|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Oct 2, 2024 21:13:08 GMT
Lady Gaga looks very hot in this ngl. I always thought she was sexier in her Poker Face days, but she really turns my head here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Marx on Oct 2, 2024 22:44:37 GMT
I’ve scoured the reactions to this online. Bugger me- near universal derision. And all echoing sentiments I was hoping not to hear (Ala- the film pointlessly offers self-conscious apologia for the 2019 film’s faux-controversy, the musical segments lack broader purpose and are essentially promotional, the original film’s conclusion is undermined, the film is ostensibly a redundant epilogue, et al…). I’m now highly reticent to see this, purely on the grounds that it’ll almost certainly piss me off.
Still, it’s hardly the first time a good film has received a shite sequel. As noted, it never needed one at all. The sequel was clearly never originally planned, and likely a product of studio pressure following the 2019 film’s success. When creative figures bely their intuitions, the final result is inevitably much worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by iank on Oct 3, 2024 5:46:41 GMT
I saw the first one, and it was alright, but I've never seen it again and don't own it, and this sounded like a bad idea from the moment they said it was a musical. If it comes on streaming for free I may give it a go, though I can nary seem to summon the enthusiasm to even attempt the majority of modern movies these days.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Oct 3, 2024 8:47:58 GMT
Lady Gaga looks very hot in this ngl. I always thought she was sexier in her Poker Face days, but she really turns my head here. She's always hot. Best she ever looked was A Star Is Born.  That nose is absolute perfection.  Most beautiful woman in anything as far as I'm concerned. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Oct 3, 2024 8:50:11 GMT
I’ve scoured the reactions to this online. Bugger me- near universal derision. And all echoing sentiments I was hoping not to hear (Ala- the film pointlessly offers self-conscious apologia for the 2019 film’s faux-controversy, the musical segments lack broader purpose and are essentially promotional, the original film’s conclusion is undermined, the film is ostensibly a redundant epilogue, et al…). I’m now highly reticent to see this, purely on the grounds that it’ll almost certainly piss me off. Still, it’s hardly the first time a good film has received a shite sequel. As noted, it never needed one at all. The sequel was clearly never originally planned, and likely a product of studio pressure following the 2019 film’s success. When creative figures bely their intuitions, the final result is inevitably much worse. Don't listen to fandom though. They are braindead sheep. It may be good, it may be bad. PS IF the leaked ending is true, that's not such a big deal. Believe it or not that's a long standing version of the Joker's origins and character that's been adapted lots of times before. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Oct 3, 2024 9:06:45 GMT
It's funny because Morbius killed fandoms credibility for me for all time. It's not even like it's one of my favourite films or anything. Like I said it's average, but the insane response making out it was like The Room was so misplaced. Hilariously I was duped into watching Morbius because of bad word of mouth, thinking it was going to be like the Room and hilariously awful. That and all the stupid Morbius memes finally convinced me all of these people on both sides are just brainless sheep who actively enjoy bullying people.
