely seen.
Todd: "ok guys I see you want a Joker sequel" Fans: "no we do not" Todd: "even though I reaaalllyy don't wanna do it, I'll do it for you" Fans: "please don't" Todd: "if you are soo insistent I simply can't refuse you. You're welcome"
Yeah, it's more the studio wanted a money making franchise from a one and done thing. The fans don't really get a say with what happens. And then the fans are blamed for being toxic or some such rot. If I could find a way to make money off of every time this has happened...
What are you talking about?MANY people wanted this movie even though it was said The Joker was supposed to be a standalone. Now that you got it, your gonna pretend you never wanted it?? K.
The irony of a millionaire artist that gets to write stories for a living self inserting as the joker acting like hes some poor tortured soul isnt lost on me
They all look completely deranged. As in for real not from an acting/immersive standpoint… it’s like a real lunatic directed this movie. Everytime i see him standing still smoking his cigarette i burst out laughing. I can’t take anything happening seriously
@@Alex38369 you clearly missed the point. He had no intention of making a sequel. The movie didn’t need a sequel but WB wanted to milk the cash cow. Better to take it out to the backyard and shoot it yourself then let someone else let it slowly and painfully milk it to death. They were gonna take his vision and ruin it regardless, let’s be honest here. It’s Warner Bros.
Making a good sequel to basically a carbon copy of Taxi Driver + King of Comedy would be hard. Some people just don't wanna admit Todd Bungl is simply incompetent.
@@HughMungus45Nah, he wanted to make a sequel. He figured he could ride the lightning off the popularity of the first film, he thought this nonsense was genius, and when it bombed he threw everyone but himself under the bus. "Big mean WB made me do it! I didn't wannaaaa 😢💰🤑🤑🤑"
Why should Todd be trusted with anything tbh. He's establishing a track record of making a movie, getting mad that it's successful and crashing the ship on purpose. What a brat.
I genuinely don’t understand why you wouldn’t want your movie to be popular? Like do they not want money? Do they hate that they’re popular? Do they not like doing their job? Do they just hate fans? I genuinely don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to make a movie and then get mad when it’s received well. That’s like making sharknado then getting mad when people think it’s actually pretty funny. Why even make it?
@@garf7298Or what if they just respect it enough to contain it to one movie ? And not going for trilogies, sagas and spin offs that stains the original intent ?
@@jeremybauchet6845 If this was the first time, I would sort of get it. But then why get contracted for more than one film? Since this is a reoccuring pattern, its him being a brat at this point. Nobody forced him in the sense he could have walked away but instead decided to waste everyone's time and money
@@MelancholyJoker19 He'd rather take the blame by being the only one able to kill his own billion worth baby, instead of having a JJ Abrams-Rian Johnson situation all over again. Todd Phillips has been very clear since the premiere in 2019 that there would be no sequel at all. It's Warner Bros that insisted when they saw the cash flow. It was him going all over again, or some random yes man engaged by WB. So yeah. It was his middle finger lesson to WB for not listening to the desire of having one shots movies. Movies are just like paintings. You can have triptics sometimes, but if the painter wanted this one piece to be unique, everyone shall respect that. But that's everyone's fault, for pressuring alongside WB to get a sequel. We saw how much sequels damage franchises, big IPs when they're not made with intent.
I remember in 2018 they were saying that Joker was going to be a stand alone. I guess blame the studio for being greedy wanting a sequel and Todd Phillips didn't want it, so this is what we got.
@@J.C.3 it's hilarious though. If he made the film to be a one off, and wanted to take that idea and keep it going past what he wanted. That is messed up. They wanted a sequel so bad, and that's what they get rather than being happy with just one special film.
@@johnyap4154 well I'm sure that the idea and interpretation of joker 1 was completely his idea. After the success of it, the production company has all the rights to make a second one with or without him. I'm sure he wanted to just let it be, and marinate with time. So the studio probably kept pressing to make the movie either with or without him. They also produced several junkits stating how Joaquin and Todd were very keen on the idea of a sequel. Those are produced with strategy, not by mistake
This movie feels like an anti fan-service movie, unlike what Marvel does. Todd could have went the easy way, make a Joker that gets thrown into acid, where he manipulates Harley, and becomes a mastermind, ultimately teasing Batman in the third movie. But he did the opposite. Harley serves no purpose, the Joker is nothing but a persona, and the shocking scenes adds no layer but being edgy just to be edgy. And the ending to me, is purely a mock-off of a bad fan-fiction ending. Todd Phillips did everything wrong. And it's so wrong, it feels on purpose. It's like getting 0 on a 100 questions QCM.
@SzalonaJanka, I got you, man. SPOILERS. Joker got killed in the asylum by a weird "real" joker, Harley was never pregnant and leaves him, he also got SAed by the guards. I liked the movie myself but lots of people hate it very sad.
It really does feel like on purpose. He hated everything about Comic book movies and the success of the previous ones and decide to mock the fanbase that supported not just the first Joker movie, but the entire comic book genre. I guess congrats for him, i suppose. The joke has always been on us. This movie's failure is well deserved because thats what Todd wants, i guess
@@johans3164ahahha exactly, but so this movie is more deeper about how no one actually cares about real human beings , about Arthur fleck, all we wanna see is the joker
@@MechaMono_ Honestly in my opinion, it was just the pride of Todd Phillips and his unwillingness to let go of his own version of the Joker and how he liked directing. It kind of reminds me of the Wachowski’s and what they did with the recent matrix sequel. I totally get why the directors wouldn’t want to give up something they put so much time and effort in, but at the same time they have to realize they’re working with a multi million dollar corporation like Warner Brothers. They potentially could’ve signed a contract saying that if there was a significant return of investment on the film, they would be picked first to direct the sequel considering they directed it the first time. They have the choice to opt in or opt out of that. So they did sign up for this.. It’s honestly just pride of their own versions of the characters in my opinion.
I think the first 2/3s of the movie is pretty good, especially when he embraces joker, but after he is beaten up by the guards that last 1/3 of the movie is so bad it ruins the whole movie
Whole time I was watching the bootleg I was like I don’t see why people talking so much trash about this it’s good. Then that scene.. all downhill from there. Third act destroyed the whole film.
think it´s a contract thing, just like The Matrix 4. If he refuses to do it, they can do it without him, so he rather f it up himself and close business. Well, it worked, who is exited for a new Joker? Not me
we don't know what was said until it's exposed by either todd or someone else. Hollywood is a bunch of cash grabbers and don't care if the director says no, maybe they threatened to prevent another project if they don't get what they want. we just don't know
I agree with you . Just wondering if there are multi movie contract clauses where he is committed to do a sequel if first movie makes x$M. Even if that is the case, he can still refuse, just with higher consequences
Here’s what upsets me most about this ending. The killing of Arthur by a future joker is not a bad idea, however the way they did it was horrible and it really cheapens the impact of everything the movie tried to be. Like even if they did make a sequel with this ending it just won’t feel like an actual movie but more of a desperate cash grab for the audience.
Idk how people are so convinced that the mental patient at the end of the movie becomes Heath Ledgers Joker. This universe has its own Harvey Dent and they even showed how he lost half his face. There's no way there are two Harvey Dent district attorneys who both happened to lose half of their face. THAT would be one fucking HELL of a coincidence. And during the Dark Knight no one mentions the name Arthur Fleck while someone is running around Gotham calling themselves Joker? There's no way.
This is different universe. Ending mean Joker is just the idea. Anyone can be Joker. Arthur is just the one who start it, and it not the same Dark knight universe.
@@robin97rvthis is why it’s a stupid idea. The whole him cutting himself after killing arthur was totally not needed for a film where joker has a story like this one. Really shitty ending to a film
Exactly, it’s sad that this could had been something really good and if some else had the chance could have boosted their career but this is Hollywood, the dark inside of it.
bro made a good joker movie (a villain that people adore outside of his movies) and got mad when people got interested in this version of him. Braindead
Todd Philips is like a kid who is disgruntled for being loved for the first movies he makes, then they want more from him and he is like I don’t feel like it
They weren’t good either. I could’ve told you this movie was going to suck as soon as news came out that they cast Gaga. Then the trailer came out and it confirmed everything about it would suck. Clearly a total piece of shit film. You could smell the shit through the screens on your phone
agreed, they went to heavy on the singing and not enough actual story, the joker was an actual joke in this one, also i think they had the opportunity for Gaga to be remembered as the best Harley as well but they wasted that opportunity. The film overall was very boring, part 1 was 1000x better.
@@lile4life713 I agree. Honestly in my opinion, it was just the pride of Todd Phillips and his unwillingness to let go of his own version of the Joker and how he liked directing. It kind of reminds me of the Wachowski’s and what they did with the recent matrix sequel. I totally get why the directors wouldn’t want to give up something they put so much time and effort in, but at the same time they have to realize they’re working with a multi million dollar corporation like Warner Brothers. They potentially could’ve signed a contract saying that if there was a significant return of investment on the film, they would be picked first to direct the sequel considering they directed it the first time. They have the choice to opt in or opt out of that. So they did sign up for this.. It’s honestly just pride of their own versions of the characters in my opinion.
@@hahaiwonPeople might be able to make back the money they lose on this pretty easily but making back the time they lose is a lot more difficult... Not worth the investment imo
I guess that's Hollywood for you. Make a movie complaining about the success of your previous movie. Maybe Phillips can be a dockworker instead, I hear they need those.
@@KerlimKerl Ah well my happiness doesn't rely on a movie, so I'm OK.. but yeah it would've been nice if this could've been a worthy successor to the first movie. I guess it wasn't in the cards :)
They had the perfect chance to tie this in with The Batman and make the guy who kills Arthur be the ‘joker’ Robert Pattinson interviews in the deleted scene
@@notnino6235 it largely makes no sense anyway, but to mostly dismiss the whole concept of the Joker origin is such a middle finger to fans. As has been pointed out, if the first film had been about a disgruntled man with mental health problems who kills a few people, it would have been largely ignored. It made a billion off the back of being a Joker film.
@@dicarpio2177Well, "you'll get what you deserve." If the reason you're interested in art is not the plot, not the acting, not the visuals, not the meta-commentary, but the name of a character from a children's picture book... Well, there are two such characters in this film! I hope these viewers are happy
Maybe it has . The guy that killed felix at the end carves a smile on his face with the knife like the real joker from Batman. Maybe he was the real joker
@@Julius7istthe joker in the dark knight told multiple stories about his scars to different people and that was very intentionally done to keep his origin ambiguous
@@cleansoles912vision7 it was a well made film not the best but definitely doesn’t deserve all the reviews it’s getting by retard critics and butthurt comic nerds who had the expectation that the series never was supposed to be in the first place
yeah for sure because the vision of making a musical out of a serious thriller was 100% going to knock the audiences socks off! Don't be naïve dude, nobody would've thought that a musical was the way to go bro.
