It's funny that a lot of people say: "hollywood doesn't make good, unique movies anymore, they just make cashgrab sequels! Everything is the same and boring". And when someone finally makes a unique sequel with a great twist, a movie that goes a different way than the first one, the same people say: "Why didn't he make the movie exactly like I expected and wanted it to be!". I mean.... this movie is finally not just a cheap cashgrab. I love the fact that he made the movie how he wanted it to be and didn't take the route of just pleasing the "joker fanbase". The first movie was one of my favourite movies for a long time and when I heard they do a sequel I was a little bit concerned that they will destroy a perfect stand alone movie. I never expected such a beautiful work of art and I'm positively surprised. Wonderful cinematography, great acting and a good message. I was in therapy for a long time and had to learn to break out of the victim mentality, that's why this movies touched me on a very personal level. I'm feeling so sad for arthur that he never had a person to show him how to fight his way out of his misery😢 Thank you for this awesome video, it's the best one about this movie I saw so far👌
I loved Folie à Deux and it made the first film even better, because we could re-view it through a different lens and with more insight. Appreciations for your insightful and honest review, even touching on the »All it Takes is One Bad Day« mantra of the Joker. The video wouldn’t have needed so much Despot stuff, because it's an excellent analysis on its own.
Yeah, I went a little to hard on the Despot stuff, but he made a lot of the same points other people were parroting so I just used it as a launch pad. But I get it, I had to watch the video a lot to get footage and it was not pleasant. It's not something I am gonna make a habit.
Love the "majority who criticized this completely subjective piece of art are too dumb to comprehend what I was smart to enough see" kind of attitude. Really endearing.
Thank you.....wait a minute. That was a criticism. My point was the aspects they were critiquing were not subjective. It was mostly about seeing Arthur as a literal symbol of revolution, which he never was, and Todd Phillips making Joker 2 to tell fans of the first movie to "fuck off" These are not subjective points. There is no evidence for the second, and evidence of the first point is derived from just misunderstanding the movie they were watching
@@TheOneNerd1 Todd saw some Joker memes online and thought it was his entire fanbase, so he crashed the character he helped create to "own the incels". It's not genius, it's spiteful and shortsighted.
@@TheOneNerd1 It's well documented that he did not like the fanbase reaction to the first movie. Either the studio or Todd himself disliked the fanbase reception of the movie so much that he wanted to tear Joker down.
@@DefaultName-du3kr Well documented where? Cause I showed the one fake article that was saying that. If it's well documented, it should be easy to find
It feels like Arthur isnt moving the plot because he isn’t, The joker is. The opening cartoon shows this. In this movie the joker is Tyler durden. While he and Harley are planning an escape, Arthur is stuck in a musical trance fighting his other personality. The only way to escape is to kill Arthur and take full control. After the explosion “joker” throws arthur in the backseat and jumps up front. They are fighting for control and joker wins by manipulation through harley.