PS recently I remember seeing one youtuber called Ya Boi Zack call out Critical Drinker brilliantly. Now I'm not keen on Ya Boi Zack either, but he was right. He said Drinker only ever waits to see what the general response is from his audience before trashing a film as the worst or praising it, and Drinker flew into a rage saying that he has a life outside youtube and his channel is bigger anyway so Zack is just jealous of him. Great comeback.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Oct 3, 2024 12:19:17 GMT
This is a prime example of why I don't bother with YouTube reviewers. So off-puttingly OTT that I can't past the first 30 seconds. I read that LG has released a 13 track companion album to this film. Hard not to get the impression that this film is more of a vehicle for her than anybody else.... PS I f*cking hate the phony anger schtick youtubers do as well, but this guy seems a bit more level headed than most. The Critical Drinker currently pisses me off the most out of the big youtubers. I don't hate the Critical Drinker for his political opinions to be clear. He is a prick that way, but again the people he goes up against like the reddit psycho's, Disney simps, geek sell out sites like The Mary Sue are far worse. It's literally impossible not to be on his side when he attacks them, because they are cartoonishly bad. As I've said before the Mary Sue would be less toxic if it were a barrel of toxic waste. That's just it; I have no clue who the 'Critical Drinker' is, but whilst I'm sure that 'phony anger' would irritate me too, it's just the OTT mannerisms, and up their own arse style of presentation and gesticulatory self-awareness of YouTubers like the above that I can't be bothered with. As for LG, my remarks were not intended to be derogatory as such. I know nothing about her recording/acting career or cultural standing. I vaguely remember seeing a snippet of her on tv a number of years ago, but let's just say it's not within my sphere of interest.  |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Oct 3, 2024 13:45:30 GMT
PS I f*cking hate the phony anger schtick youtubers do as well, but this guy seems a bit more level headed than most. The Critical Drinker currently pisses me off the most out of the big youtubers. I don't hate the Critical Drinker for his political opinions to be clear. He is a prick that way, but again the people he goes up against like the reddit psycho's, Disney simps, geek sell out sites like The Mary Sue are far worse. It's literally impossible not to be on his side when he attacks them, because they are cartoonishly bad. As I've said before the Mary Sue would be less toxic if it were a barrel of toxic waste. That's just it; I have no clue who the 'Critical Drinker' is, but whilst I'm sure that 'phony anger' would irritate me too, it's just the OTT mannerisms, and up their own arse style of presentation and gesticulatory self-awareness of YouTubers like the above that I can't be bothered with. As for LG, my remarks were not intended to be derogatory as such. I know nothing about her recording/acting career or cultural standing. I vaguely remember seeing a snippet of her on tv a number of years ago, but let's just say it's not within my sphere of interest. Oh don't worry I didn't think you were trashing her I was just pointing out how unmanly my love for Gaga is LOL. It's funny people think I'm an alt right Nazi these days, as back in the day everybody used to think I was gay given my love for female singers and Doctor Who. (I will say though I don't know how loving and worshipping female singers became seen as a gay thing, whilst liking music by guys with long hair and shaved chests like The Who became became seen as a straight guys thing LOL. Then again I never understood why the classic Lesbian look was butch? Shouldn't they be not wanting to look like men in order to attract women who are not attracted to men? These are plot holes in reality in my opinion.) Also even if you were trashing Gaga that's cool too, everybody's entitled to their own opinion, and as much as I love her, she IS pretentious, though oddly that just makes her a bit sexier to me. The funniest was when there was a backlash to Artpop (already a pretentious title) and she went on a big "what did I do to deserve this, I just wanted to bring love to everybody's hearts" LMFAO you can imagine how well that went down. Still the security girl I worked with a few years back said Gaga was very down to earth and nice, which I was genuinely surprised at given how divorced from the real world you'd think she'd be. The girl also HATED David Tennant by the way haha. I remember I even joked about buying her series 2 on DVD for Christmas and her words were "you know how much I hate that c*nt." Shame she and Iank never met. I think her distaste of Tennant was more she didn't like his acting than anything he did as he generally seems to be a nice guy, I've met him actually and liked him. Anyway I know about gits like the Drinker because I'm in the youtube sphere more than you as obviously that's what I want to do with my stories. (Speaking of which Scratchman is starting soon.) Meanwhile I also don't think you can ever dismiss the damage these people can do. Remember once upon a time back in 2013 I was told not to bother about the LGBT activist fans, the SJWs etc and their growing influence online by the DW IMDB boards "oh they're just crazies, Moffat doesn't care" and well look what happened. I feel the same could happen in reverse. Thanks to people like the Drinker, Nerdrotic we could see a real swing the other way as more SJW things keep bombing and we could see a return to McCarthyism, with people being smeared as commies, and who knows maybe under them we'd get a story where the Doctor meets Ayn Rand. |
