Todd Phillips Full Control Over Joker 2 Direction Backfires On Warner Bros

[@kharikhy-ree2242]

Full creative control and no test screening. That's bold.

[@kharikhy-ree2242]

@@myytchanneldinakoha8498 + whatever the marketing budget. All to punk and catfish people. Where is Ahston Kutcher and Fat-***-Kelly Price 😅

[@JoseRodriguez-un2kc]

Here's what I don't understand.... If Todd Phillips did not want to make the sequel... Then why the 🤬 did he do it in the first place. Get somebody else to do it.

[@MrOjotaOk]

Por exactamente eso. Alguien más tomaría su concepto y lo llevaría a hacer una película que "las masas" querrían ver (igualmente joaquin nunca hubiese aceptado hacerla). Consiguió ese trato Todd y te demostró porque no es buena idea continuar las películas cuando no es necesario. Su mensaje es intencional. Habiendo dicho eso, la película, como película tiene fallos igualmente.

[@onionnight]

If Todd was allowed all of this then I think he also got a big bag of money with it

[@k.i187]

money, man.

[@SlashersquadJack]

I'm assuming that money is very hard turn down

[@maxpops8427]

@@MrOjotaOk His concept? He doesn’t own The Joker

[@thundercron77]

The fact he didn't want test screenings proves that he knew he was intending to make something the masses wouldn't like.

[@djJaXx101]

Studios probably get a bad rep because you can only hear when studios get it wrong, youll never heard when the studio saves a movie from a disaster.

[@LembeckIsStaying]

Great point and I admit I'm guilty of it too.

[@SuperJumper40]

Art should be allowed to fail. Sometimes a good result comes out when a director has free control, sometimes not. And that's okay. The only incomprehensible thing here is that Warner Bros. was stupid enough to provide 200 million dollars for this. This kind of movie could just as easily have been made with a quarter of that.

[@souvikmondal6161]

Exactly

[@ElielArrey]

James Cameron has full creative control on the AVATAR movies, but he does test screens, and those films make $2 billion plus each time lol

[@mbryanf]

Todd Phillips being given full control over the movie is the same as giving Vince Russo control over WCW.

[@hugocerzu]

They should have never made a sequel to begin with

[@charleyzacharia9878]

Ironically John didn’t mention James Cameron’s name, if the studio wants to give a full control with the project, the only name comes in mind is James Cameron, he defies all of the odds, he’s proven that again and again

[@stevebc957]

Also Clint Eastwood - on time, on budget, doesn't have an axe to grind. Yeah he's in his 90's but he's got a new movie coming out at the end of the month (Juror #2).

[@charleyzacharia9878]

@@stevebc957 I did not mean undermine Clint’s work , I like his work , but I can’t put his name in the same category with Cameron , he’s on a another level, Clint has hit and miss , none of his movies hit a billion dollars Top 5 films that made over $ 2 billion, 3 of them are Cameron’s movies , enough said

[@bly87823]

So WB can't win. They meddle, DC movie turns out bad. They give 100% control, DC movie turns out bad. *Shrug*

[@Horacio_Poggi]

They should meddle a little bit then.

[@joelrolston8736]

It's just one movie. They probably didn't consider it such a "big" risk, considering they have "bigger" plans with James Gunn's Superman.

[@adrianalfred1277]

@@bly87823 that’s how the internet goes. Like a bunch of babies who don’t know what they want, they’ll do everything to shift the blame. Sometimes a movie just doesn’t work out. Leave it at that and move on.

[@tronam]

It’s almost like filmmaking is a collaborative marriage of art and commerce. They just forgot about the commerce part this time.

[@f8talfury]

Creatively control should be given incrementally. Joker 1 costed 50m, Joker 2 200m way too high. Should of capped it at 100-120m

[@redeemtheruins]

Heath Ledgers joker burned a giant pile of money .... maybe joker 2 is a nod to that iconic joker moment :)

[@dante6985]

"performance art"

[@juanthompson8016]

😂😂😂😂

[@adamcade604]

Joker 2 and Megalopolis are the Heaven's Gate of the 21st Century!

[@CVal012]

We saw that 3 times in comic books: WW2, Thor 4 and joker 2 now. Giving a 1 time success director full control.