@@TheOneNerd1thats also why the inmate cuts his face. Its not because hes heath ledger, its because now the make up is irrelevant. I loved this movie 😅
I loved Joker 2. Not quite as good the first, but close, and a VERY fitting sequel, to the unconventional, controvesial, genre-defying first movie. I'll bet money that in 15 or 20 years, Folie a Deux stands up far better than 99% of comic book movie sequels. People saying the movie is a middle finger to fans, are kinda HALF-right... But they also completely miss the whole point of the movie. Philips DIDN'T want to make a sequel; He wanted the first movie to stand alone.... But the studio, responding to audiences who ONLY go to see established franchises, sequels, reboots and spin-offs of familiar characters, just kept throwing money at Philips, til he eventually accepted.. So the movie IS "a middle finger"... But its NOT "a middle finger at Joker fans, for relating to a disenfranchised white, male anti-hero", like half YT seem to want to believe... ... it's s a middle finger to lazy, risk-averse audiences, demanding lazy, risk-averse sequels, that are just a copy-paste of a safe, familiar movie, with safe, familiar characters, doing safe, familar stuff.... Those people characterizing Folie a Deux as "woke Hollywood, mad that audiences liked the edgy firat Joker movie" are 100% projecting, and didn't SEE what was on the screen. I don't really think Philips cares about"woke" politics, one way or the other.... but if anything, Folie a Deux is one of the LEAST"woke" movies of the decade; It contains exactly ZERO tokenistic casting, or forced "diverse" characters or storylines. Like the first movie, its just a pretty accurate depiction of New York society in the 80s. And it's very clearly a passionate tribute to classic musicals of the 50s- But without a HINT of the usual apologia, in any modern movies with "retro" themes, about the fact that those old musicals reflected the social values of their day. It completely avoids ANY if the usual "woke" preaching, about race, or lgbt, or gender politics, or anything else; it's notable for a total ABSENCE of any of the standard, tired, forced "woke" tropes.. Its just a gloriously ballsy, totally unapolagetic love-letter to a genre that's become forgitten/unpopular, which Philips has modernized in a very innovative, unconventional way, in a way that FORCED sequel-viewers out of their comfort-zone, of seeing the same, safe, predictable movie, over and over and over... Even if it WAS a bad movie (which I don't believe it was), I would STILL praise a sequel director, for doing something so gutsy and outside the box. People (me included) have been complaining how bland, spineless, and unoriginal 2020's movies are; Well, you can like Joker 2 or don't like it... But you CAN'T accuse it of being unoriginal, or failing to take risks... And "original"/"risk-taking" means that NOT every movie will please every movie-goer.. that's why its called a "risk". But I will gladly accept even BAD movies that genuinely take risks, and do something original... as opposed to 99% of 2020's movies, that are jusy lazy, generic, bland mush farted out by faceless, indistinguishable directors, where every movie feels like it was made by a combination of market-resarch data, a corporate diversity and inclusion taskforce trying to not offend Twitter/Reddit, and an AI director-bot 9000,, just rehashing whatever people liked about the last half-dozen successful movies. The reaction to Joker 2 proved that its AUDIENCES' fault that 2020s movies are garbage, arguably even more than studios... Coz audiences just WANT familar, same-same reboots and sequels, about characters they're already invested in, doing the same, familiar, safe, re-assuring stuff they did in the LAST movie in that franchise. Joker 2 may not have been the sequel that audiences wanted... But it was the sequel audiences deserved...
It's funny to think that the sequel audiences wanted, that being that Joker and Harley go on a killing rampage, getting revenge on all the mean bullies and people see as ruining society, would have been the easy cookie cutter way to go, and something that would have totally gone against the themes and point for the original. Joker 2 was an experiment. Which only wasted WBs money who people claim to hate all the time anyway. So it's a win win. People just need to hate cause they literally made something up about the movie and got mad about it
It would be "logical' to go against the point and themes of the first movie so Joker could kill more people and not learn anything from it. Have you seen the first movie or did you just hear about it from memes
So I'd like to have a civil exchange! I actually find it interesting how a lot of folk have found the film's subversion interesting, and it COULD have been, in my opinion, but it fails on many levels. Folie à Deux seems to hate you for liking the first film. It is strangely hostile to it's core audience and Todd Phillips is weirdly resentful toward people who really connected with the first film. The movie spends 2 hours recapping what happened in the first film, and then lectures you as to why you suck for liking it. The film seems to absolutely HATE Arthur by torturing him further, as though this poor man hasn't been through enough already. I also think Todd is completely wrong in thinking that "people only care about the Joker, no one cares about Arthur Fleck", an angle he has really gone for with this sequel. He couldn't be more wrong, because I have seen countless fans of the first film talk about how relatable, grounded and real Arthur feels to them. What was the point of the first movie if the sequel is telling us that none of Arthur's character development or journey mattered? It renders BOTH the first and second film almost meaningless, because it's telling us that the Joker never mattered, that Arthur's persona and character development never mattered. What is even the point in the first movie even existing then if that's how Todd feels? Harley Quinn in this film is one of the biggest wasted opportunities I think I have ever seen in a movie. She could have been REALLY interesting in the context of this film, a rabid fan who wants Arthur to be who she thinks he is. But she ends up being nothing more than an underwritten mouthpiece for Todd Phillips to further throw spite at fans of the Joker. In my opinion, it's a spiteful, bitter film, that weirdly hates the first film's success and the first film in general. What I did kinda like is that it talked about people who wanted the Joker to be a certain way, to "be the Joker" that people wanted to see, which, again, could have been super interesting and unique. But I find this film doesn't really go anywhere and by the end, nothing has changed and nothing has really been explored, or completed, or expanded on. The discussion of this film has been interesting and hearing someone out who enjoyed it rather than hated it is interesting!