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Oct 3, 2024 14:15:25 GMT
I’ve scoured the reactions to this online. Bugger me- near universal derision. And all echoing sentiments I was hoping not to hear (Ala- the film pointlessly offers self-conscious apologia for the 2019 film’s faux-controversy, the musical segments lack broader purpose and are essentially promotional, the original film’s conclusion is undermined, the film is ostensibly a redundant epilogue, et al…). I’m now highly reticent to see this, purely on the grounds that it’ll almost certainly piss me off. Still, it’s hardly the first time a good film has received a shite sequel. As noted, it never needed one at all. The sequel was clearly never originally planned, and likely a product of studio pressure following the 2019 film’s success. When creative figures bely their intuitions, the final result is inevitably much worse. Don't listen to fandom though. They are braindead sheep. It may be good, it may be bad. PS IF the leaked ending is true, that's not such a big deal. Believe it or not that's a long standing version of the Joker's origins and character that's been adapted lots of times before. The dislike expands beyond fandom. Even the most casual of movie goers are upset. From the sounds of it the movie is a massive troll job and purposely made to annoy certain Joker fans. That's self sabotage, surely? The first film was so rich in depth and made with a clear vision. This doesn't sound like it was made with the best of intentions. I'm seeing it tomorrow so I'll tell you know what I thought. My excitement is decreasing, sadly. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Oct 3, 2024 14:35:18 GMT
Don't listen to fandom though. They are braindead sheep. It may be good, it may be bad. PS IF the leaked ending is true, that's not such a big deal. Believe it or not that's a long standing version of the Joker's origins and character that's been adapted lots of times before. The dislike expands beyond fandom. Even the most casual of movie goers are upset. From the sounds of it the movie is a massive troll job and purposely made to annoy certain Joker fans. That's self sabotage, surely? The first film was so rich in depth and made with a clear vision. This doesn't sound like it was made with the best of intentions. I'm seeing it tomorrow so I'll tell you know what I thought. My excitement is decreasing, sadly. In all honesty this is going to reach The Flash levels of bombing from the sounds of things. What is f*cking up with DC? Why can't they get their shit together? This movie and the Flash had the perfect ingredients to succeed. The Flash, buddy movie with a new superhero and Michael Keaton's Batman. If nothing else surely that would be a crowd pleaser? Why not use Grant Gustin who everybody loves? Nah let's cast a ridiculously controversial actor as the Flash and kill Michael Keaton and his entire world and only have him show up in the last half thereby driving away his audience. The Joker sequel with a huge star with an existing fandom paired with our most popular supervillain? Nah let's piss off fans of the first. DC are almost as much of a murdered franchise as Doctor Who. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Oct 3, 2024 16:45:58 GMT
I just checked out the synposis for this as I couldn't wait to see it after the bad word of mouth. Yeah it looks shit.
SPOILERS, this isn't what the trailer made out it would be. The Joker and Harley going on a crazy rampage throughout the city and their twisted relationship. Nope it's basically a court room drama, with Harley barely getting to do anything.
I hate to say fandom is right on this. God damn do I hate giving those little f*ckers any credit, but this looks like a gigantic waste of time and undermines the first film. It does NOT look as though it undermines the first films political message though to be clear. More just that Arthur turns out to be a pretty lame Joker.
Ah well I hope Venom 3 smashes Deadpool and Wolverine's record. This has 0 chance. In fact it may be the first Batman film to flop as even Batman and Robin turned a profit technically.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Marx on Oct 3, 2024 17:31:48 GMT
Yeah, I reckon I’ll be giving this a sustained- if not permanent- pass.