[@mobious6340]

he made them a billion dollars..they asked for a sequel, he asked for and got carte blanche.. you only get what you negotiate for john

[@hublaze3042]

Exactly, it's still the studios fault in the end. The guy said during the first one, No sequel. Then you throw a bunch of money at him & beg him for one anyway. And he's supposed to say no?......... He's not that good a filmmaker to pass on that, come on. Studio Error! got to greedy & fucked up the legacy of your first film now, lol.

[@DavidHager-v4v]

Joker 2 is what the hangover part 3 feels like

[@samuelwetz8378]

Yeah, I think it was clearly sign that Joker 2 was probably gonna be not so good when the last time Todd Philips did sequels was with The Hangover and generally speaking, most people didn’t like 2 and 3 all that much. I didn’t mind 2 but 3 I thought was just boring and jokes that 95% fell flat and predictable.

[@spicymemes7458]

3:00 This was the exact same reasoning WB used at the beginning of the Snyderverse. They wanted to differentiate from Marvel by letting auteurs control the story rather than a Kevin Feige figurehead.

[@NewDealDem2187]

Counterpoint: “If they expect you to make the dinner, least they can do is let you buy some of the groceries.” Bill Parcells

[@SuperheroStrength]

Did Warner Brothers learn nothing from Billy Walsh having final cut for "Medellin" ?

[@Sincere529]

😂

[@sandpiper8991]

BEST comment.

[@captainahab9602]

LMAO BUT ITS WORSE BECAUSE THERE WAS NO BLOCKBUSTER ‘MEDELLIN’ PRIOR TO ITS SEQUEL

[@SethSterner]

I feel like not enough people are stuck on “Phoenix had a dream about it…”. Pardon me? He had a dream? That’s great. I have vivid dreams all the time! Where’s my $200 million?! A f**king DREAM?! Who banks on that? WB apparently…

[@chrisdealemania]

Agreed. My dreams are better than movies. Look forward to them every night. 😂

[@jrpgaddict7726]

Todd Phillips sabotaged the movie, he hated the fans and destroyed Joker out of spite....what a disgrace! 🚮

[@charlesl5251]

Nope. He loved the first movie and made the sequel a turd to teach the studio a lesson. Not the fans.

[@royvarghese5334]

@@charlesl5251 Nope. He just sucks at making sequels.

[@charlesl5251]

@@royvarghese5334 Nope. If you think about it that makes no sense. He made the hangover sequels turds for the same reason. He did it on purpose. But believe what you want.

[@royvarghese5334]

@@charlesl5251 He should stick to that story. 😂👍

[@Tuntira]

How does any of this make sense, the man is a director, what director would purposefully want to put out crappy work. The man lives and dines by his reputation. Purposefully making crappy movies will prevent him from working again... Maybe I missed an article but I think that this idea came from some weird reddit or 4chan page

[@gamingarachnid3367]

Joker 2 should’ve been a tax write off like batgirl was, he’ll flash to an extent should’ve been

[@Aquarat86]

I respectfully disagree with your stance John. There are many movies that are collaborative efforts between a studio and director and it still turns out bad. Some movies, whether they're collaborative or just the vision of one director turn out bad. Sometimes one person has a great idea but the studio screws it up for them and vice versa. Its a roll of the dice.

[@stephennootens916]

Same with test screening. After test screenings of Blade Runner the studio insisted on a more up beat ending and the narration by Ford.

[@GeekProCult]

They gave them the “hulk hogan” type deal, they had all the creative control 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@cesaracosta5483]

“That doesn’t work for me brother” -Todd Phillips

[@GeekProCult]

@@cesaracosta5483 “not tonight brother!” 🤣🤣🤣

[@Tizzo1982]

80 years of stories and Joker History and Todd Phillips couldn’t take any elements from any of it.

[@c17sam90]

He never really did in the first film

[@Tizzo1982]

@@c17sam90 well, there was actually elements of Killing Joke. The unsuccessful comedian. That’s probably it though.

[@richardloyd8753]

Joker 2 should of never happened anyway. That story was done but the studios saw how much money the first one made. The only reason why Joker movie made so much money to begin with because people were curious how a Joker solo film would work. Sometimes it's best to really think does everything need a sequel? If you're just making a sequel just because and don't really know how another one would work then it shouldn't be made.