I would say, without going point for point, that your premise is a bit flawed from the start cause you assume the film hates fans of the first. Because of that, you see everything as trying to connect to that. Harley is not a mouth piece for anything. She is a fan of a fake Joker who never existed. Arthur is not a leader and never tried to be, that was the point. People assumed he was and his fans tried to make him something he was not. All Arthur is, is a mentally ill man who snapped. He was never a hero, never a hero.
@@TheOneNerd1 Harley wants Arthur to be who she thinks he is. She's disappointed and lashes out when he disowns the Joker, she is literally a mouthpiece for how Todd Phillips views fans of the Joker and her character is SUPER underdeveloped aside from that. It kinda feels like you don't want to believe that or accept that. Also you're saying the literal only reason Arthur stops being the Joker is because someone he considered a friend was killed by the guard. Is that really all it took after everything Arthur has already been through? Even if you did want to go with Arthur seeing how his actions hurt people around him, again, an interesting take, it is super weak and poorly handled if that even was the intention. The characters are too paper thin and pays lip service to these ideas rather than actually commit to them. Harley is frustratingly under written and under used in this film. I actually have no issue at all with Arthur's singing, by the way. It's quite literally lore accurate.
@itsbreadbin well at least we can agree on the music front. But even so, if this were just a simple issue of people think certain elements were under written or under developed,.I would not have an issue with that either and would have never made this video. But it's the false narratives going around of people assuming the film is an attack on fans which irks me. As I have had to repeat many times before. There is no evidence for it other than one article with no involvement from Todd. Just one reviewers interpretation that the Internet ran with and took as serious for some reason, cause exposing "anti fan" behaviours makes for easy views and engagement. I'm just out here trying to dispell some falsehoods I am seeing spread that is frankly making any discussion about Joker 2 as a movie toxic as hell
@@TheOneNerd1 I mean, it's pretty obvious and on the nose that the movie is calling fans out. Dude, a guy cosplaying as the Joker is like "we still love you man!" With Arthur literally running away from him lmao. It couldn't be any less subtle and more on the nose if it tried. The second movie is about the first film and it's reception by the public. I don't think anyone ever thought Arthur was "the good guy". To be honest I have never heard anyone say that ever. Relating to a character or understanding where they are coming from doesn't mean you agree or that they are a good person. I keep hearing people calling Arthur a "narcissist", and I think that's a completely incorrect and entirely wrong accusation. Arthur isn't a narcissist. He just wants someone to love him, to be nice to him. He's been treated like worthless garbage his entire life and all he wants is someone to be kind to him for once. Is he maybe a little entitled for thinking he's owed that? Sure, I guess? He definitely isn't a narcissist though and people who think he is don't know what narcissism is. Also you seem to think people see Arthur as a "hero", literally who ever said that? He's tired of being downtrodden and he stands up for himself in a destructive and violent way, his character development in the first film was about him getting to that point and becoming the Joker, that was literally the entire point of the first film. And the second movie basically tells you to forget all that and forget that character development ever happened to begin with. What is even the point of the first movie existing then?
@itsbreadbin I will say, In regards to your first point. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Second, in regards to him being a narcissist. There is a difference to wanting to be loved, and stalking a girl and having that fantasy sequence where he sees a talk show host as a father figure and having a Chris Chan level of entitlement. He is not a normal level of entitled and self important,.like I said in the video,.it's Elliot Rodger levels
Maybe the director got scared by the public and establishment response to the first film and decided kill the character. Fix the "mistakes" of the first, and get in line with the system.