Today I decided to go take a look and saw that it was really good. This movie deconstructs and evaluates what 1 movie said and people were rather expecting scale. This situation is comparable to the one in the film. People were waiting for the Joker but they got Arthur Fleck. Still, I hope that the film will earn its box office and the ratings will change.
Well…they could always have “leverage” over the guy. You know…like “special info” involving particular “indecent activity” with a certain type (think, Epstein style😉). Kind of like what Kathleen Kennedy most likely dangles over her Disney superiors on a routine basis, to keep herself in the position she’s in. Just saying.🤷🏻😆
Contracts contracts contracts. You ever wonder why an actor is in some movie? Their contract forced them. Why not decline? Boom 40 million fine. Joaquin phoenix is actually being sued currently for saying no to an upcoming project.
That Todd Philips comment about meta commentary. So similar to the matrix 4. While I can understand that frustration, there’s a level of ingratitude that these creatives get to work in a field that is lucrative and of their choosing. So many folks work jobs they hate day after day just to get by.
@@marvinthemartian6788 I mean I get it from his point of view. The movie was perfect as a stand alone. If he refused to make the sequel then he says goodbye to all that money and goodbye to funding for future films passion projects.
Todd Philips had the right to say no to a sequel, but he said yes, only to fuck over the fans and general audiences who wanted to see the evolution of the character. No one should idolize the joker, so that point could’ve still come across showing us that he is indeed a crazy mf, that does awful shit. In the first one he was the underdog, we felt bad for him, now imagine in the sequel we don’t feel bad for him, we actually hate him towards the end, like you would a realistic joker. he could’ve delved deep into the psyche of a broken individual who sees society and people as jokes and then is given power. The director is so entitled for the move he made, actually pisses me off how he really gave the fans a middle finger. Yea give the studio a middle finger that’s fine but when u do it to your fans that different. Total opposite of what Ryan Reynolds’s did, and he gave the studio a middle finger the whole time but delivered for the fans. SPOILER ALERT 🔔 He could’ve still died at the end by the “real joker” taking inspiration from the crimes he committed. But we would’ve seen the chaos he had brought to Gotham and had been satisfied with the end. He would’ve been too old for Batman anyways so it would make sense that the joker for the bat was inspired by this guy.
Huh, you are right. Just like the Godfather movie. In the first one, we see how Michael rises (or descends if you could say so) to the world of Mafia and underground crime. In the second movie, we see how he delves deeper, evolving psychologically into a more cruel and unrest version of himself. Imagine if Joker 2 is like that, we can see now why being like the Joker is bad, or atleast shown what will happen if you let people like the Joker let loose, the cruelty and the carnage it will bring
@@nabongobong9155 that’s what the ending of the first one was leading to but it was left open ended. Now in the sequel they undo the whole arc. I love that comparison to the godfather, let the joker loose and grow to show how twisted the character is, still have him die tho, I think that it was always supposed to set up him up to be the inspiration to a legit Batman joker anyways, he’d be too old. Now these are just dreams 🥲. Maybe the movie gets better with the years but rn it bums everyone out.
Have you ever considered that the possibility that the fans may be shit and they deserve the middle finger? Well, that's what I think. I love this film, almost more than the first one.
Movie sucks! Director insufferable! Studio is annoying! If the director didn’t want to do it then should have walked away.. nobody can force him to do anything. He has the FU money already. He did it anyways because he wanted the money the studio was giving him.. he’s not a victim.
if it was about the money he'd go with the safe option for a sequel, but he did not. why all of you people are acting like some knowledgeble smart guys who have some insider info? you don't, not everything is just about the money
Todd must have a really hard life. I feel sorry we forced him into making this movie. No person should be subjected to the horrors of being a big budget Hollywood director. Moment of silence for todd
I think people seem to miss the point of the whole Joker thing. It's been well established that the Joker ideology is the opposite mirror image to the Batman ideology. Anyone can be Joker if pushed far enough into madness and insanity. Same way anyone can be Batman if willing and able enough. Yes Arthur was only the inspiration and catalyst for all the chaos and madness, he was simply a broken man that snapped and went on a killing spree. But I'd wager without him the real Joker wouldn't have gotten the inspiration to kill him and take his place.
That’s the reason why I thoroughly enjoyed this film. Idk what sequel people expected to see after the first one, but this was spot on to me. The feeling the Joker gives you when he takes control of Arthur the people that he sees being inspired by his actions. Idk about him being better than heath ledger but Joaquin Phoenix’s Joker is nothing short of sublime
I went in knowing this was going to feature musical numbers and it opened with a Looney Toons-esque cartoon., before dumping us in the grim reality of Arkham. From there I could tell this was not going to be some low brow, fan service flick. Deliberately blurring the lines to give us Arthur's beaten down psyche, the film is almost entirely seen from his warped perspective, thus it is deliberately vague on what is fact or fiction. Rather like Terry Gilliam's Brazil, the blur between fantasy & reality leaves you questioning what you have seen. This film will age well as it picks up a cult following amongst those who want to be challenged by the movies that they see. Don't try to box it with the other DC movies. It deserves to stand by itself
@@stephenreardon2698 It actually reminds me of a line that Mark Hamill's Joker says in The Killing Joke. "The past and memories can be treacherous. Sometimes I remember my past one way and sometimes another. If I had to choose my own past I would prefer multiple choice." Pretty much sums up the Joker's psyche, fractured and unable to determine what's real or the truth.
@@stephenreardon2698In my opinion it's a surprisingly brilliant sequel! Personally, I never gleefully rooted for Joker when he first took over in the first movie. I just felt shocked and at the same time still a sad kind of empathy for Arthur, as it was never his conscious intention to become a ruthless killer, and thus I took already the first film as a tragedy, and as kind of a cruel and mean practical joke played on him by Gotham City itself. The life experience forced upon him in this city, right from the start, lead him on to hide in a world of illusion he simply could not get out of again, so he descended deeper and deeper into it until he got lost within and, fleeing from harsh reality, delusionally thought his life were a comedy. This was the most cruel punchline this Gotham could ever make him the butt of. A delusion as extreme as this one adds insult to injury by making the inevitable comedown from it psychologically much, much more painful, because it heightens the emotional state from which its victim must eventually plummet: From delusional mania into disillusioned depression. Especially after committing murders under the influence of a self-righteous delusion, being faced with the harsh reality of their consequences, this invariably means: King for a day, fool for a lifetime. With Arthur being as underprivileged, interpersonally naive, socially awkward, prone to delusions and of below average intelligence, as precisely shown over the course of "Joker" already, anything a "Joker 2" movie consistent with the first one could ever logically turn out as would have to be an epilogue portraying this comedown from Fleck's illusional flight into madness. With a setup that obvious if keeping things realistic: Was this sequel really "needed"? Right after watching "Joker", I adamantly would have answered that question with a capitalized "NO!". But then, adding the character of Lee Quinzel, with an interesting inversion of the power structure we are used to seeing between Harley Quinn and The Joker, also adding a deeper exploration of Arthur's desperate need for love and for being seen and accepted, and yet again putting more of a focus on how Gotham's tense societal atmosphere comes close to a boiling point, also putting more of a focus on stylistic choices that led me further down the rabbit hole of Arthur's delusion, of his desperate coping mechanisms, his misreadings of people's ulterior motivations and intentions even if barely hidden behind a threadbare facade, "Folie a deux" made me empathize even more with its protagonist than "Joker" did. "Joker: Folie a deux" not only took a deep dive into Arthur's deranged mind, it furthermore did it from the inside looking out, almost throughout the movie's entire runtime. It allowed me to truly understand how Arthur Fleck ticks. While also depicting the careless cruelty and collective madness of Gotham's inhabitants - or if you want to look at it from a more metaphysical point of view: depicting a haunting spiritus loci poisoning the inhabitants' minds - the atmosphere of this movie, between magic realism and surrealism, took me on a trip just as fantastic and fascinating as the comic book "Arkham Asylum: A Serious Place on Serious Soil". That's way more than I had hoped for from an allegedly "unwarranted" sequel. Even with little screen given to Lee Quinzel, her scenes were enough to explain and support Arthur Fleck's character arc, and Lady Gaga portrayed Quinzel with such emotional depth and with such manipulative cunning that it makes me wish for yet another sequel, one mainly dealing with this character's future development- at least if such a portrayal is psychologically as consistent with "Folie a deux" as Arthur Fleck's portrayal in "Folie a deux" is with what "Joker" established before. Even though, compared to "Joker", "Folie a deux" was a movie less enjoyable and harder for me to watch, because there is no catharsis in the end but rather a hauntingly tragic ending for Arthur, I feel that both the movie and Arthur himself did go out in style: Arthur regains his humanity and dignity by reining in and integrating his shadow, thus finally owning his life completely, warts and all, including his most erroneous decisions, and by doing so he finally grows out of being for ever so long a largely unaware, deeply hurt child lashing out against a world not quite understood, and he comes into his own as a fully fledged adult who now has shed all illusions he ever so long had lived by, an adult who now has the guts to face himself and his own tragedy, a botched up life full of misery, and even if it means certain death for him, he brings up the courage to accept full responsibility for his deeds, thus allowing himself to feel empathy for his victims. Empathy in a city lacking empathy! A villain becoming an "internal hero" triumphing over the darkest sides of his personality, by not allowing himself to stay as embittered and aggressive as the city that has wronged him for decades - that to me is beauty in darkness, hope against hope, a defiant light in the eternal darkness that is and always will be Gotham City. Here we have not a superhero, not a seemingly steadfast moral beacon such as Batman, but someone who has been pulled down into a living hell, who has then successfully been tempted to do the most evil deeds - and yet he came out of it on the other end, a better and more rounded person, finally free from fear and seeing clearly, even if only for a very brief moment: A moment of slight redemption achieved against all odds. The craftsmanship behind shaping the poignantly fitting atmosphere of Gotham City as experienced by "Folie a Deux"'s protagonist I experienced as even more intensive than what "Joker" came up with. In spite of being a movie about the utmost cruelties possibly being done to human beings, "Joker: Folie a Deux" is a surprisingly tender movie due to it being told empathically through the lense of its fragile and tragic protagonist. Bravo!