[@majrgaming2633]

If I was WB i would’ve said “u can have full control but if the movie doesn’t at least break even u gotta pay us back for the financial loss”

[@JoseRodriguez-un2kc]

I'm not going to watch joker 2. If the director is intentionally trying to piss me off.... Why should I watch it? The logic doesn't make sense 😕

[@kharikhy-ree2242]

Exactly 😅

[@OverZaEast]

This movie doesn't need to exist. The whole Todd Phillips said about society is pushing Joker persona into Arthur doesn't need to be shove of our face. The first movie ending has already gave us open ended story about the whole Arthur/Joker thing. Maybe he could be imagining and crazy, maybe all of Joker story in comics and movies are part of his delusions, maybe it is true that Arthur and Joker is separate entities and Arthur doesn't realized it. It ended in a perfectly open ended story that can be interpreted to different audiences.

[@dragondude9637]

Apparently there are two alternative endings. One of them sees Joker and Harley dancing on the steps with a crowd cheering for them. But because Phillips didn't have test screenings, he didn't go from the test audience's responses.

[@Jendeman]

15:15 and turns out the other studio for lady in the water was WB. I guess it’s no stranger for them to give directors 100% autonomy.

[@charlesxavier1226]

At least "studio interference" is not bad-man in this drama

[@desi_no_aka]

To play devils advocate…. Todd Phillips should be able to negotiate for whatever he wants. If that’s what WB gave him then that’s on them. I don’t feel for them losing a negotiation in the least bit.

[@lordrayden3045]

You are correct

[@joeysjourneys90]

A lot of people haven’t seen it and saying it’s bad 😅 I decided to watch it anyway and it was good. It was entertaining and not really a musical. It’s a movie about a man with mental illness. It was entertaining and not as bad as all the sheep are saying 🐑

[@terrancesellington]

Unless their name is Cameron, too. James Cameron has less than 12-13 films and they're all bangers!

[@ramboluib2752]

Todd Phillips made sure studios would never force him to do a sequel to any film he will ever make again by botching this one lol.

[@kompanjonac]

Lol genius

[@hothotheat3000]

Yup. He got his money, screwed them over, and kicked up his feet at a ranch on opening weekend.

[@Bayard1503]

Oh, he made sure he's not getting another blockbuster movie any time soon... I guess now he has the money to make a couple indies to prove he knows what he's doing.

[@fulgencioreal7959]

I literally just finished watching it . Joaquin was great in this .. I don't get why so much hate and definitely not horrible.It's was enjoyable. People just totally wanted so bad for it to be what they imagined it for it to be . I'm the word of Arthur fleck- "you wouldn't get"

[@ericfurst6091]

James Cameron is in the same category. He is a safe +1 bio director.

[@misterdarwin]

WB had no idea what to do with its DC properties. It gambled small on Joker and won big at a time when the DCEU was collapsing on itself. They didn't have a vision of where to go with the property, and even if they did, their track record was abysmal (and many would credit the failure of many DC films to studio interference). I think it understandable that they thought TP had the secret formula and if he could make them another billion, why get in his way? They didn't care where he put the fridge or the stove.

[@jgls1987]

It was bad ideas to give Todd Phillips total control like he is Steven Speilberg, Christopher Nolan or Martin Scorsese who have resume to show for.

[@adrianalfred1277]

lmao what ? Every director should be given total control. Feedback should be given but no studio shuld ever interfere in someone's vision. Regardless, James gunn gave him feedback AFTER the movie was shot. He didnt become the DC head till the start of 2023. You act like James Gunn was there when the movie was made and gave notes for Todd to change stuff as it happened. This movie was a musical and thats why they hated it. Theres nothing James Gunn culd do about that as a latercomer into the company.

[@jordanwhite352]

​@@adrianalfred1277There have been many many cases in films where a studio's recommendation or directing. Actually benefited the film tremensely and made it an overall better product, both artistically as well as marketing wise. Saying that all directors should always have complete control is bonkers, especially because film by its nature is a collaborative effort. A lot of your favorite things that were done in film were not even done or thought up by the director, but originated in the screenwriter With editors and then we're carried out by the lighting team and the actors in front of the cameras and the cameraman behind the cameras and worked on afterwards. It's special effects and the people who make the stages and the costumes and the props and the foliage people and everything. Hell, there's in famous thing with Star Wars were apparently the film was incredibly unwatchable until the film's editor who happened to be georgio Lucas's wife finally edited the thing despite George protesting it and gave us the absolute brilliant film that we have today.