I'm so tired of this framing. Nobody 'misunderstood' Joker 2. They understood perfectly and didn't like it. You aren't smart just because you noticed what theming was 2 days ago
@TheOneNerd1 Dude come on. I've read the comments and I know you liked the movie. There's nothing wrong with that. But there is legitimate criticism and the director didn't want a sequel but was pushed into making it. He has made his distaste for it very clear. My biggest gripe is that the entire movie is just pointless. Nothing changes, Arthur gets belittled and bitched down, ends up right where he started and dies. No character Arc at all. Unless you consider him assassinating his own character an Arc. It's cool if you liked it, but this is a story nobody cared to hear, because nothing in it mattered.
@@skyhunter2816 He does go through a charecter arc. It's essentially continuing what the first movie set up. He was made a folk hero by a movement of people who thought he was a symbol against society and it's evils. But he was just a guy who killed some people. In some cases, unjustifiably. That is the point of the movie. There is no charecter assassination of Arthur from the previous movie, cause he was already basically stripped down at the end of the first movie. I go over this in the video, but again, it's all about Arthur trying to run away from his responsibilities from the first film, which he learns if getting people he cares about hurt and killed. Yeah, he gets killed at the end, it's a tragic story, not everyone gets a happy fairy tale ending. He didn't get a good ending in the first movie either. Again, this is all about people going into this movie with a narrative they have heard, and assuming that's what it is by forcing those puzzle pieces together to form a warped picture. No evidence to suggest Todd was forced to do this or it was to spite the audience, non, zero, zilch. And when I ask people to present it, it;s all "Well, you gotta read between the lines" Nah, it's the narrative falling apart.
You’re literally bullying a child. Everyone at his age has cringe takes, what good does calling him cringe do? You were his age once and naive just trying to get by. Let a kid grow, the voice is AI it’s not actually him
It's funny that a lot of people say: "hollywood doesn't make good, unique movies anymore, they just make cashgrab sequels! Everything is the same and boring". And when someone finally makes a unique sequel with a great twist, a movie that goes a different way than the first one, the same people say: "Why didn't he make the movie exactly like I expected and wanted it to be!". I mean.... this movie is finally not just a cheap cashgrab. I love the fact that he made the movie how he wanted it to be and didn't take the route of just pleasing the "joker fanbase".
The first movie was one of my favourite movies for a long time and when I heard they do a sequel I was a little bit concerned that they will destroy a perfect stand alone movie. I never expected such a beautiful work of art and I'm positively surprised. Wonderful cinematography, great acting and a good message.
I was in therapy for a long time and had to learn to break out of the victim mentality, that's why this movies touched me on a very personal level. I'm feeling so sad for arthur that he never had a person to show him how to fight his way out of his misery😢
Thank you for this awesome video, it's the best one about this movie I saw so far👌
I loved Folie à Deux and it made the first film even better, because we could re-view it through a different lens and with more insight. Appreciations for your insightful and honest review, even touching on the »All it Takes is One Bad Day« mantra of the Joker. The video wouldn’t have needed so much Despot stuff, because it's an excellent analysis on its own.
Yeah, I went a little to hard on the Despot stuff, but he made a lot of the same points other people were parroting so I just used it as a launch pad. But I get it, I had to watch the video a lot to get footage and it was not pleasant. It's not something I am gonna make a habit.
Love the "majority who criticized this completely subjective piece of art are too dumb to comprehend what I was smart to enough see" kind of attitude. Really endearing.
Thank you.....wait a minute. That was a criticism.
My point was the aspects they were critiquing were not subjective. It was mostly about seeing Arthur as a literal symbol of revolution, which he never was, and Todd Phillips making Joker 2 to tell fans of the first movie to "fuck off"
These are not subjective points. There is no evidence for the second, and evidence of the first point is derived from just misunderstanding the movie they were watching
@@TheOneNerd1 Todd saw some Joker memes online and thought it was his entire fanbase, so he crashed the character he helped create to "own the incels". It's not genius, it's spiteful and shortsighted.
There is no evidence of that. None whatsoever. Where are you getting this?