But Todd Phillips actually said in a recent interview that him and Joaquin actually wanted to work together again and they had more to say with the character of Joker, so this rumour that Todd was forced into making it just seems like a false myth
Fans like all of us are too mind blown that this really happened so they’re trying to look into a deep meaning, but the truth is Todd Phillips couldn’t top his first one
@@84paratize Honestly in my opinion, it was just the pride of Todd Phillips and his unwillingness to let go of his own version of the Joker and how he liked directing. It kind of reminds me of the Wachowski’s and what they did with the recent matrix sequel. I totally get why the directors wouldn’t want to give up something they put so much time and effort in, but at the same time they have to realize they’re working with a multi million dollar corporation like Warner Brothers. They potentially could’ve signed a contract saying that if there was a significant return of investment on the film, they would be picked first to direct the sequel considering they directed it the first time. They have the choice to opt in or opt out of that. So they did sign up for this.. It’s honestly just pride of their own versions of the characters in my opinion.
This is where they meesed up, They introduce Harvey Dent character , then got his half face burn, giving the audience the impression that thats was his origin story, Ruining the timeline even more
What timeline is being ruined here? These Joker movies were always meant to be solo entries, and were never meant to build to anything else in the DC universe. There is already a separate Batman movie timeline with Barry Keoghan as the Joker. And another with the upcoming DCEU headed by James Gunn. If you thought this movie ever had any chance to have continuity with the other films, you really missed the point. If that were the case, they wouldn't have cast a middle-aged Joaquin Phoenix in the role and introduce a child Bruce Wayne in the first film.
@@dudujencarelliSo if there's no batman in this timeline, then what? Gotham becomes a wasteland? Remind you that bruce is still a kid and two villains harley quin and two face are already around.
The in-universe TV movie wasn't confirmed as "terrible." Lee thinks it's amazing because she idolized him. Gary thinks it's terrible because he was there for a murder. His neighbor also doesn't like it because she's in it as well. Nobody else shares much of an opinion. Everybody sees what they want to out of the first movie. That was the message there.
You can tell Arthur was tired of being joker when Harley drew the lipstick on the visiting glass. He looked so disappointed, but forced a smile on the glass.
I don't believe he had a visitor at all. Throughout the movie, he's accompanied by guards usually cuffed down that hallway. But the one time he's alone with no guards suoervising was a setup by the guards to allow him to get shanked by the other inmate. Which is how it usually happens in prison. I do not believe he had a visitor at all.
@biancamcflurry9206 here's my actual review This film was extremely poorly executed, serving as a prime example of how to tarnish an iconic predecessor with a woefully inadequate sequel. The dialogue-driven scenes featuring Joaquin Phoenix were exceptional, but the implied rape/sodomy scene in the bathroom was deeply unsettling. It appears Todd Phillips aimed to dismantle the Joker character established in the first film. Almost as if Todd Phillips was told he had to assassinate the joker character from that movie. The original's poignant plight and anger resonated strongly with audiences, but this sequel seemed to eradicate the Joker's essence completely. The guards literally raped the joker out of him. What little remained was lost after the inmates death who came to his support. To make matters worse, the predictable ending was telegraphed early on. I firmly believe this sequel should not have been made. They effectively disassembled the character development from the first film, leaving me stunned. As for the singing segments, they only served to annoy, disrupting potentially meaningful dialogue and character development. I also understand what Todd Phillips was trying to accomplish in this film, deconstructing the Joker character to lose audience support and popularity garnered in the first film. But it felt like a total demolition rather than a thoughtful critique. He seemed to aim for a commentary on toxic fandom through Lady Gagas high society character and the Arkhman and general population in society. But the execution fell flat, leaving me disappointed and disconnected from the story and its themes of subverting expectations and challenging our attachment to the Joker. It felt messy. 🤔🤔🤔☹️☹️😠😠😠🤬🤬🤬🤬.
Just saw it. I actually didn't mind the movie. I was initially annoyed when he was dying but once I saw the kid cut the scars in I think that was for sure the idea of Ledgers Joker. This was probably late 70's, that kid was probably 18 or so in this movie. Ledgers Joker could pass for around mid 30's. That would put Dark Knight in the 90's which is about what it seems like. That all adds up, plus the more I think about it the more I like that idea that the original Joker wasn't the one that actually made it big, but was the one that came up with the idea and a real psycho killed him and took his place. Like that's what would actually happen in real life. A real psycho would seize that fantasy and make it his own life.
But the issue is that it doesn’t add up. Harvey Dent got injured twice, on top of already being District Attorney in this movie when in The Dark Knight he’s the NEW District Attorney after the death of longtime DA Carl Finch. And the Waynes’ portrayal was very different, right down to Thomas running for Mayor in Joker.
Same thing with WB and The Matrix. This movie had a lot of redeeming value, I just didn't like the ending. I *hated* The Matrix 4, no redeeming value. The lesson for WB should be: stop forcing your creators to make movies they don't want to make. Both are meta commentaries about how they didn't want to make the movie. In both, that's my least favorite aspect.
Right? Ppl weren’t asking for this film to begin with. It was an interesting take on joker but nobody was going crazy asking for a sequel to this. Everyone thought this was a one off
Harley Quinn was such an undeveloped character. Since she spent most of the movie singing, we don't understand her motivations, her story, her personality, nothing.
There's no explanation to anything she does other than "she's crazy". She went as far as to have sx with him, have a baby, change her personality and looks, commit crimes, and publicly side with him on TV.
For someone who saw Joker as Arthur and understood his mental breakdown... I really really appreciate this movie. He got to die as Arthur, the little boy who made the world brighter with is laugh. Joker was my favorite DC character, because his twisted view of the world makes sense. So did Arthur's version, but the means to prove that were wrong. In DC Joker just keeps on doing it, but in contrast we finally see the Joker becoming human again. That's a good movie (minus the musical)
It’s a fine *standalone* movie if it had no relation to DC whatsoever and both the first and second movie had completely different titles. They knew exactly they were doing with the advertising and the use of _”The Joker”_ IP. It was essentially false advertising which is illegal.
If Todd didn't wanna make it, then he should have walked away. This movie is an entitled person complaining about success. Im really tired of people named Todd f cking things i like up.
Arthur want death.. Arthur like Murray.. Murray not like he thinks.. throws a joke.. He killed Murray.. Real Joker like Arthur.. Arthur not like he thinks.. throws a joke.. He killed Arthur.. Arthur get what he deserved..
I actually liked the movie, nothing's ever good enough for people everyone's a critic and apparently everyone is an expert screenplay writer/director and could do 100x better joker movie.. I like how the movie paid homage to classic silver screen Hollywood, with hints of Fred Astaire, Charlie Chaplin.. I liked all the singing and dancing it felt like a perfect blend of modern and classic movies..
I never even considered there was actually a visitor. I just assumed the guards were setting him up to get shanked. After all, if he really had a visitor, the guard absolutely would've doubled back to see where Arthur went. It's not exactly a free roam facility there. The guard would notice immediately Arthur has fallen behind.
This. Arthur was distracted by the other inmate for like a whole 3 minutes and the guard never came back to check where he was. This is the same people that raped him and killed his friend. They wanted him gone.
I had a different interpretation of the movie. Joker was about what could make a good person turn into a remorseless killer, who revels in violence and finds it funny. Deux was about what could make that person actually feel remorse & want to be a human being again. He felt guilty about traumatizing Gary, & getting the young inmate killed by the guards. What Arthur did inspired that guy to act out, Arthur wants to stop the people who might be inspired by Joker, so they don't get hurt, or hurt others, so he tries to destroy Joker's legacy. Ultimately what he did can't be undone, the next guy who killed him + carved up his face will take his place as The Joker. I didn't love the movie, for one thing it had way too many musical numbers. Not a good Joker sequel, but a few interesting ideas in it
The ending of him getting stabbed was just so unsatisfying. It's like I sat there for 2hr18min for that? It felt like no one but Arthur actually interacted with Harley for the whole movie so personally I thought she was just in his mind. And the random inmate we never met before, at least I don't remember him, kills him and carves his own face up like Heath Ledger's Joker... absurd. 🙄
I would have swapped that out to a final scene showing Arthur in bed, or in a padded room, in a straight jacket with yellow bloodshot eyes and a huge richter mortis grin on his face, further implying it's unclear how much of both films happened and how much is in his mind, but either way Fleck isn't Joker.... he's a victim of Joker venom.
I actually think the ending was the only saving grace. Makes perfect sense from a narrative standpoint, he was never the Joker all along even the first movie has enough stuff to peel back to show that's the case. He was always just some "random guy". Having it cut to (assuming) Heth, the actual Joker is brilliant. The rest of the movie I couldn't stand but the ending is the one thing they got right.
@@westrim Exactly! I will always defend the ending and give flowers when it's deserved. Even if I'm not a fan of everything else, the ending made the time spent worth it to me in the end. It's just most people are only thinking MC die = bad which is a very one-dimensional take to begin with.
A simple sequel could've been Harley helping joker escape Arkham asylum and they both terrorize the city together. & They could've introduced their own universe's Batman to save the day
Or we see thr joker and harley become gang leaders who ultimately kill martha wayne...we see bruce wayne as a child......fade to black....flash forward keaton in the suit again puttin joker away in cuffs....quip about how the joker will get the last laugh.....credits
Probably too simple or predictable. The plot for the second version was actually pretty good but not executed well, a mentally ill clown will inevitably be a bad leader. They should have shown how Arthur reached that “this isn’t for me” mindset. Make him do terrible stuff and meet people even crazier than him. It would then make a great plot twist when he works with Batman to fix his mistake
Ngl disrespecting hardworking people who find escale thru films is so gross man. I like Joaquin too but idk im kinda off all the people involved with this
I'll say it. It was a good movie with some heavy scenes. I thought the musical parts were really self indulgent and mostly unnecessary but damn if I didn't feel bad for Arthur and was disgusted by how evil Harley was. But when Arthur finally realizes that to continue to be joker he will have to throw people under the bus and become just as nasty as the people who abused him all his life after the Mr. Puddles scene. He comes back to reality and admits he is just a normal guy and got too carried away by it all. The scene where Harley says shes pregnant and then starts being nonsensical and begins singing while Arthur is going through about every single emotion someone who really isn't ready to be father can go through was super real and tragic as he starts believing in her gaslighting.
I dont even know where to begin. Joker was such a breath of fresh air when it came out and was such a polarizing film , most of all the pacing was top tier imo. I haven't and won't see Joker 2, I just feel like if the idea was to not glorify the actions of the joker the film should have been told from the perspective of another character. Hell, they could've used Harley to show us a different version of Joaquin's Joker from her perspective that contradicts Arthur. I guess if we want to see good movies we need to do it ourselves...