[@mosesking2923]

@@adrianalfred1277 LOL. No directors should have full total control. As long as the studio is the one footing the 200 million dollars, than the film belongs to the studio. The film director is no different than a chef. They simply assemble the thing together. The one footing the bill gets the final say.

[@adrianalfred1277]

@@mosesking2923 alright don’t cry when studios interfere. It’s how DCEU ultimately failed. It’s why MCU is failing rn. It’s why we get unnecessary sequels. The director should get creative control during the making of the movie. The studio should give feedback at multiple stages. The movie should get test screenings for feedback. Feedback is welcome but if you interfere with a director’s vision it’s going to leave an uninspired product

[@harrisd1983]

​@adrianalfred1277 it matters when the studio interferes more than that they do it, especially when the movie is 200 million. DC interfered after the movies were far into production or done.

[@bluray76]

Todd Phillips, the visionary who brought Hangover, due date, Road Trip, love those movies but who he think he is? He ain’t Redford, Lumet, Capra, Welles. Cmon now man.

[@jakeruefer1735]

The only reason they are complaining is because they didn’t like the movie. If the movie was good, this wouldn’t be a story. John likes to say that “Everybody complains about studio interference but no one interferes more than Marvel. The only reason people don’t complain is because the movies are good (or used to be).” The same is true here in the opposite direction. Lots of movies give directors final cut. He just didn’t like this one. The reality is sometimes directors getting full control works out. Just like studios giving notes works out. It didn’t here. Oh well. It’s on the studio for agreeing to it.

[@politefan8141]

Campea's been on a roll lately. After this and his crying about a marginal increase in movie theater prices (during a time when moviegoing has never been as accessible thanks to subscription programs), he's starting to become quite insufferable.

[@hublaze3042]

I'll 2nd that and add it's on the studio for begging him to do it after he said no the first time. Tod knew he had no internal reason for this film. Films that start with a check before a story tend to have an uphill battle.

[@pjackson116]

and what did WB do? give James Gunn an entire cinematic universe😆😆😆😆😆

[@trevonpernell0814]

What does James Gunn have to do with this?

[@txtstar119]

There was also a report that this was greenlit by the old regime of WB and it seemed like a reckless negotiation that just wanted a sequel to the biggest DC movie in years at the time. This movie is a fascinating tale of what happens in the studio model to unseen success!

[@digginnthecrates5045]

Christopher Nolan also gets the do what you want card

[@mosesking2923]

Yeah, but he actually makes good films. Like James Cameron, some directors deserve final cut and some don't.

[@misterdarwin]

And that's why you get the end to Tenet, which hinges on expository dialogue you can't hear.

[@MarcusWarcus40]

@@mosesking2923good films like…tenet? Yeah no

[@darrellglover493]

​@@MarcusWarcus40Oscar winning films like Oppenheimer? Yea

[@MarcusWarcus40]

@@darrellglover493 the one I couldn’t stay awake for and many people agree was boring as fuck? Yeah

[@BeastLion777]

Next they make a movie where Batman isn't Bruce Wayne, but a guy who heard about Bruce and decided to fight criminals

[@sharonsanders7199]

The joker never dies. Harley would never leave him. This movie sucked.

[@jeremy-thomas7265]

Arthur was never the joker

[@sharonsanders7199]

@@jeremy-thomas7265 nothing about this entire movie felt like the joker. Not even the first film.

[@jeremy-thomas7265]

@@sharonsanders7199 because he was never the joker

[@sharonsanders7199]

@@jeremy-thomas7265 I know... I get what you're saying. I just don't know why Warner Brothers even bothered.

[@jeremy-thomas7265]

@@sharonsanders7199 I think Warner bros believed that Todd Philips would make another billion dollar movie , when his initial Intentions were to make a deep dark movie about mental health, he did they same thing for part 2 , it just came full circle, and now Harley Quinn reflects the audience.