@@TheOneNerd1 It's well documented that he did not like the fanbase reaction to the first movie. Either the studio or Todd himself disliked the fanbase reception of the movie so much that he wanted to tear Joker down.
@@DefaultName-du3kr Well documented where? Cause I showed the one fake article that was saying that. If it's well documented, it should be easy to find
It feels like Arthur isnt moving the plot because he isn’t, The joker is. The opening cartoon shows this. In this movie the joker is Tyler durden. While he and Harley are planning an escape, Arthur is stuck in a musical trance fighting his other personality. The only way to escape is to kill Arthur and take full control. After the explosion “joker” throws arthur in the backseat and jumps up front. They are fighting for control and joker wins by manipulation through harley.
That is an interesting way of looking at it
@@TheOneNerd1thats also why the inmate cuts his face. Its not because hes heath ledger, its because now the make up is irrelevant. I loved this movie 😅
I loved Joker 2. Not quite as good the first, but close, and a VERY fitting sequel, to the unconventional, controvesial, genre-defying first movie.
I'll bet money that in 15 or 20 years, Folie a Deux stands up far better than 99% of comic book movie sequels.
People saying the movie is a middle finger to fans, are kinda HALF-right... But they also completely miss the whole point of the movie.
Philips DIDN'T want to make a sequel; He wanted the first movie to stand alone.... But the studio, responding to audiences who ONLY go to see established franchises, sequels, reboots and spin-offs of familiar characters, just kept throwing money at Philips, til he eventually accepted..
So the movie IS "a middle finger"... But its NOT "a middle finger at Joker fans, for relating to a disenfranchised white, male anti-hero", like half YT seem to want to believe...
... it's s a middle finger to lazy, risk-averse audiences, demanding lazy, risk-averse sequels, that are just a copy-paste of a safe, familiar movie, with safe, familiar characters, doing safe, familar stuff....
Those people characterizing Folie a Deux as "woke Hollywood, mad that audiences liked the edgy firat Joker movie" are 100% projecting, and didn't SEE what was on the screen.
I don't really think Philips cares about"woke" politics, one way or the other.... but if anything, Folie a Deux is one of the LEAST"woke" movies of the decade; It contains exactly ZERO tokenistic casting, or forced "diverse" characters or storylines. Like the first movie, its just a pretty accurate depiction of New York society in the 80s.
And it's very clearly a passionate tribute to classic musicals of the 50s- But without a HINT of the usual apologia, in any modern movies with "retro" themes, about the fact that those old musicals reflected the social values of their day. It completely avoids ANY if the usual "woke" preaching, about race, or lgbt, or gender politics, or anything else; it's notable for a total ABSENCE of any of the standard, tired, forced "woke" tropes..
Its just a gloriously ballsy, totally unapolagetic love-letter to a genre that's become forgitten/unpopular, which Philips has modernized in a very innovative, unconventional way, in a way that FORCED sequel-viewers out of their comfort-zone, of seeing the same, safe, predictable movie, over and over and over...
Even if it WAS a bad movie (which I don't believe it was), I would STILL praise a sequel director, for doing something so gutsy and outside the box.
People (me included) have been complaining how bland, spineless, and unoriginal 2020's movies are; Well, you can like Joker 2 or don't like it... But you CAN'T accuse it of being unoriginal, or failing to take risks...
And "original"/"risk-taking" means that NOT every movie will please every movie-goer.. that's why its called a "risk".
But I will gladly accept even BAD movies that genuinely take risks, and do something original... as opposed to 99% of 2020's movies, that are jusy lazy, generic, bland mush farted out by faceless, indistinguishable directors, where every movie feels like it was made by a combination of market-resarch data, a corporate diversity and inclusion taskforce trying to not offend Twitter/Reddit, and an AI director-bot 9000,, just rehashing whatever people liked about the last half-dozen successful movies.
The reaction to Joker 2 proved that its AUDIENCES' fault that 2020s movies are garbage, arguably even more than studios... Coz audiences just WANT familar, same-same reboots and sequels, about characters they're already invested in, doing the same, familiar, safe, re-assuring stuff they did in the LAST movie in that franchise.