Contrary to popular opinion, i REALLY FEEL Todd phlips made a bold choice in showing the middle finger to the audience who instead of empathizing, idealises the manifestation of trauma and hurt!!!! Even though creative choice to make it a Musical went over my head,but the overall essence of the movie is good! I know if the message is too direct then it puts off the audience and comes out as preachy but sometimes its important to show them a direct mirror when they have been misunderstanding something all along!! Similar thing ended up happening to Christian bale's american psycho and poeple started idealising him instead of understanding that its manual to "Not be this person" instead of being one...sometimes we as audiences also do deserve this hard and direct hit in the face to wake us up to reality,no matter how pissed it makes us! BRAVO TODD!
I think the lesson of the film is that people like this fantasy version of you (Joker) but hate the real you (the loser Arthur Fleck). And Fleck sealed his own fate by not embracing his Joker persona.
@@Fillenbillen I respect that. It’s so funny that even Todd Philips and Joaquin Phoenix think it stinks. And the whole media say it was terrible. But by rotten tomatoes it’s 33%, which means 1 out of 3 people who watched it like it.
I feel Arthur sealed his fate by embracing this Joker persona. Without firing his lawyer he might have been viewed by the jury as a victim of circumstance, the system failing him, a partly delusional schizophrenic additionally suffering from arrested development due the trauma of prolonged sexual childhood abuse, and furthermore being damaged by parentification from an early age on due to having to care for his psychologically unstable mother. This might have lead to a milder sentence, getting him sent back into security custody, but this time in a proper hospital without sadistic, or with at least less sadistic guards and proper therapy and medication. But with the Joker taking over, he blew all of that away, showed mean streaks of verbal cruelty towards Gary before Gary gave his heartbreaking testimonial, alienated and shocked the Jury with a sudden confession so that they must have felt mocked by what appeared to be nothing but a charade to insult the victims' families. Thus, Arthur appeared as a sadistic killer without any empathy at all, securing the death penalty.
I think your reading it wrong. I'm thinking he didn't get the death penalty and he didn't actually have a visitor. I think he was set up to be killed because he didn't get the death penalty. I also feel this is the perfect follow up to the first movie. It explains why jokers origin story always changes. There have been a bunch of jokers with different origin stories and each new joker takes on all previous origins alnd adds his own.
imagine a Director whos job is to make movies, gets a fan base who wants more movies that the director created, to only end up pooping on them because he doesn't want to make movies his fans want to see...what weird times we live in.
![ทุกครั้งที่หลับตา (Lucid Dream) - AYLA's [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4i1OBAQyv58/mqdefault.jpg)
Here's my Joker 2 Ending video. Post all your reactions in the comments. I'll do a longer WTF Easter Eggs and Breakdown video tomorrow. Here's my Joker 2 Movie Review too! th-cam.com/video/EQOGhvcxJpo/w-d-xo.html
The matt reeves needs to just be the primary universe.
Movie was do-do water
Agatha all along is better
They ruined the joker
@@zigghie8285I didn’t see this bro
They should of named the movie, Joker 2 : The jokes on you.
Should have
the jokes on you 2: electric boogaloo, the squeakel folie a deux
this is perfect
to be fair this would be a very Joker move.
Or Joker 2:hollywood movies are trash right now
Poor guy, "forced" to take tens of millions of dollars to make movie.... I hope he's okay.
i mean... either he does it or they take the next guy and it's gonna be even more s**t than the thing we got now. i can see how someone feels "forced" to do it.
@@xMrMayhemx Maybe maybe not. Alien vs Aliens. Both great movies. Two different directors. With Phoenix and Lady Gaga. I really don't think you could go much worse than what we got with a really motivated director building off the first film.
You would be surprised how annoying a studio that you want to keep working for but doing other director and passionate film making for. They probably kept throwing joker 2 in his face
Gotta love being WYT
Can I be "forced" to being privileged enough to be able to helm a Joker movie and possibly bring some actual joy and escapism to fan's.
I think the person that was visiting him when he got stabbed was his first lawyer. She actually did care for him and was right all along about Harley.
Or it was a lie to kill him
So Todd Phillips basically purposely makes shitty sequels for a big payday
Yup
It's made me love John Carpenter even more.
No, that’s just an idiotic excuse. No idea why he’s taking the stance that somehow Todd isn’t responsible for this like it’s not his fault. Wtf are you on about dude YIKES
Poor guy
Just like Wachowski making Matrix 4.
Congratulations to Todd Phillips, he may be one of the few who made a movie where critics and audience agree on a 33% Rotten Tomatoes score, that's very rarely seen.
No kidding he needs to pick up a lottery ticket 😂
Lol, i spit on my screen trying to hold the laught 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 sooooo trueeeee a film so empty
The dude has absolutely no idea what he's talking about
Tod has plans this particular joker to tie into the multiverse
Freemason number
And now it’s 32%
Todd: "ok guys I see you want a Joker sequel"
Fans: "no we do not"
Todd: "even though I reaaalllyy don't wanna do it, I'll do it for you"
Fans: "please don't"
Todd: "if you are soo insistent I simply can't refuse you. You're welcome"
Yeah, it's more the studio wanted a money making franchise from a one and done thing. The fans don't really get a say with what happens. And then the fans are blamed for being toxic or some such rot.
If I could find a way to make money off of every time this has happened...
Don't make me sing
What are you talking about?MANY people wanted this movie even though it was said The Joker was supposed to be a standalone. Now that you got it, your gonna pretend you never wanted it?? K.
Speak for yourself
@@Fickji fans are toxic as shit mate.
The irony of a millionaire artist that gets to write stories for a living self inserting as the joker acting like hes some poor tortured soul isnt lost on me
Wkwk
What?
That's just an interpretation
Literally baffling to me. Should have said no and kept it moving.
He was a tortured person in the first film? I'm confused
OOOH man it must suck to make millions to make a movie to say FU to the fans and the studio
Right
You gotta admit, it's a pretty funny joke.
They all look completely deranged. As in for real not from an acting/immersive standpoint… it’s like a real lunatic directed this movie. Everytime i see him standing still smoking his cigarette i burst out laughing. I can’t take anything happening seriously
@@jayzonedc6474
Not when you get charged money to hear it.Then you are just in a bad F mood.
@@drakearvidsson6936 Nah, that made it even funnier. You gotta embrace your inner Joker and see the absurdity of the world.
So apparently we did the bad action of liking the first joker movie and forced Todd Phillips into making a second one? That a load of bs
@@Alex38369 you clearly missed the point. He had no intention of making a sequel. The movie didn’t need a sequel but WB wanted to milk the cash cow. Better to take it out to the backyard and shoot it yourself then let someone else let it slowly and painfully milk it to death. They were gonna take his vision and ruin it regardless, let’s be honest here. It’s Warner Bros.
They didn't make him do anything. They gave him a shit load of money and he said "Okay".
Making a good sequel to basically a carbon copy of Taxi Driver + King of Comedy would be hard. Some people just don't wanna admit Todd Bungl is simply incompetent.
@@HughMungus45Nah, he wanted to make a sequel. He figured he could ride the lightning off the popularity of the first film, he thought this nonsense was genius, and when it bombed he threw everyone but himself under the bus. "Big mean WB made me do it! I didn't wannaaaa 😢💰🤑🤑🤑"
tbf joker fanboys are annoying asl
Why should Todd be trusted with anything tbh. He's establishing a track record of making a movie, getting mad that it's successful and crashing the ship on purpose. What a brat.
I genuinely don’t understand why you wouldn’t want your movie to be popular? Like do they not want money? Do they hate that they’re popular? Do they not like doing their job? Do they just hate fans? I genuinely don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to make a movie and then get mad when it’s received well.
That’s like making sharknado then getting mad when people think it’s actually pretty funny. Why even make it?
@@garf7298Or what if they just respect it enough to contain it to one movie ? And not going for trilogies, sagas and spin offs that stains the original intent ?
@@garf7298reminds me of how goth kids started destroying their culture as emo became a thing.
@@jeremybauchet6845 If this was the first time, I would sort of get it. But then why get contracted for more than one film?
Since this is a reoccuring pattern, its him being a brat at this point. Nobody forced him in the sense he could have walked away but instead decided to waste everyone's time and money
@@MelancholyJoker19 He'd rather take the blame by being the only one able to kill his own billion worth baby, instead of having a JJ Abrams-Rian Johnson situation all over again.
Todd Phillips has been very clear since the premiere in 2019 that there would be no sequel at all.
It's Warner Bros that insisted when they saw the cash flow. It was him going all over again, or some random yes man engaged by WB.
So yeah. It was his middle finger lesson to WB for not listening to the desire of having one shots movies. Movies are just like paintings. You can have triptics sometimes, but if the painter wanted this one piece to be unique, everyone shall respect that.
But that's everyone's fault, for pressuring alongside WB to get a sequel.
We saw how much sequels damage franchises, big IPs when they're not made with intent.
This film wasn’t needed. The first movie was just fine as a stand-alone
I disagree.
They could have done a sequel but nit this man....
I remember in 2018 they were saying that Joker was going to be a stand alone. I guess blame the studio for being greedy wanting a sequel and Todd Phillips didn't want it, so this is what we got.
DC - "But Money..."
Wrong. This is a perfect duology.
Arthur's lawyer was right. Nobody cared about him, not even his own girlfriend. Everyone cared about the Joker.
“You get what you fucking deserve” couldn’t be more fitting for a film like this seeing how it’s bombing at the box office.
So they made this film to reprimand us while also charging us for admission. Scumbag Hollywood stuff right there.
Exactly get ovoooo it
I really hope that’s not true lmao. He’s crazy if he did that shit on purpose
@@J.C.3 it's hilarious though. If he made the film to be a one off, and wanted to take that idea and keep it going past what he wanted. That is messed up. They wanted a sequel so bad, and that's what they get rather than being happy with just one special film.
What I don't get is how was he forced to make this? He wasn't contracted for it according to what he said when the first movie came out...
@@johnyap4154 well I'm sure that the idea and interpretation of joker 1 was completely his idea. After the success of it, the production company has all the rights to make a second one with or without him. I'm sure he wanted to just let it be, and marinate with time. So the studio probably kept pressing to make the movie either with or without him. They also produced several junkits stating how Joaquin and Todd were very keen on the idea of a sequel. Those are produced with strategy, not by mistake
This movie feels like an anti fan-service movie, unlike what Marvel does.
Todd could have went the easy way, make a Joker that gets thrown into acid, where he manipulates Harley, and becomes a mastermind, ultimately teasing Batman in the third movie.
But he did the opposite.
Harley serves no purpose, the Joker is nothing but a persona, and the shocking scenes adds no layer but being edgy just to be edgy.
And the ending to me, is purely a mock-off of a bad fan-fiction ending.
Todd Phillips did everything wrong. And it's so wrong, it feels on purpose. It's like getting 0 on a 100 questions QCM.