[@philipcohen7192]

Zaslav should have made this a tax break and released batwoman instead

[@elchamber]

Now, when ever a director moans about control, they head will just say”Todd Philips,” or even “Coppola.”😢

[@alexrivera633]

The money they made with joker 1 was lost with joker 2 lol

[@krsurakshith6311]

Nope if you will add both movies they probably have still made profit remember Joker 1 made nearly half a billion dollars in Profits Joker 2 ain't loosing 500 million dollars

[@CharlessMovieChannel]

Given what happened with Hangover 2 & 3 I'm legit surprised that WBD looked at Todd Phillips & Said "Yep Here's the $$$$ go & we're just gonna close our eyes". I'm very torn on Test Screenings I see the Arguments for & against...Joker Folie A Deux ala Superman Returns NEEDED TEST SCREENINGS!!!!

[@stephennootens916]

It has always been a hit and miss when it comes to Studios involvement with movies. We seen studios butcher a movie and sometimes they help the director stay on track.

[@LibertyFX]

Total director control is fine if... 1) It is not established property already 2) The budget is under 30 million What they gambled here is full on stupid.

[@jaybling6687]

Yeah, a writer-director wanting to make their own spec script is an acceptable circumstance for them to have control.

[@Tizzo1982]

Can’t tell a lie, Campea finally made a good analogy here 😂

[@ki-seonpeck9069]

He finally put the watermelon in the bag

[@Tizzo1982]

@@ki-seonpeck9069 hahahaha, I think it was apples, but yeah, finally, hahahahah

[@ki-seonpeck9069]

@@Tizzo1982 I think he said there's apples in the bag (a very rough cut of Snyder's Justice League) but no watermelon in the bag (100% fully completed ready to be released Snyder Cut) lol

[@Tizzo1982]

@@ki-seonpeck9069 oh right right right. And no matter how he explained it, it made no sense. Hahahahaha.

[@JAF729]

My guess is Joaquin Phoenix wouldn't do it unless they agreed to Todd Phillips demands. So this was the only way to get a sequel.

[@mbryanf]

lol, “it’s got a 30% percent audience rating(and declining), which means there are people who like it.” Yeah, I guess that means people liked Madame Web too.

[@johnpeters-rw9it]

I mean, it literally does mean that 30% of ppl liked it.

[@MavvyMaloneTV]

I would argue the same goes for those big names. Look at Megalopolis. Look at the Irishman. When directors are given carte blanche they tend to get very detached & self indulgent.

[@regalmonkmusic]

Everyone pointing the finger at everyone else. The studio is to blame for being so greedy. It was known that the makers of the 1st film had no intention of doing a second one. They were right.

[@jackdennis3511]

They also agreed to make the movie so they're equally to blame.

[@DReppin2009]

I will never ever blame a company for wanting my services based on the service I previously offered. I get to call my price and it is my duty to continue to provide the same quality. Blaming the studio for basically saying "we like what you did and we want you to continue doing it" is wild to me. Phillips fucked up, end of.

[@jasonone8726]

Every studio is greedy. There are rarely any movies that make a lot of money, and those didn't have a sequel.

[@lincoln2324]

I agree, in this case the executives should've said no to the conditions todd phillips asked, but most importantly, they should've said NO TO THE SEQUEL ITSELF. And no, WB wasn't smart about wanting a Joker 2 and they weren't smart about greenlighting Folie A Deux

[@nicholasjoseph8297]

I didnt like Joker 2 or Megaloplis, but im sick and tired of always blaming the artist. John might as well work for a studio since he never talks about Inde films, defends studios for shelving projects and always shits on artist trying to survie. Its the marketings fault and the audience tastes fault. Todd Phillips gets my full respect for making something balsey and risktaking that started a conversation. And it will find its audience overtime and while Phillips will get no funding for big studios, A24 might want to give him something for a way smaller budget or Netflix might want to give him the Keys for a show, which is more likley what he wants. Do you think the 60s/70s new Hollywood or the Inde new wave of the 90s would have happened if Busninees was the first concern. Even the Mountrushmore Directors are finding it imposibe to get funding. If you want predictability go into other fourm of business not the movie business. The movie needed to be Marketed more accurate, be less expensive, and not go to Venice. Not micro manage Philips. And @johncampea if you liked it you would defend it. Cause when Furiosa bombed you didnt shit on George Miller for having full control. George Lucas said it himself "maybe it would look better as a green house, but I want it white" im paraphrasing. How the fuck did these legnds become Legends by obeying the studio? WB was stupid for wanting a sequel in the first place.

