GGGGerald Posted September 3, 2019 21 hours ago, EricJ said: Problem is, we already KNOW the Joker's origin, when Jack Nicholson fell into the chemicals. And that was a lot more believable (since it came from the actual comics), than suggesting that he was poor Travis Bickle, hoping the rain would come and wash away the scum of the city. Villain origins want us to hate the villain, but, y'know, not too much, or we wouldn't pay to see the movie. Did you just say a "hollywood movie", about "comic book superheroes", was believable ? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricJ Posted September 4, 2019 3 hours ago, GGGGerald said: Did you just say a "hollywood movie", about "comic book superheroes", was believable ? Well, only in the sense that Chris I-Hate-Comic-Books Nolan's "The Dark Knight" tried to be 21st-century "believable" with homegrown villains, teenage YouTube Bat-wannabes, discussions of cellphone privacy vs. security, and exhaustive examinations of mob banking to the near-complete exclusion of the main plot, it was easier to believe that Tim Burton's Batman was actually based on a comic book. (Or, "Easier to believe Tim had ever read one in his life".) 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spence Posted September 11, 2019 It's now certain to make a lot, with Oscar momentum building & all But nowhere near 08s DK ($535m.) & Tim Burton's 1989 smash grossed $251m *Jack is still my favorite Joker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spence Posted September 19, 2019 4 hours ago, JakeHolman said: I betcha it easily soars over $100m. overall & they might as well give J. Phoenix the *Oscar already, especially given *hanks is in support as Mister Rogers Had the chance to see The Joker yet? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spence Posted September 19, 2019 Might win for Make-Up as well Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spence Posted September 19, 2019 On 9/3/2019 at 4:59 PM, GGGGerald said: Did you just say a "hollywood movie", about "comic book superheroes", was believable ? it does seem a lot like Taxi-Driver from all the trailers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jameselliot Posted September 26, 2019 This is troubling. https://io9.gizmodo.com/u-s-military-issues-warning-to-troops-about-incel-viol-1838412331 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spence Posted September 26, 2019 25 minutes ago, JakeHolman said: No matter what still my favorite Joker & at the time of filming there was huge publicity on how much *Jack got & some believe to this day that's why his peers in the Academy snubbed him You & others be the judge Best actor 1989 *Daniel Day Lewis won his first of 3 leading statuettes in My Left Foot Kenneth Branagh, Henry V Tom Cruise, Born on the 4th of July Morgan Freeman, Miss Daisy & Robin Williams in Dead Poet's Society Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spence Posted September 26, 2019 Now that some of the early Oscar race is taking shape, I bet this one makes more $dough$ then any other BP nominee this year, raking in over $250m. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sepiatone Posted September 26, 2019 13 hours ago, jameselliot said: This is troubling. https://io9.gizmodo.com/u-s-military-issues-warning-to-troops-about-incel-viol-1838412331 Sure is. Personally, I don't see a connection to the "Joker" character in movies and the motive for a mass shooting spree. But then, nutjobs never needed any rational reasoning for doing what they do. And after reading what "Incels" purportedly stands for, I also fail to reckon how shooting up patrons at a movie house does anything to improve their situation or foster any empathy towards it. Anyway.... My neighbor thinks it's some kind of publicity stunt by the producers to generate overall interest in the movies release. Sepiatone Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LawrenceA Posted September 26, 2019 13 minutes ago, Sepiatone said: Sure is. Personally, I don't see a connection to the "Joker" character in movies and the motive for a mass shooting spree. But then, nutjobs never needed any rational reasoning for doing what they do. And after reading what "Incels" purportedly stands for, I also fail to reckon how shooting up patrons at a movie house does anything to improve their situation or foster any empathy towards it. Anyway.... My neighbor thinks it's some kind of publicity stunt by the producers to generate overall interest in the movies release. There are a few connections. The new film portrays the Joker as a loser who gets beaten down by society until he finally cracks, committing multiple acts of murder, as well as inspiring others to do the same. Since the Joker is the protagonist of the story, some view the film as glorifying this type of behavior. Many of the mass shootings in the past several years have been committed by "losers", or "incels" (involuntary celibates, for those who aren't familiar with the nomenclature), young men who seem to have failed in their work and/or their love lives. Some fear that other such men in the viewing audience may sympathize with the Joker character to the degree that they will be inspired to go out and kill. Finally, the Aurora theater shooting in 2012 was committed during a showing of The Dark Knight Rises by a nutjob who cited the Joker as his inspiration, so some view that as an indicator of what could happen again, particularly with a movie focusing on the Joker character and where he explicitly calls for violence to "get back at society". I personally don't care. I'm not offended by onscreen violence, and I'm not going to coerced into committing violence because of a movie. And as you say, most nutters don't need an excuse to commit violence. But I'm also not certain that this is a publicity stunt by Warners, as I think it will keep more people away from theaters out of fear of an incident, rather than draw more to see it in the theater. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sukhov Posted September 27, 2019 16 hours ago, Sepiatone said: Sure is. Personally, I don't see a connection to the "Joker" character in movies and the motive for a mass shooting spree. But then, nutjobs never needed any rational reasoning for doing what they do. And after reading what "Incels" purportedly stands for, I also fail to reckon how shooting up patrons at a movie house does anything to improve their situation or foster any empathy towards it. Anyway.... My neighbor thinks it's some kind of publicity stunt by the producers to generate overall interest in the movies release. Sepiatone It's not about getting sympathy I think, but making society afraid of them. Shootings like this are a way for these weaklings to feel power over others for once in their lives. I agree with Larry that it's not the film's fault if they are inspired to commit violence as I highly doubt that is the director's vision. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sepiatone Posted September 27, 2019 "Power over others", eh? Hmm... So, how many of these "Incel's" have done this sort of thing and made it out alive? As far as I know, it's none so far.... now.... THAT'S power? Sepiatone Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NipkowDisc Posted September 27, 2019 elfman's score for the first movie was weak. creative but weak. elfman could not imbue his composition with the percussive punch it needed that woulda been child's play for Goldsmith or Williams. that's why the only track I like is attack of the batwing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NipkowDisc Posted September 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Sepiatone said: "Power over others", eh? Hmm... So, how many of these "Incel's" have done this sort of thing and made it out alive? As far as I know, it's none so far.... now.... THAT'S power? Sepiatone not related to Joker but so what. the franchise came unglued with the 2nd burton film and it has been downhill ever since. the Schumacher films are an abomination. bring back Keaton! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sepiatone Posted September 27, 2019 10 minutes ago, NipkowDisc said: bring back Keaton! Well now, a 68 year old Bat Man would be kinda interesting, eh? It'd remind me of that old MAD magazine gag; "If Comic Characters Aged Like Real People". Showing SUPERMAN flying through the air, furiously flapping his arms and huffing and puffing out of breath with an enormous gut hanging down..... An obituary of PRINCE VALIANT dying at the age of 637 or so.... And DENNIS THE MENACE addressing the UN general assembly. Sepiatone Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedracer5 Posted September 27, 2019 I'm sick of all these superhero and superhero-adjacent things. Now we're going to have a Riddler origin story, Two-Face origin story, Poison Ivy origin story, and so on. The best Joker is Cesar Romero, a close second is Mark Hamill's voice characterization on Batman: The Animated Series. Batman: the Animated Series is the best version of Batman as far as I'm concerned. I'm just really tired of the trend of everything having to be a dark re-telling of every story. Why don't we go the other direction and make something that's fun--not depressing. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sepiatone Posted September 28, 2019 Maybe the movie people feel they haven't presented ALL the "prequels". Like, how did COUNT DRACULA become a vampire? Maybe a "prequel" in which TOM JOAD is shown smashing that guy's head "plum to squash" that got him the manslaughter charge? And was there a "prequel" that let us in on why HANNIBAL LECTER became a psychopathic cannibal? The "prequel" possibilities are virtually endless! Sepiatone 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