Joker 2 may not have been the sequel that audiences wanted... But it was the sequel audiences deserved...
It's funny to think that the sequel audiences wanted, that being that Joker and Harley go on a killing rampage, getting revenge on all the mean bullies and people see as ruining society, would have been the easy cookie cutter way to go, and something that would have totally gone against the themes and point for the original.
Joker 2 was an experiment. Which only wasted WBs money who people claim to hate all the time anyway. So it's a win win. People just need to hate cause they literally made something up about the movie and got mad about it
@@TheOneNerd1 what.. it would have been the logical way to go.. not this POS musical nonsense lol
It would be "logical' to go against the point and themes of the first movie so Joker could kill more people and not learn anything from it. Have you seen the first movie or did you just hear about it from memes
@@TheOneNerd1 not logical to make this garbage musical with a fake boring Joker in it constantly talking about the first movie lol krap Harley too
yeh u know better than everyone else lool arr0gant
So I'd like to have a civil exchange! I actually find it interesting how a lot of folk have found the film's subversion interesting, and it COULD have been, in my opinion, but it fails on many levels. Folie à Deux seems to hate you for liking the first film. It is strangely hostile to it's core audience and Todd Phillips is weirdly resentful toward people who really connected with the first film. The movie spends 2 hours recapping what happened in the first film, and then lectures you as to why you suck for liking it. The film seems to absolutely HATE Arthur by torturing him further, as though this poor man hasn't been through enough already. I also think Todd is completely wrong in thinking that "people only care about the Joker, no one cares about Arthur Fleck", an angle he has really gone for with this sequel. He couldn't be more wrong, because I have seen countless fans of the first film talk about how relatable, grounded and real Arthur feels to them. What was the point of the first movie if the sequel is telling us that none of Arthur's character development or journey mattered? It renders BOTH the first and second film almost meaningless, because it's telling us that the Joker never mattered, that Arthur's persona and character development never mattered. What is even the point in the first movie even existing then if that's how Todd feels?
Harley Quinn in this film is one of the biggest wasted opportunities I think I have ever seen in a movie. She could have been REALLY interesting in the context of this film, a rabid fan who wants Arthur to be who she thinks he is. But she ends up being nothing more than an underwritten mouthpiece for Todd Phillips to further throw spite at fans of the Joker. In my opinion, it's a spiteful, bitter film, that weirdly hates the first film's success and the first film in general. What I did kinda like is that it talked about people who wanted the Joker to be a certain way, to "be the Joker" that people wanted to see, which, again, could have been super interesting and unique. But I find this film doesn't really go anywhere and by the end, nothing has changed and nothing has really been explored, or completed, or expanded on. The discussion of this film has been interesting and hearing someone out who enjoyed it rather than hated it is interesting!
I would say, without going point for point, that your premise is a bit flawed from the start cause you assume the film hates fans of the first.
Because of that, you see everything as trying to connect to that. Harley is not a mouth piece for anything. She is a fan of a fake Joker who never existed. Arthur is not a leader and never tried to be, that was the point. People assumed he was and his fans tried to make him something he was not.
All Arthur is, is a mentally ill man who snapped. He was never a hero, never a hero.
@@TheOneNerd1 Harley wants Arthur to be who she thinks he is. She's disappointed and lashes out when he disowns the Joker, she is literally a mouthpiece for how Todd Phillips views fans of the Joker and her character is SUPER underdeveloped aside from that. It kinda feels like you don't want to believe that or accept that. Also you're saying the literal only reason Arthur stops being the Joker is because someone he considered a friend was killed by the guard. Is that really all it took after everything Arthur has already been through? Even if you did want to go with Arthur seeing how his actions hurt people around him, again, an interesting take, it is super weak and poorly handled if that even was the intention. The characters are too paper thin and pays lip service to these ideas rather than actually commit to them. Harley is frustratingly under written and under used in this film. I actually have no issue at all with Arthur's singing, by the way. It's quite literally lore accurate.