[@alecontiveros4959]

This reminds me a lil of the medellin movie in the show "ENTOURAGE" philipps is billy walsh lol

[@Shen_YouTube_]

I agree with John on this. Also: who is the target audience for a musical? I mean.. I love the comics, but personally not a big musical fan. So I just skipped the movie. Simple.

[@daydreaminavenue]

The movie should have never happened in the first place and this is exactly why

[@BrandonJackson0581]

It's not what you deserve, is what "you negotiate" - someone famous said it

[@ThisIsntFine]

I think he cooked so hard he burnt it

[@txtstar119]

Must of the movies we love had collaboration with the director and the studio, it's a beautiful dance of push and pull that done right turns good ideas from a director and studio resources into masterpieces!

[@gloriathomas3245]

The 1992 Buffy The Vampire Slayer film was collaboration between Fox and the directors and that movie turned out to be a hot piece of garbage especially since it involved going behind Joss Whedon's back and changing his screenplay

[@adamcade604]

13:40 still looks like the godfather compared to his Avatar Adaptation!

[@cementbox4430]

Todd wants to make joker 2 and you got to say no.

[@megasith9761]

If James Gunn's DC Studios takes off and we get the adaptations of Joker and Harley ppl are familiar with I'm sure these two movies will become cult classics.

[@spacewinter]

Lol Kristen's reaction to Johns peeing on the seat was exactly my face

[@masonteague4039]

Didn't need a sequel

[@RonnieNimer]

Egos kill IPs.

[@glennwelsh9784]

Man, Todd Phillips took WB to the cleaners and they eagerly let him. Can't really blame him for taking everything he wanted because they were foolishly willing to give it to him. Opportunities like that rarely ever come along for a filmmaker. You know he figured that if they wanted this unnecessary sequel and were going to back up the dump trucks filled with cash to his doorstep, I don't know how many people would choose "the integrity of cinema" over being absolutely set for life.

[@TheMajinZenoShow]

I smelled this horse shit coming after they announced they were making a second one. Wasn't a fan of the first one. Not my Joker

[@matthewgold4229]

This felt more like a lady Gaga concert with the joker in it

[@virgiliomartinezerickson8044]

7:10 John is pro studio sometimes

[@dc100dc100]

People are angry that Arthur isn’t The Joker. It’s called “joker”, he is A joker. If you removed the “Arkham” sign and any reference to Gotham, there’s nothing that makes this the DC Joker. He’s an abused kid grown up into a mentally ill man in a terrible city. Anything else is projecting our expectation of The Joker onto him. (Har)Lee’s reaction to him later in the film is the audiences’ misunderstanding of the movie and the character. She wanted the Joker and he was only ever Arthur (just like the critics) Speaking of the music… the reason for the music? He first saw Lee in music therapy and she sang to him. If it was art therapy, Arthur would have been dancing through paintings to woo her in his hallucinations. Lee’s love language is music. She was a privileged upper East sider. She probably had music, voice, dance lessons as the girl of rich parents. This isn’t a musical, it’s the fever dream of a lovestruck, obsessive mental patient. He’s mentally ill, not a mastermind anarchist. Can anyone honestly say that you could see Arthur from Joker1 planning the downfall of Gotham? Outsmarting any of the batmans we’ve seen (Pattinson’s?!). Do you see him making penguin or the riddler bend the knee? Would Bane freeze at the sight of him?See him walk into a room full of mob bosses and walk out unscathed? Manufacture timed explosives, p0is0n gas, fight Batman hand to hand? He was full of swagger as joker, but he wasn’t smarter; he didn’t demonstrate any greater competency, he had no skills other than a good strut. Even his court skills were true to the story; his defense was so incompetent.. exactly what an uneducated person would be able to do. It’s like the arguments you hear in traffic court by people defending themselves. Heck, this was even shown in the 1st movie. Joker’s super moment on the stairs is shown as him just dancing like an idiot (lots of pelvic thrusts) hearing his own music. He was never The Joker. Even at the end of Joker1 we see him in police custody with no sign of a fight. He probably just sat down on the couch and waited for the police. Remember his plan was self h@rm, not murd3r. He didn’t know what to do next. Then he gets rescued by his followers and he stands on top of the car (again, just a strut) Then we see him hunched over, laughing his painful Arthur laugh smoking a cigarette with another counselor in Arkham. He was caught again. The audience wanted to see him powerful, so it did, but he was still Arthur just playing more roles for atttention and love. They wanted Hannibal Lechter but he was always Buffalo Bill