Napiszesz co się stało w zakończeniu?
@@SzalonaJanka i'm sorry but i do not understand 😿
@SzalonaJanka, I got you, man. SPOILERS.
Joker got killed in the asylum by a weird "real" joker, Harley was never pregnant and leaves him, he also got SAed by the guards. I liked the movie myself but lots of people hate it very sad.
It really does feel like on purpose. He hated everything about Comic book movies and the success of the previous ones and decide to mock the fanbase that supported not just the first Joker movie, but the entire comic book genre. I guess congrats for him, i suppose. The joke has always been on us. This movie's failure is well deserved because thats what Todd wants, i guess
@@johans3164ahahha exactly, but so this movie is more deeper about how no one actually cares about real human beings , about Arthur fleck, all we wanna see is the joker
If Todd Phillips hates his movies, maybe idk, stop making movies?
Did you watch the entire video or are you just that dense?
Studios will do that. They will say make the Joker 2, if you don't we won't greenlight your other projects.
He said he was done with dc universe after this one.
@@MechaMono_ and turn down millions yea right 😂 this the real world 🌍
@@MechaMono_ Honestly in my opinion, it was just the pride of Todd Phillips and his unwillingness to let go of his own version of the Joker and how he liked directing. It kind of reminds me of the Wachowski’s and what they did with the recent matrix sequel. I totally get why the directors wouldn’t want to give up something they put so much time and effort in, but at the same time they have to realize they’re working with a multi million dollar corporation like Warner Brothers. They potentially could’ve signed a contract saying that if there was a significant return of investment on the film, they would be picked first to direct the sequel considering they directed it the first time. They have the choice to opt in or opt out of that. So they did sign up for this..
It’s honestly just pride of their own versions of the characters in my opinion.
Phenix said he wouldn’t come back for a 2nd unless the script was perfect… guess he whispered or $20mil gets handed to him?
Money talks
@@lightingthief4482yes it does. And honestly I don’t blame him
The script was good but the execution one of the worst, no matter how good a plot is if the execution isn't good then it just a waste
Or this is what he wanted....
I assume he didn't want to do this anymore, so I guess his one condition was that Arthur died.
I think the first 2/3s of the movie is pretty good, especially when he embraces joker, but after he is beaten up by the guards that last 1/3 of the movie is so bad it ruins the whole movie
Whole time I was watching the bootleg I was like I don’t see why people talking so much trash about this it’s good. Then that scene.. all downhill from there. Third act destroyed the whole film.
It could have been a decent movie if it had ended with him in the back of that Joker-gang car.
@@thetruth1013no cap bruh the ending ruins the movie
Soo…. Did he like get r@p3d in the showers?? That was a little confusing
@@jonathanvillalba3214 yes.
If you hate JOKER, WHY MAKE JOKER MOVIE TO BEGIN WITH !!
I presume it was written into his contract and the studio made him honor it
think it´s a contract thing, just like The Matrix 4. If he refuses to do it, they can do it without him, so he rather f it up himself and close business. Well, it worked, who is exited for a new Joker? Not me
It's hollywood.....everything is done for the same reason: precious shekels
@@darthvinithat's why i like the matrix resurrection's because it was a massive f u to warner brothers if you wach it properly
💰 💰 💰
How is anyone forcing Todd to make a part 2. He can always say no. He is paid well. It was his choice.
thank you
right im so tired of this point he is a multi millionaire and crying that how got paid even more how bad is it for him
we don't know what was said until it's exposed by either todd or someone else. Hollywood is a bunch of cash grabbers and don't care if the director says no, maybe they threatened to prevent another project if they don't get what they want. we just don't know
I agree with you . Just wondering if there are multi movie contract clauses where he is committed to do a sequel if first movie makes x$M. Even if that is the case, he can still refuse, just with higher consequences
If you have a contract, Warner could potentially sue. That's why actors sometimes due movies they dont want to. Also, hes getting paid regardless
Here’s what upsets me most about this ending. The killing of Arthur by a future joker is not a bad idea, however the way they did it was horrible and it really cheapens the impact of everything the movie tried to be.
Like even if they did make a sequel with this ending it just won’t feel like an actual movie but more of a desperate cash grab for the audience.
Plus it isn’t at all in line with the Joker character to base his persona on someone else
Idk how people are so convinced that the mental patient at the end of the movie becomes Heath Ledgers Joker.
This universe has its own Harvey Dent and they even showed how he lost half his face. There's no way there are two Harvey Dent district attorneys who both happened to lose half of their face. THAT would be one fucking HELL of a coincidence. And during the Dark Knight no one mentions the name Arthur Fleck while someone is running around Gotham calling themselves Joker? There's no way.
It’s clearly supposed to be the real joker that is the rival to Batman but it’s probably not supposed to be Ledger’s Joker. Yeah I don’t get it either
This is different universe. Ending mean Joker is just the idea. Anyone can be Joker. Arthur is just the one who start it, and it not the same Dark knight universe.
I think it might be the joker from the batman universe. We got a new batman movie coming up with possibly the joker in it
@@robin97rvOh hell nah the batman sequel better not be ass
@@robin97rvthis is why it’s a stupid idea. The whole him cutting himself after killing arthur was totally not needed for a film where joker has a story like this one. Really shitty ending to a film
It almost feels disrespectful that he thrashed such an interesting version of the Joker.
Exactly, it’s sad that this could had been something really good and if some else had the chance could have boosted their career but this is Hollywood, the dark inside of it.
No almost hedid.
bro made a good joker movie (a villain that people adore outside of his movies) and got mad when people got interested in this version of him. Braindead
@@LolTroll217 dudes oblivious of why this movie was made lol but go off bro, you look up to a clown whilst looking like irl
@@tippydahutt the only explanations for why this movie was made are 12th grade English ThisIsVeryDeep in nature
Todd Philips is like a kid who is disgruntled for being loved for the first movies he makes, then they want more from him and he is like I don’t feel like it
The trailers itself is 100x better than the actual movie.
They weren’t good either. I could’ve told you this movie was going to suck as soon as news came out that they cast Gaga. Then the trailer came out and it confirmed everything about it would suck. Clearly a total piece of shit film. You could smell the shit through the screens on your phone
No wonder it cost 3 times more than first one
agreed, they went to heavy on the singing and not enough actual story, the joker was an actual joke in this one, also i think they had the opportunity for Gaga to be remembered as the best Harley as well but they wasted that opportunity. The film overall was very boring, part 1 was 1000x better.
@@TheUnfortunate0ne1Gaga wasn’t even bad, the way Harley Quinn was written was just absolutely atrocious
@@dantepierre1948 Gaga has never been good. I doubt she started being good in this pile of shit movie.
They should’ve pulled this instead of Wile E. Coyote and road runner😢😢😢😢😢
For real. Even if it equally sucked, least it wouldn't tie itself to a far better movie.
@@lile4life713 I agree. Honestly in my opinion, it was just the pride of Todd Phillips and his unwillingness to let go of his own version of the Joker and how he liked directing. It kind of reminds me of the Wachowski’s and what they did with the recent matrix sequel. I totally get why the directors wouldn’t want to give up something they put so much time and effort in, but at the same time they have to realize they’re working with a multi million dollar corporation like Warner Brothers. They potentially could’ve signed a contract saying that if there was a significant return of investment on the film, they would be picked first to direct the sequel considering they directed it the first time. They have the choice to opt in or opt out of that. So they did sign up for this..
It’s honestly just pride of their own versions of the characters in my opinion.
Its WILY COYOTE
I'm god damn tired of movies being pulled anyway. If it's already been made, or even if it's just mostly done, just release the damn thing zaslav
@@krazykuz13cmc imagine trying to correct somebody and you’re wrong lol it’s Wile E. Coyote
There was actually no visitor. It was all a setup
I agree
The "joker" guy who stabs arthur at the end is visible early in the film, doing creepy smiles in the background, staring at Arthur Fleck.
Yea I noticed him immediately. I thought he was gonna be a minion
Wow how amazing you and the 15 other people that seen this movie must have really been loving that callback 😂😂😂😂thanks for your sacrifice
@@postsniper-7532 you're great! Thanks for the input
well the way he eerie smiled at him and the way he came upto him at the end.. it was pretty evident he was going to do smth to arthur
The only good thing about the movie was the ending. The real joker looks so much more sinister than Arthur.
I’m absolutely shocked at how this project turned out, WTF HAPPENED!! Definitely won’t leave the house to watch this one! Thank you Charlie!!
Nah dude. Watch it. You need to see for yourself how BAD it is. Lol
@@hahaiwon dammit!! I probably will! Lol
@@hahaiwonPeople might be able to make back the money they lose on this pretty easily but making back the time they lose is a lot more difficult... Not worth the investment imo
@@carlos_picyweinerno you can just pirate it. Don't give them your money
@@twistedgale yessir!! And I can stay home!!!
Imagine being so conceited that you felt forced to make a sequel to a movie people adored. Unreal
Can we just all agree Joker 2 never happened.... just like the 2024 Crow.
Just like pacific rim uprising
can we all agree that you and the critics missed the point of the film
@@tippydahuttcan you explain rather than say we missed the point?
@@bloomgan5519 do i really need to when you people can't even elaborate on how the first isn't bad but the second is
And Disney starwars
I guess that's Hollywood for you. Make a movie complaining about the success of your previous movie. Maybe Phillips can be a dockworker instead, I hear they need those.
Am super disappointed💔
@@KerlimKerl Ah well my happiness doesn't rely on a movie, so I'm OK.. but yeah it would've been nice if this could've been a worthy successor to the first movie. I guess it wasn't in the cards :)
They had the perfect chance to tie this in with The Batman and make the guy who kills Arthur be the ‘joker’ Robert Pattinson interviews in the deleted scene
😐
If you know anything about dc, it makes absolutely no sense
@@notnino6235 it largely makes no sense anyway, but to mostly dismiss the whole concept of the Joker origin is such a middle finger to fans. As has been pointed out, if the first film had been about a disgruntled man with mental health problems who kills a few people, it would have been largely ignored. It made a billion off the back of being a Joker film.
I hope ur trolling 😂😂
@@dicarpio2177Well, "you'll get what you deserve." If the reason you're interested in art is not the plot, not the acting, not the visuals, not the meta-commentary, but the name of a character from a children's picture book... Well, there are two such characters in this film! I hope these viewers are happy
You know damn well this has nothing to do with the Dark Knight
Maybe it has . The guy that killed felix at the end carves a smile on his face with the knife like the real joker from Batman. Maybe he was the real joker
@@glint_tvnah
@@glint_tvin Dark Knight Joker explained that his dad carved that smile “let’s put a smile on that face”
@@Julius7istthe joker in the dark knight told multiple stories about his scars to different people and that was very intentionally done to keep his origin ambiguous
How could Harvey Dent have injured his face twice?
