JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX - Movie Review

Рет қаралды 293

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 4

@PreciousHuddle 14 күн бұрын

Your review was really good! I have some questions for you if you'd like to answer them! Do you believe that this movie was on purpose sabotaged by its own director? Do you believe that Arthur truly became The Joker in the end of the first movie? If not, then do you believe that it was justified what they did to his character in the ending of the second movie? Some people that liked the movie believe that this is a somewhat of a "full circle" moment, that Arthur never truly became the Joker and wouldn't become the Joker anyway, that "he got what he deserved" (the famous punchline from the first movie, this whole movie is a recycling bin of the first one, really!) for believing that he was "better" than anybody else. That this is his downfall for hurting people like Mr Puddles. I personally believe that Philips did all this on purpose. And that he clearly wanted to show Arthur and us, the audience, that when you dare to defy, authority figures for example, you will pay the consequences for your defiance. It's so sad and horrifying how his story ended. And the way the camera focuses on his face, we see his eyes as they slowly lose their light and life, all alone, with no one by his side, is truly a horrible way to close off a character, even as crazy and messed up as Arthurs was. For me, this movie truly was one of the most horrific and disrespectful movies of the year. Thanks for and if you read my comment, even if you won't answer my questions! Happy holidays and a happy new year to you!

@odysseyfour1997 13 күн бұрын

Thanks for your comment! I believe that Todd Philips intended to make a good film however in my opinion it is clear that he also used it as a statement. He wanted to subvert the audience and give the studio the middle finger. I understand the point they are making about Arthur being a pathetic character that was aware of the things he was doing wrong and that the Joker is a symbol that can be inhabited by anyone but I don't think it makes for an interesting film. I hated the ending because it felt like the movie was a waste of time and a means to make a few thin points that are easy to understand. It is probably a realistic version of the events that would follow the first but it didn't feel like a story that needed to be told. I agree with you on all fronts here. I don't think it was the right point to say that Arthur deserved that ending. A more nuanced examination of consequences would have been better. Regardless of all of this, the film just isn't assembled very well in the edit. The pacing drags and the screenplay is so surface level that the courtroom scenes lack tension. I appreciate the comment and I too wish you a happy new year!