[@williammccormick984]

The mental gymnastics are impressive. It was a bad sequel. That's all. Stop dancing around it.

[@jeremybrown7578]

To show you how bad of a situation this is, they just announced that the 4k/blu-ray will be available 12/17.

[@IcaroRamosDM]

To be fair, the first Joker also had no test screenings and Todd Phillips made it exactly the way he wanted because WB didn't care enough at the time to meddle with it 😅

[@johnsilver6316]

And he had full control over this film and WB didn’t meddle with it and he still produced a pile of dog crap. Clearly he’s a great example of why studio executives unfortunately need to meddle with many of the projects being produced.

[@GiriT10939]

Joker 1 had test screenings, the major plot points were out in the summer of 2019 because of the test screenigns

[@IcaroRamosDM]

@@GiriT10939 Joker 1 had screenings at festivals at that time, before major release,, not test screenings

[@adike5]

first joker was meh

[@Mike19737]

Joker 2 is this generation’s Ishtar and Highlander 2.

[@damiandekker474]

Lady in the water is absolutely hilarious. I know it's not necessarily supposed to be, but yeah, it can be enjoyed in the right mindset at the right time of night.

[@metalliholic]

What happened is that he made the studio a billion dollars the last time around.

[@Kainmuchan83]

If the film is cleary a "Director Named Movie" Like James Cameron, Steven Spielberg, Quinten Terrentino, Etc...where the audiance is there because of the director largely, then they should have final cut. If not...then they are just hired guns there to do the producers and studios bidding. Just because you are a director, does not mean your vision is final. If its a passion project, thats one thing, but if its a brand name thing...the producers should always have final say!

[@BigMac7629]

Todd Phillips is a good director but he's no Steven Spielberg or Scorsese or James Cameron.

[@alloverdaplace2043]

Damn Joaquin even said he hates sequel...and this was his first one 😭

[@monicadelgado5296]

Seriously?

[@alloverdaplace2043]

@@monicadelgado5296 yea he said it in his interviews he is against making sequels he broke his rule for this one because of the massive amount of money he got offered.....but it tanked

[@GiriT10939]

@@alloverdaplace2043he is the one who came up with the idea of joker singing, and also made major re-writes even on the day of filming.

[@priya1568]

I don't know why they thought a musical would work for most comic book fans

[@c17sam90]

While I don’t love either Joker film this feels like the type of sequel Joker should have had. There’s no other way (if you have to do a sequel to Joker) to end the story this way by saying Joker is bad you shouldn’t want to be Joker. Every level of the system failed Arthur and when he did get someone wanting to help him his own love of attention burned the bridge.

[@RJ_____________]

i did not liked this movie at all . i liked to hear your thoughts on this situation , John and Crew

[@NoirNameless]

He has creative control over the first one too. Only difference was WB tried seeing him up to fail by giving him a shoestring budget but believing it’d work, and it did cause Todd actually wanted to make it. This time, the execs came in and shoved their hands all in the pot. It happens. When something makes money, there’s more cooks in the kitchen second time around who think they know better than the head chef. And that always ruins things.

[@inshal6420]

I mean John literally says he had full control. What did the execs shove their hands in

[@jwallE93]

Dude Todd Philips Trolled everyone. I think this was an artist not wanting to do a sequel but was forced to

[@charlesl5251]

Exactly.