Stop blaming studios for the bad idea of the filmmakers. Todd Phillips didn't purposely made bad movie. He actually DID make a bad movie.
Thing is it wasn’t a bad movie
@@ChefLASaint😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 shit was 🗑️🧃
@@cleansoles912vision7 it was a well made film not the best but definitely doesn’t deserve all the reviews it’s getting by retard critics and butthurt comic nerds who had the expectation that the series never was supposed to be in the first place
yeah for sure because the vision of making a musical out of a serious thriller was 100% going to knock the audiences socks off!
Don't be naïve dude, nobody would've thought that a musical was the way to go bro.
Seriously... there is only like 30 minutes of story continuation from the first movie...
Lee: " I would do anything for you." (Except stay with you when you're not Joker any more.) I could hear his heart breaking. 💔
So Todd Phillips is a whiny little b basically😂😂
I mean let's be real, he still got paid and he's richer then us so I guess the jokes on us.
Hahahahahaha @@jordansupplee6561
Angry white guys, upset they didn't get the power fantasy they wanted...
@@jordansupplee6561simp
@@jordansupplee6561 exactly playa me and him stay winning
Once it was announced this was a "musical" people should have known...
I should’ve did some research because I didn’t know that. I kept saying what is this a musical🤦🏽♂️
I dont look up movies i go to see in the cinema... I regret it the movie sucked
Why do people say musicals suck? They don't, this was just a bad one
@@1_Toed_Man that's not neccessarily what I meant
It's just that people should have known this won't be an actual sequel to the previous one you know?
@@1_Toed_Man Musicals are lame
Today I decided to go take a look and saw that it was really good. This movie deconstructs and evaluates what 1 movie said and people were rather expecting scale. This situation is comparable to the one in the film. People were waiting for the Joker but they got Arthur Fleck. Still, I hope that the film will earn its box office and the ratings will change.
Making a movie as an F u for forcing him to do it… does he know he didn’t have to say yes? Lol
I don’t understand, how somebody is “forced” to make a movie.
Like, if you don’t want to do it, just say “no”… why butcher it?
Well…they could always have “leverage” over the guy. You know…like “special info” involving particular “indecent activity” with a certain type (think, Epstein style😉). Kind of like what Kathleen Kennedy most likely dangles over her Disney superiors on a routine basis, to keep herself in the position she’s in. Just saying.🤷🏻😆
Contracts contracts contracts. You ever wonder why an actor is in some movie? Their contract forced them. Why not decline? Boom 40 million fine. Joaquin phoenix is actually being sued currently for saying no to an upcoming project.
@@Jason-eu5zxTodd doesn't have a contract. Educate yourself.
@@Jason-eu5zx Nahhhhhhhhhhh Joker was a standalone until it grabbed cashed and Todd got greedy. Learn about things you wanna open mouth for.
I presume it was written into his original contract as well. And then the studio made him honor it because the first was so successful
Dear Todd,
They should have never gave you money.
Fans of Joker
That Todd Philips comment about meta commentary. So similar to the matrix 4. While I can understand that frustration, there’s a level of ingratitude that these creatives get to work in a field that is lucrative and of their choosing. So many folks work jobs they hate day after day just to get by.
Yup!
@@marvinthemartian6788 I mean I get it from his point of view. The movie was perfect as a stand alone. If he refused to make the sequel then he says goodbye to all that money and goodbye to funding for future films passion projects.
Todd Philips had the right to say no to a sequel, but he said yes, only to fuck over the fans and general audiences who wanted to see the evolution of the character. No one should idolize the joker, so that point could’ve still come across showing us that he is indeed a crazy mf, that does awful shit.
In the first one he was the underdog, we felt bad for him, now imagine in the sequel we don’t feel bad for him, we actually hate him towards the end, like you would a realistic joker. he could’ve delved deep into the psyche of a broken individual who sees society and people as jokes and then is given power. The director is so entitled for the move he made, actually pisses me off how he really gave the fans a middle finger. Yea give the studio a middle finger that’s fine but when u do it to your fans that different. Total opposite of what Ryan Reynolds’s did, and he gave the studio a middle finger the whole time but delivered for the fans.
SPOILER ALERT 🔔
He could’ve still died at the end by the “real joker” taking inspiration from the crimes he committed. But we would’ve seen the chaos he had brought to Gotham and had been satisfied with the end. He would’ve been too old for Batman anyways so it would make sense that the joker for the bat was inspired by this guy.
Huh, you are right. Just like the Godfather movie. In the first one, we see how Michael rises (or descends if you could say so) to the world of Mafia and underground crime. In the second movie, we see how he delves deeper, evolving psychologically into a more cruel and unrest version of himself. Imagine if Joker 2 is like that, we can see now why being like the Joker is bad, or atleast shown what will happen if you let people like the Joker let loose, the cruelty and the carnage it will bring
@@nabongobong9155 that’s what the ending of the first one was leading to but it was left open ended.
Now in the sequel they undo the whole arc. I love that comparison to the godfather, let the joker loose and grow to show how twisted the character is, still have him die tho, I think that it was always supposed to set up him up to be the inspiration to a legit Batman joker anyways, he’d be too old.
Now these are just dreams 🥲. Maybe the movie gets better with the years but rn it bums everyone out.
i fw heavily with what you think dude
@@alessandrobarrientos8961 they massacred my boy arthur man
Have you ever considered that the possibility that the fans may be shit and they deserve the middle finger? Well, that's what I think.
I love this film, almost more than the first one.
Petition to delete this from our minds
Todd Philips sounds like a giant baby
Nop just jewish
Movie sucks! Director insufferable! Studio is annoying!
If the director didn’t want to do it then should have walked away.. nobody can force him to do anything. He has the FU money already. He did it anyways because he wanted the money the studio was giving him.. he’s not a victim.
First movie was too popular with what they consider to be "toxic fans"... had to make it cringe
if it was about the money he'd go with the safe option for a sequel, but he did not. why all of you people are acting like some knowledgeble smart guys who have some insider info? you don't, not everything is just about the money
Y'all know studios will blacklist you for not doing what they want right?
@@desmondslater are you're implying that what they wanted was a very dangerous idea of a musical? how was that supposed to be some cashgrab tactic
They sign contracts…
She didn’t know shit about those stairs…why would she be there 😂
Todd must have a really hard life. I feel sorry we forced him into making this movie. No person should be subjected to the horrors of being a big budget Hollywood director. Moment of silence for todd
ahahahahaha 😂
Or maybe this joker stuff is actually just really gay so get over it
wasting peoples time is not a good way to express ur art
I think people seem to miss the point of the whole Joker thing. It's been well established that the Joker ideology is the opposite mirror image to the Batman ideology. Anyone can be Joker if pushed far enough into madness and insanity. Same way anyone can be Batman if willing and able enough. Yes Arthur was only the inspiration and catalyst for all the chaos and madness, he was simply a broken man that snapped and went on a killing spree. But I'd wager without him the real Joker wouldn't have gotten the inspiration to kill him and take his place.
That’s the reason why I thoroughly enjoyed this film. Idk what sequel people expected to see after the first one, but this was spot on to me. The feeling the Joker gives you when he takes control of Arthur the people that he sees being inspired by his actions. Idk about him being better than heath ledger but Joaquin Phoenix’s Joker is nothing short of sublime
I went in knowing this was going to feature musical numbers and it opened with a Looney Toons-esque cartoon., before dumping us in the grim reality of Arkham. From there I could tell this was not going to be some low brow, fan service flick. Deliberately blurring the lines to give us Arthur's beaten down psyche, the film is almost entirely seen from his warped perspective, thus it is deliberately vague on what is fact or fiction. Rather like Terry Gilliam's Brazil, the blur between fantasy & reality leaves you questioning what you have seen. This film will age well as it picks up a cult following amongst those who want to be challenged by the movies that they see. Don't try to box it with the other DC movies. It deserves to stand by itself
@@stephenreardon2698 It actually reminds me of a line that Mark Hamill's Joker says in The Killing Joke. "The past and memories can be treacherous. Sometimes I remember my past one way and sometimes another. If I had to choose my own past I would prefer multiple choice." Pretty much sums up the Joker's psyche, fractured and unable to determine what's real or the truth.
@@stephenreardon2698In my opinion it's a surprisingly brilliant sequel!
Personally, I never gleefully rooted for Joker when he first took over in the first movie. I just felt shocked and at the same time still a sad kind of empathy for Arthur, as it was never his conscious intention to become a ruthless killer, and thus I took already the first film as a tragedy, and as kind of a cruel and mean practical joke played on him by Gotham City itself.
The life experience forced upon him in this city, right from the start, lead him on to hide in a world of illusion he simply could not get out of again, so he descended deeper and deeper into it until he got lost within and, fleeing from harsh reality, delusionally thought his life were a comedy.
This was the most cruel punchline this Gotham could ever make him the butt of. A delusion as extreme as this one adds insult to injury by making the inevitable comedown from it psychologically much, much more painful, because it heightens the emotional state from which its victim must eventually plummet: From delusional mania into disillusioned depression.
Especially after committing murders under the influence of a self-righteous delusion, being faced with the harsh reality of their consequences, this invariably means: King for a day, fool for a lifetime.
With Arthur being as underprivileged, interpersonally naive, socially awkward, prone to delusions and of below average intelligence, as precisely shown over the course of "Joker" already, anything a "Joker 2" movie consistent with the first one could ever logically turn out as would have to be an epilogue portraying this comedown from Fleck's illusional flight into madness.
With a setup that obvious if keeping things realistic: Was this sequel really "needed"?
Right after watching "Joker", I adamantly would have answered that question with a capitalized "NO!".
But then, adding the character of Lee Quinzel, with an interesting inversion of the power structure we are used to seeing between Harley Quinn and The Joker, also adding a deeper exploration of Arthur's desperate need for love and for being seen and accepted, and yet again putting more of a focus on how Gotham's tense societal atmosphere comes close to a boiling point, also putting more of a focus on stylistic choices that led me further down the rabbit hole of Arthur's delusion, of his desperate coping mechanisms, his misreadings of people's ulterior motivations and intentions even if barely hidden behind a threadbare facade, "Folie a deux" made me empathize even more with its protagonist than "Joker" did.
"Joker: Folie a deux" not only took a deep dive into Arthur's deranged mind, it furthermore did it from the inside looking out, almost throughout the movie's entire runtime.
It allowed me to truly understand how Arthur Fleck ticks.