As trendy as it is to do it down within faux-cinephile circles on the internet, I consider the first film one of DC’s few really good films in recent memory (a sentiment, incidentally, shared by Richard Donner before he died). Given everything I’ve heard about it, treating this sequel as an inseparable continuation sounds about as logical or satisfying as treating Blues Brothers 2000 or Exorcist II as inseparable continuations.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Oct 3, 2024 18:17:01 GMT
Yeah, I reckon I’ll be giving this a sustained- if not permanent- pass. As trendy as it is to do it down within faux-cinephile circles on the internet, I consider the first film one of DC’s few really good films in recent memory (a sentiment, incidentally, shared by Richard Donner before he died). Given everything I’ve heard about it, treating this sequel as an inseparable continuation sounds about as logical or satisfying as treating Blues Brothers 2000 or Exorcist II as inseparable continuations. The trailer was so f*cking deceptive. It includes scenes not in the movie, and makes it look like the Joker and Harley will create a new demented movement and will bring Gotham to its knees like the bit where the Joker and Gaga are dancing through the streets and there is the ruins of a police car next to them and it flickers between their delusion of themselves as gorgeous, romantic heroes. I was expecting it to maybe link in with the origins of Batman too, IE be set ten years later and feature a young Bruce taking to the street and stealing the Joker and Harley's thunder as the hero of the people which leads to the beginning of the feud. Nope instead Gaga might as well not be Harley Quinn. Here is the synopsis. I'd look away now Maxil. Arthur Fleck is in custody at Arkham Asylum awaiting trial for a series of murders he committed as the Joker two years earlier. His lawyer, Maryanne Stewart, plans to argue that Arthur’s Joker persona is responsible for the crimes. In music therapy, Arthur meets fellow patient Lee Quinn, who reveals she was imprisoned after burning down an apartment.
During a film screening attended by Arthur, Lee, and abusive guard Jackie Sullivan, Lee ignites a fire. Amidst the chaos, Arthur and Lee attempt to escape but are caught trying to climb a fence. Arthur is then placed in solitary confinement, where Lee visits him to say she is being released to avoid his influence, though she promises to attend his trial. During a televised interview with television personality Paddy Meyers, Arthur sings to Lee through the television screen, deepening her love for him.
At the trial, assistant district attorney Harvey Dent calls witnesses who dismiss Arthur’s claims of insanity. During a break, Maryanne reveals that Lee had voluntarily committed herself and had not burned down the building. Arthur then dismisses Maryanne and chooses to represent himself. After bringing his former co-worker Gary and neighbor Sophie to the stand, Dent rests his case, and Arthur offers no defense. Returning to Arkham, he is severely beaten by guards led by Jackie, who kills another inmate and supporter of Arthur. In his closing argument the following day, a devastated Arthur denies having a separate Joker persona, taking full responsibility for his actions. Lee storms out of the courtroom, and the jury finds Arthur guilty of murder. As the judge reads the verdict, a bomb explodes outside the courthouse, allowing Arthur to escape amid the chaos with help from two followers.