[@Fernando_616]

After having seen the movie, unquestionably. It gave me a fresh perspective on the subtitle as well. Most of us just applied the literal translation to the characters, but it may have actually alluded to the diagnosis that once existed and how it applied to the audience and our beliefs about the character we were watching

[@royvarghese5334]

@@jwallE93 Imagine the pain he must have felt when the studio forced him to do sequel by threatening to give him millions of dollars & full creative control. 😂👍

[@yungblade7]

I don't understand his grudge against the first movie. Clearly this film was made with spite

[@fredrickgarrettsr2632]

When I heard it was going be a musical, I thought it would be him and Harley killing people as they sing cause In their minds that's how they see it playing out and flipping from reality and colorful musical but not what they did , glad I haven't seen this film cause sounds horrible.

[@ItchinToGetRich]

It's your duty as a film fan to build your own opinion on the film. Never and I say never judge something based off of someone else's thoughts and opinions. Terrible way to live life.

[@fredrickgarrettsr2632]

@@ItchinToGetRich 1st , I do form my own opinion, but if a reviewer I trust advise to wait or temper my expectations and I decide to save my money , I do Second I don't like musicals anyway , 3rd I waited and watched the first joker at home so I wasn't excited about this movie at all but I will see at some point at home.

[@andrewhinojosa7093]

@@ItchinToGetRichbro if you’re privileged sure but not all of us can afford a ticket to a movie that has been getting nothing but bad reviews, maybe once it comes out on streaming sure maybe then people can form their own opinions but as of now, it’s fair to not watch a movie opening week or even in theaters when the movie going experience is super expensive and even without snacks, tickets alone are crazy.

[@elchamber]

Calling out Screen Rant for their clickbait headlines😂😂🎉

[@vladimirpetroski7089]

Best of luck to Phillips directing anything with over a 50 mil budget now xD

[@TheKajizler]

That damn “Battlefield Earth” after watching that I took my Greg Hildebrandt “Star Wars” poster turned it upside down, take a good long look at the Scientology cross hidden in the poster and then put on a right proper public Scientology sci-fi film. George Lucas’s “Star Wars!”

[@isaacmartinez6904]

Creative Control is a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing for directors who have been in the business and makes amazing movies like Scorsese, Tarantino and Nolan. But it's a curse because a movie can go wrong in many ways. For example, Michael Cimino was given creative control on Heaven's Gate (a movie not the cult) due to his success of The Deer Hunter. But the movie didn't do well and the director was a perfectionist. Overall, creative control can be useful or useless depending on who's making the movie.

[@Gavin48]

Good analogy. Only think I would say is everyone needs some level of control. Look at the 3 you mentioned. They're great. But they have all become slightly indulgent with age. Every director is slightly indulgent. You need a producer who can reign these movies in

[@mbryanf]

You mean Todd Phillips couldn’t make “Due Date 2,” starting the joker and Harley along for a wild road trip and comedy adventure?

[@GSPfan10]

I like the idea of giving directors control, but it should first start with studios approving the idea. If Joker 2 was pitched as a musical, that is where the studio should have immediately said no.

[@gloriathomas3245]

I totally disagree with you. A film or TV show should be dictated by the creatives for the better or worse and I can point to several examples such as the shows seaQuest dsv and Sliders where the studio made what started out good thing bad by their meddling.

[@GSPfan10]

@@gloriathomas3245 Who are you defining as the creatives?

[@earlchatterton9133]

Directors do need to be kept in some form of check or you get Michael Cimino destroying a studio with Heaven's Gate. Studio should have told Christopher Nolan "no" when he demanded Tenet get a theatrical release during Covid, and that movie lost a lot of money. I also think Scorsese should be pulled back a little in terms of how extreme the lengths of his last few movies. I know Killers Of The Flower Moon was always intended to be Oscar bait and not a mainstream blockbuster, but it lost money and won no Oscars. It's just not a great business move, even if it's a great artistic success. Not everything needs to be so expensive.

[@TheWhills]

"The enemy of art is the absence of limitations" - Orson Welles

[@AliFrankTheTank]

Taking the bag💰 to make trash is crazy

[@poe_more_please]

I think there's a lot of people here not listening to what's being said. There's no advocating for a studio to completely dominate the creative process of a film - just the fact that there needs to be oversight. Because we get busted ass movies like this. Then there'll be someone saying that movies have flopped with studio's particpation. No shit. 99% of movies you see will most certainly be backed by a studio. It is a balance. Collabration. If you make art with another person(s) or entity, it is no longer just your vision.