While also depicting the careless cruelty and collective madness of Gotham's inhabitants - or if you want to look at it from a more metaphysical point of view: depicting a haunting spiritus loci poisoning the inhabitants' minds - the atmosphere of this movie, between magic realism and surrealism, took me on a trip just as fantastic and fascinating as the comic book "Arkham Asylum: A Serious Place on Serious Soil".
That's way more than I had hoped for from an allegedly "unwarranted" sequel.
Even with little screen given to Lee Quinzel, her scenes were enough to explain and support Arthur Fleck's character arc, and Lady Gaga portrayed Quinzel with such emotional depth and with such manipulative cunning that it makes me wish for yet another sequel, one mainly dealing with this character's future development- at least if such a portrayal is psychologically as consistent with "Folie a deux" as Arthur Fleck's portrayal in "Folie a deux" is with what "Joker" established before.
Even though, compared to "Joker", "Folie a deux" was a movie less enjoyable and harder for me to watch, because there is no catharsis in the end but rather a hauntingly tragic ending for Arthur, I feel that both the movie and Arthur himself did go out in style:
Arthur regains his humanity and dignity by reining in and integrating his shadow, thus finally owning his life completely, warts and all, including his most erroneous decisions, and by doing so he finally grows out of being for ever so long a largely unaware, deeply hurt child lashing out against a world not quite understood, and he comes into his own as a fully fledged adult who now has shed all illusions he ever so long had lived by, an adult who now has the guts to face himself and his own tragedy, a botched up life full of misery, and even if it means certain death for him, he brings up the courage to accept full responsibility for his deeds, thus allowing himself to feel empathy for his victims.
Empathy in a city lacking empathy!
A villain becoming an "internal hero" triumphing over the darkest sides of his personality, by not allowing himself to stay as embittered and aggressive as the city that has wronged him for decades - that to me is beauty in darkness, hope against hope, a defiant light in the eternal darkness that is and always will be Gotham City.
Here we have not a superhero, not a seemingly steadfast moral beacon such as Batman, but someone who has been pulled down into a living hell, who has then successfully been tempted to do the most evil deeds - and yet he came out of it on the other end, a better and more rounded person, finally free from fear and seeing clearly, even if only for a very brief moment: A moment of slight redemption achieved against all odds.
The craftsmanship behind shaping the poignantly fitting atmosphere of Gotham City as experienced by "Folie a Deux"'s protagonist I experienced as even more intensive than what "Joker" came up with.
In spite of being a movie about the utmost cruelties possibly being done to human beings, "Joker: Folie a Deux" is a surprisingly tender movie due to it being told empathically through the lense of its fragile and tragic protagonist.
Bravo!
it's a middle finger to the studio, the fans, to your mom and dan, your girlfriend/boyfriend. shit probably to your dog too..
nooo!!! not my sparky!!!
Dan will never forgive him for this.
Nobody gives my dog the finger..... I will avenge my 🐕 🌭 dog
Dont forget my nigga Dan
Damn it must suck to make a movie so succesful that you get a strong fanbase and get to make a sequel
Heath Ledger’s joker said his dad carved his face.. that guy at the end looks like heath ledger.. and carves faces… 🤷🏼♂️
The dance in the bathroom ...and on the stairs and the chat show scene in the first movie was pure cinema gold ...unfortunately money talks ....
But Todd Phillips actually said in a recent interview that him and Joaquin actually wanted to work together again and they had more to say with the character of Joker, so this rumour that Todd was forced into making it just seems like a false myth
Fans like all of us are too mind blown that this really happened so they’re trying to look into a deep meaning, but the truth is Todd Phillips couldn’t top his first one
@@84paratize Honestly in my opinion, it was just the pride of Todd Phillips and his unwillingness to let go of his own version of the Joker and how he liked directing. It kind of reminds me of the Wachowski’s and what they did with the recent matrix sequel. I totally get why the directors wouldn’t want to give up something they put so much time and effort in, but at the same time they have to realize they’re working with a multi million dollar corporation like Warner Brothers. They potentially could’ve signed a contract saying that if there was a significant return of investment on the film, they would be picked first to direct the sequel considering they directed it the first time. They have the choice to opt in or opt out of that. So they did sign up for this..
It’s honestly just pride of their own versions of the characters in my opinion.
He was forced into making THIS. This is not a statement from Todd Phillips. This is a humiliation ritual imposed on him.
@@Fantasyremixnope, this is him, in fact he was given big creative freedom (and big money), which means he can make it good if he wanted it
Yeah this video is full of assumptions. We shouldn't spread rumors like that unless we have a source.
Todd Phillips wanted another paycheck.
He's not some tortured soul.
This is where they meesed up, They introduce Harvey Dent character , then got his half face burn, giving the audience the impression that thats was his origin story, Ruining the timeline even more
What timeline is being ruined here? These Joker movies were always meant to be solo entries, and were never meant to build to anything else in the DC universe. There is already a separate Batman movie timeline with Barry Keoghan as the Joker. And another with the upcoming DCEU headed by James Gunn. If you thought this movie ever had any chance to have continuity with the other films, you really missed the point. If that were the case, they wouldn't have cast a middle-aged Joaquin Phoenix in the role and introduce a child Bruce Wayne in the first film.
@@dudujencarellithis sequel is trash regardless.
@@dudujencarelliSo if there's no batman in this timeline, then what? Gotham becomes a wasteland?
Remind you that bruce is still a kid and two villains harley quin and two face are already around.
You think he becomes two face through the bomb in the court?
@@GP.Records this sequel is amazing my dude. The fact that you think it's trash proves its point.
The in-universe TV movie wasn't confirmed as "terrible." Lee thinks it's amazing because she idolized him. Gary thinks it's terrible because he was there for a murder. His neighbor also doesn't like it because she's in it as well. Nobody else shares much of an opinion. Everybody sees what they want to out of the first movie. That was the message there.
You can tell Arthur was tired of being joker when Harley drew the lipstick on the visiting glass. He looked so disappointed, but forced a smile on the glass.
Why do all of these people hate the fans so much.
because they hate themselves
Cause you guys are trash
I 100 percent agree! You hit the nail on the head!
because the fans are never satisfied, they always have negative things to say about a movie.
@@akino1827they didn't about the first one
I don't believe he had a visitor at all. Throughout the movie, he's accompanied by guards usually cuffed down that hallway. But the one time he's alone with no guards suoervising was a setup by the guards to allow him to get shanked by the other inmate. Which is how it usually happens in prison. I do not believe he had a visitor at all.
Right, I was under the belief the fat guard set him up to die because he was still mad
@biancamcflurry9206 absolutely after they raped the joker out of him.
@biancamcflurry9206 here's my actual review
This film was extremely poorly executed, serving as a prime example of how to tarnish an iconic predecessor with a woefully inadequate sequel. The dialogue-driven scenes featuring Joaquin Phoenix were exceptional, but the implied rape/sodomy scene in the bathroom was deeply unsettling. It appears Todd Phillips aimed to dismantle the Joker character established in the first film. Almost as if Todd Phillips was told he had to assassinate the joker character from that movie. The original's poignant plight and anger resonated strongly with audiences, but this sequel seemed to eradicate the Joker's essence completely. The guards literally raped the joker out of him. What little remained was lost after the inmates death who came to his support. To make matters worse, the predictable ending was telegraphed early on. I firmly believe this sequel should not have been made. They effectively disassembled the character development from the first film, leaving me stunned. As for the singing segments, they only served to annoy, disrupting potentially meaningful dialogue and character development. I also understand what Todd Phillips was trying to accomplish in this film, deconstructing the Joker character to lose audience support and popularity garnered in the first film. But it felt like a total demolition rather than a thoughtful critique. He seemed to aim for a commentary on toxic fandom through Lady Gagas high society character and the Arkhman and general population in society. But the execution fell flat, leaving me disappointed and disconnected from the story and its themes of subverting expectations and challenging our attachment to the Joker. It felt messy. 🤔🤔🤔☹️☹️😠😠😠🤬🤬🤬🤬.
The first movie was: The Joker
This second movie was: The Joke
Not sure how Tod Philips is not getting sued over sabotaging multiple projects at this point,
guy has BPSD
@@Teshkomije he should have been black listed
I mean he could have just NOT made it….. instead of pissing on the fans and tanking a movie.
Seems selfish. He wasn’t forced to direct the movie, someone else could!
But but but.. money talks, which derails everything he claimed to stand for. He double killed his name and reputation
Just saw it. I actually didn't mind the movie. I was initially annoyed when he was dying but once I saw the kid cut the scars in I think that was for sure the idea of Ledgers Joker. This was probably late 70's, that kid was probably 18 or so in this movie. Ledgers Joker could pass for around mid 30's. That would put Dark Knight in the 90's which is about what it seems like. That all adds up, plus the more I think about it the more I like that idea that the original Joker wasn't the one that actually made it big, but was the one that came up with the idea and a real psycho killed him and took his place. Like that's what would actually happen in real life. A real psycho would seize that fantasy and make it his own life.
But the issue is that it doesn’t add up. Harvey Dent got injured twice, on top of already being District Attorney in this movie when in The Dark Knight he’s the NEW District Attorney after the death of longtime DA Carl Finch. And the Waynes’ portrayal was very different, right down to Thomas running for Mayor in Joker.
I’m thinking WB pushed too hard, and Todd just said “*uck it, let’s just sing!” He was quoted saying his time with the studio is done!
Same thing with WB and The Matrix. This movie had a lot of redeeming value, I just didn't like the ending. I *hated* The Matrix 4, no redeeming value. The lesson for WB should be: stop forcing your creators to make movies they don't want to make. Both are meta commentaries about how they didn't want to make the movie. In both, that's my least favorite aspect.
@@whatisdelicious fuckin great ..I totally agree 👍🏻
@@whatisdelicious perfectly said!!
"fuck", use your damn words, don't be a fucking child
I don’t think the fans wanted a sequel. The majority of what I see is being said is that, it didn’t need a sequel.
Yeah hes just trying to make it look otherwise
It wasn't the fans, it was the studio.
Right? Ppl weren’t asking for this film to begin with. It was an interesting take on joker but nobody was going crazy asking for a sequel to this. Everyone thought this was a one off
No one asked him for the sequel if it wasn’t connected to Batman anyways. Honestly, the most DISAPPOINTING dc movies I have EVER seen 💀
She seems more like a therapist going undercover to figure out what makes joker tik. And then writing a book about him. To become infamous.
I felt that vibe too ,
She was more of an obsessed fan of joker’s than a actual lover
Harley Quinn was such an undeveloped character. Since she spent most of the movie singing, we don't understand her motivations, her story, her personality, nothing.
There's no explanation to anything she does other than "she's crazy". She went as far as to have sx with him, have a baby, change her personality and looks, commit crimes, and publicly side with him on TV.