After fleeing, Arthur wanders through Gotham and eventually encounters Lee outside his old apartment, but she rejects him for renouncing his Joker persona. As she leaves, the police apprehend Arthur and return him to Arkham. The next day, another patient approaches Arthur and stabs him repeatedly in the stomach. The patient carves a smile onto his own face while Arthur is left to bleed out on the floor.Now I actually don't mind the Joker being a title passed on to different people. I will say I think it's a mistake to have the first Joker die before Batman emerges as then it feels like the first Joker isn't the real Joker because he never faced Batman, but it is still an idea that has been done before in the comics and other adaptations like Gotham. (Funny thing is though Gotham did this in that it had Jerome Valeska played by Cameron Monaghan be set up as the Joker, only to die before Batman emerged and it pissed everybody off for that very reason of people saying "oh Cameron's such an amazing actor it sucks that he isn't an official Joker" so they had to bring him back and undo their story. You'd think the makers would have learned from that?) Still this does undermine the point of the first film, of him becoming the Joker and again what the f*ck does Harley do in that synopsis? Lies about burning down a building and then dumps Mr J? That's it? Why bother getting in an actress like Lady Gaga to play it? Why even bother making her Harley Quinn when she shares no similarities, has no major role in the plot etc. She could have been a new character like the black babe in the first film? Arthur also doesn't even kill anyone? I know that may sound shallow of me LOL, wanting to see lots of death, but given the whole point of the first film was to show a monster created by society, this seems like a major shit on that. Again maybe it's not bad for what it is I don't know, but yeah it's a big let down to the story of the first. f*cking hell DC why do you keep f*cking up? The best thing they've done in the last 10 years was Gotham. The Arrowverse had some great stuff but was too much of a mixed bag to be called truly brilliant. The DCEU was exactly the same (though some would say I was being generous with that LOL. I liked WW 2017, Man of Steel, ZS JL, Aquaman and Batman vs Superman is a movie that grew on me.) Sorry still not sold on The Batman that I think is boring pretentious bullshit. Gotham was the only one that was actually good right the way through. Shame they can't top that. Only thing I'm looking forward to about it, is Steve Coogan plays an obnoxious chat show host who interviews the Joker LOL. "Knowing me Alan Partridge knowing you Arthur Fleck AHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA" |
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Oct 4, 2024 15:06:44 GMT
I saw this earlier. To be honest I'm not going to sit here and pretend it's a complete disaster. This film is visually striking, perhaps one of the best-looking films I've seen for ages. The musical numbers are beautifully staged and framed and the lighting is wonderful. Gaga's make up design as well as her performance are highlights though the character feels a bit undercooked. The biggest flaw is Joker himself. This movie is a Joker movie that doesn't want to be a Joker movie. You're not getting the Joker movie you've got in your head. Todd Philips has purposely short-changed the viewers in this way and I think that's the reason people don't like the movie. It also doesn't help that the trial sequences are often quite flat. There are a few great moments within said trial though involving the character of Gary which results in an almost regretful reaction from Arthur.
I don't want to get into spoilers until everyone has seen it, but the ending scene works slightly better in context rather than just reading it online. It does feel however like Philips is saying, "aww, screw it. I'm not going to be making more of these films anyway" in the last twenty minutes. You really have to decide for yourself whether or not the film works as both a follow up to the first and also as a piece of entertainment. It fails as the former but sort of suceeds as the latter. The musical elements are actually the best thing about the movie though Philips never goes all out like he should have done.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Oct 4, 2024 15:29:01 GMT
I saw this earlier. To be honest I'm not going to sit here and pretend it's a complete disaster. This film is visually striking, perhaps one of the most best-looking films I've seen for ages. The musical numbers are beautifully staged and framed and the lighting is wonderful. Gaga's make up design as well as her performance are highlights though the character feels a bit undercooked. The biggest flaw is Joker himself. This movie is a Joker movie that doesn't want to be a Joker movie. You're not getting the Joker movie you've got in your head. Todd Philips has purposely short-changed the viewers in this way and I think that's the reason people don't like the movie. It also doesn't help that the trial sequences are often quite flat. There are a few great moments within said trial though involving the character of Gary which results in an almost regretful reaction from Arthur. I don't want to get into spoilers until everyone has seen it, but the ending scene works slightly better in context rather than just reading it online. It does feel however like Philips is saying, "aww, screw it. I'm not going to be making more of these films anyway" in the last twenty minutes. You really have to decide for yourself whether or not the film works as both a follow up to the first and also as a piece of entertainment. It fails as the former but sort of suceeds as the latter. The musical elements are actually the best thing about the movie though Philips never goes all out like he should have done. I think that's the best review I've seen of it. Pretty much what I thought that it might be okay in its own right, but it just isn't what you wanted. Really the trailer I posted in this thread I think f*cked them LOL as it completely made out that the movie was the Joker and Gaga going on a rampage throughout Gotham and possibly fighting Batman and got everybody hyped for that. Still I think this will collapse at the box office, but its reputation may improve in time. |
|