You mean like the original 90s version of the character? God I wish 😭
Look up Hybristophilia. That’s Harley in this movie.
Greedy stupid studios will never learn. So many franchise and sequels that should never happen or come to an end.
you guys are so fucking dense. You realize the film is a response to you and its critics right?
keep crying over a movie about a killer lol
Todd Phillips chose to stand up by sabotaging the film. He clearly had his message heard . A-hole move for the fans .
Art is not done for the audience or "fans"
For someone who saw Joker as Arthur and understood his mental breakdown... I really really appreciate this movie. He got to die as Arthur, the little boy who made the world brighter with is laugh. Joker was my favorite DC character, because his twisted view of the world makes sense. So did Arthur's version, but the means to prove that were wrong. In DC Joker just keeps on doing it, but in contrast we finally see the Joker becoming human again. That's a good movie (minus the musical)
It’s a fine *standalone* movie if it had no relation to DC whatsoever and both the first and second movie had completely different titles.
They knew exactly they were doing with the advertising and the use of _”The Joker”_ IP. It was essentially false advertising which is illegal.
Absolutely shit movie made by a leftwing loser trying to "punish" the right for liking the first film.
Also its the joker that kills Arthur, both metaphorically and literally
So, now movies are not about the story, the message, the art, are a new forum to make tantrums ... What a time to be alive
You guys all missed the point, the movie is about Arthur Fleck and his mental state, Todd Phillips mentioned that many times and even for Joker 1.
If Todd didn't wanna make it, then he should have walked away. This movie is an entitled person complaining about success. Im really tired of people named Todd f cking things i like up.
Who are the other Todd's? Todd Howard?
@@uneazypolarb7691obviously
@@uneazypolarb769116 times the details
Especially the Todd from breaking bad
Arthur want death..
Arthur like Murray..
Murray not like he thinks..
throws a joke..
He killed Murray..
Real Joker like Arthur..
Arthur not like he thinks..
throws a joke..
He killed Arthur..
Arthur get what he deserved..
I actually liked the movie, nothing's ever good enough for people everyone's a critic and apparently everyone is an expert screenplay writer/director and could do 100x better joker movie.. I like how the movie paid homage to classic silver screen Hollywood, with hints of Fred Astaire, Charlie Chaplin.. I liked all the singing and dancing it felt like a perfect blend of modern and classic movies..
it could be symbolic and in his head that the joker side has finally fully taken over and killed his original self like " Vader killing Anakin " etc.
Interesting take, not my interpretation, but a valid one. Even more bleak, dark and depressing than mine.
I never even considered there was actually a visitor. I just assumed the guards were setting him up to get shanked. After all, if he really had a visitor, the guard absolutely would've doubled back to see where Arthur went. It's not exactly a free roam facility there. The guard would notice immediately Arthur has fallen behind.
I also saw this setup coming a mile away
EXACTLY! Everyone wants to read way more into every bit of plot and action. just let it be what we saw.
This. Arthur was distracted by the other inmate for like a whole 3 minutes and the guard never came back to check where he was. This is the same people that raped him and killed his friend. They wanted him gone.
@@CarlosRodriguez-bh2ey Raped him? Did they? I know they beat him tho.
@CarlosRodriguez-bh2ey 😆 wait what? Who raped who, and who killed who? I need context. I really wanna know who you mean exactly
I had a different interpretation of the movie. Joker was about what could make a good person turn into a remorseless killer, who revels in violence and finds it funny. Deux was about what could make that person actually feel remorse & want to be a human being again. He felt guilty about traumatizing Gary, & getting the young inmate killed by the guards. What Arthur did inspired that guy to act out, Arthur wants to stop the people who might be inspired by Joker, so they don't get hurt, or hurt others, so he tries to destroy Joker's legacy. Ultimately what he did can't be undone, the next guy who killed him + carved up his face will take his place as The Joker. I didn't love the movie, for one thing it had way too many musical numbers. Not a good Joker sequel, but a few interesting ideas in it
We gotta stop saying they forced him… he seen the check and did this
The ending of him getting stabbed was just so unsatisfying. It's like I sat there for 2hr18min for that? It felt like no one but Arthur actually interacted with Harley for the whole movie so personally I thought she was just in his mind. And the random inmate we never met before, at least I don't remember him, kills him and carves his own face up like Heath Ledger's Joker... absurd. 🙄
Arthur’s defence attorney had a conversation with Harley over how she was handling his trial, so it’s safe to assume she was real.
I would have swapped that out to a final scene showing Arthur in bed, or in a padded room, in a straight jacket with yellow bloodshot eyes and a huge richter mortis grin on his face, further implying it's unclear how much of both films happened and how much is in his mind, but either way Fleck isn't Joker.... he's a victim of Joker venom.
I actually think the ending was the only saving grace. Makes perfect sense from a narrative standpoint, he was never the Joker all along even the first movie has enough stuff to peel back to show that's the case. He was always just some "random guy". Having it cut to (assuming) Heth, the actual Joker is brilliant. The rest of the movie I couldn't stand but the ending is the one thing they got right.
I thought it was the best part, finalizing the transition of the Joker from a person to an idea.
@@westrim Exactly! I will always defend the ending and give flowers when it's deserved. Even if I'm not a fan of everything else, the ending made the time spent worth it to me in the end. It's just most people are only thinking MC die = bad which is a very one-dimensional take to begin with.
Should've been called joker 2: the true life of Todd Phillips...
A simple sequel could've been Harley helping joker escape Arkham asylum and they both terrorize the city together. & They could've introduced their own universe's Batman to save the day
Or we see thr joker and harley become gang leaders who ultimately kill martha wayne...we see bruce wayne as a child......fade to black....flash forward keaton in the suit again puttin joker away in cuffs....quip about how the joker will get the last laugh.....credits
Eh. The original joker was never gonna be a superhero movie anyway. And honestly I'd rather watch a drama than a superhero movie
Probably too simple or predictable. The plot for the second version was actually pretty good but not executed well, a mentally ill clown will inevitably be a bad leader. They should have shown how Arthur reached that “this isn’t for me” mindset. Make him do terrible stuff and meet people even crazier than him. It would then make a great plot twist when he works with Batman to fix his mistake
Nah. This ending was good
Shitty idea
Arthur Fleck never was
The Joker. He is a disturbed man who fantasized it.
The sequel is his fantasy world continued.
So True
Ngl disrespecting hardworking people who find escale thru films is so gross man. I like Joaquin too but idk im kinda off all the people involved with this
Joker 2: the jokes on you: electric boogaloo, the squeakel: folie a deux
P.S. We Hate You
P.S. We Hate You
0:39 What?! That’s F’d up! Where’s the Todd Phillips Cut- oh, wait … this is the Todd Phillips Cut.
Yeah Todd is a Jew too, yeah, so makes sense
I'll say it. It was a good movie with some heavy scenes.
I thought the musical parts were really self indulgent and mostly unnecessary but damn if I didn't feel bad for Arthur and was disgusted by how evil Harley was. But when Arthur finally realizes that to continue to be joker he will have to throw people under the bus and become just as nasty as the people who abused him all his life after the Mr. Puddles scene. He comes back to reality and admits he is just a normal guy and got too carried away by it all.
The scene where Harley says shes pregnant and then starts being nonsensical and begins singing while Arthur is going through about every single emotion someone who really isn't ready to be father can go through was super real and tragic as he starts believing in her gaslighting.
I dont even know where to begin. Joker was such a breath of fresh air when it came out and was such a polarizing film , most of all the pacing was top tier imo. I haven't and won't see Joker 2, I just feel like if the idea was to not glorify the actions of the joker the film should have been told from the perspective of another character. Hell, they could've used Harley to show us a different version of Joaquin's Joker from her perspective that contradicts Arthur. I guess if we want to see good movies we need to do it ourselves...
Todd Phillips basicly made a spiritual sequel to Disney Plus's she hulk
Contrary to popular opinion, i REALLY FEEL Todd phlips made a bold choice in showing the middle finger to the audience who instead of empathizing, idealises the manifestation of trauma and hurt!!!! Even though creative choice to make it a Musical went over my head,but the overall essence of the movie is good! I know if the message is too direct then it puts off the audience and comes out as preachy but sometimes its important to show them a direct mirror when they have been misunderstanding something all along!! Similar thing ended up happening to Christian bale's american psycho and poeple started idealising him instead of understanding that its manual to "Not be this person" instead of being one...sometimes we as audiences also do deserve this hard and direct hit in the face to wake us up to reality,no matter how pissed it makes us! BRAVO TODD!
👏😌
DC says “we making a sequel with or without you. you ruin it with us or we ruin it without paying you”
Todd: “lets make a movie”
I think the lesson of the film is that people like this fantasy version of you (Joker) but hate the real you (the loser Arthur Fleck). And Fleck sealed his own fate by not embracing his Joker persona.
Ngl, to me the movie was a masterpiece and better than the first, idc what people say
@@Fillenbillen I respect that. It’s so funny that even Todd Philips and Joaquin Phoenix think it stinks. And the whole media say it was terrible. But by rotten tomatoes it’s 33%, which means 1 out of 3 people who watched it like it.
I feel Arthur sealed his fate by embracing this Joker persona. Without firing his lawyer he might have been viewed by the jury as a victim of circumstance, the system failing him, a partly delusional schizophrenic additionally suffering from arrested development due the trauma of prolonged sexual childhood abuse, and furthermore being damaged by parentification from an early age on due to having to care for his psychologically unstable mother. This might have lead to a milder sentence, getting him sent back into security custody, but this time in a proper hospital without sadistic, or with at least less sadistic guards and proper therapy and medication. But with the Joker taking over, he blew all of that away, showed mean streaks of verbal cruelty towards Gary before Gary gave his heartbreaking testimonial, alienated and shocked the Jury with a sudden confession so that they must have felt mocked by what appeared to be nothing but a charade to insult the victims' families. Thus, Arthur appeared as a sadistic killer without any empathy at all, securing the death penalty.
I think your reading it wrong. I'm thinking he didn't get the death penalty and he didn't actually have a visitor. I think he was set up to be killed because he didn't get the death penalty. I also feel this is the perfect follow up to the first movie. It explains why jokers origin story always changes. There have been a bunch of jokers with different origin stories and each new joker takes on all previous origins alnd adds his own.
todd phillips needs to get over himself
imagine a Director whos job is to make movies, gets a fan base who wants more movies that the director created, to only end up pooping on them because he doesn't want to make movies his fans want to see...what weird times we live in.
Sounds like someone whose bad at their job, in my opinion
Todd Phillips pulled a "Freddy got fingered" damn...