@itsbreadbin well at least we can agree on the music front. But even so, if this were just a simple issue of people think certain elements were under written or under developed,.I would not have an issue with that either and would have never made this video.
But it's the false narratives going around of people assuming the film is an attack on fans which irks me. As I have had to repeat many times before. There is no evidence for it other than one article with no involvement from Todd. Just one reviewers interpretation that the Internet ran with and took as serious for some reason, cause exposing "anti fan" behaviours makes for easy views and engagement.
I'm just out here trying to dispell some falsehoods I am seeing spread that is frankly making any discussion about Joker 2 as a movie toxic as hell
@@TheOneNerd1 I mean, it's pretty obvious and on the nose that the movie is calling fans out. Dude, a guy cosplaying as the Joker is like "we still love you man!" With Arthur literally running away from him lmao. It couldn't be any less subtle and more on the nose if it tried.
The second movie is about the first film and it's reception by the public. I don't think anyone ever thought Arthur was "the good guy". To be honest I have never heard anyone say that ever. Relating to a character or understanding where they are coming from doesn't mean you agree or that they are a good person.
I keep hearing people calling Arthur a "narcissist", and I think that's a completely incorrect and entirely wrong accusation. Arthur isn't a narcissist. He just wants someone to love him, to be nice to him. He's been treated like worthless garbage his entire life and all he wants is someone to be kind to him for once. Is he maybe a little entitled for thinking he's owed that? Sure, I guess? He definitely isn't a narcissist though and people who think he is don't know what narcissism is.
Also you seem to think people see Arthur as a "hero", literally who ever said that? He's tired of being downtrodden and he stands up for himself in a destructive and violent way, his character development in the first film was about him getting to that point and becoming the Joker, that was literally the entire point of the first film. And the second movie basically tells you to forget all that and forget that character development ever happened to begin with. What is even the point of the first movie existing then?
@itsbreadbin I will say, In regards to your first point. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Second, in regards to him being a narcissist. There is a difference to wanting to be loved, and stalking a girl and having that fantasy sequence where he sees a talk show host as a father figure and having a Chris Chan level of entitlement.
He is not a normal level of entitled and self important,.like I said in the video,.it's Elliot Rodger levels
Good video, still not a big fan of the movie but this video does give me a new perspective on it
Appreciate you giving the video a shot
Maybe the director got scared by the public and establishment response to the first film and decided kill the character. Fix the "mistakes" of the first, and get in line with the system.
That is the narrative going around. Everyone seems to be repeating it even though the director nor the film itself supports it.
I'm so tired of this framing. Nobody 'misunderstood' Joker 2. They understood perfectly and didn't like it. You aren't smart just because you noticed what theming was 2 days ago
Joker 2 came out in October so it was way more then 2 days ago
Todd just chose the Seinfeld ending.
Considering it was made bad on purpose I'm gonna say, neither.
Bad on purpose? How so?
@TheOneNerd1 Dude come on. I've read the comments and I know you liked the movie. There's nothing wrong with that.
But there is legitimate criticism and the director didn't want a sequel but was pushed into making it. He has made his distaste for it very clear. My biggest gripe is that the entire movie is just pointless. Nothing changes, Arthur gets belittled and bitched down, ends up right where he started and dies. No character Arc at all. Unless you consider him assassinating his own character an Arc. It's cool if you liked it, but this is a story nobody cared to hear, because nothing in it mattered.
@@skyhunter2816 He does go through a charecter arc. It's essentially continuing what the first movie set up. He was made a folk hero by a movement of people who thought he was a symbol against society and it's evils. But he was just a guy who killed some people. In some cases, unjustifiably. That is the point of the movie. There is no charecter assassination of Arthur from the previous movie, cause he was already basically stripped down at the end of the first movie.
I go over this in the video, but again, it's all about Arthur trying to run away from his responsibilities from the first film, which he learns if getting people he cares about hurt and killed. Yeah, he gets killed at the end, it's a tragic story, not everyone gets a happy fairy tale ending. He didn't get a good ending in the first movie either.
Again, this is all about people going into this movie with a narrative they have heard, and assuming that's what it is by forcing those puzzle pieces together to form a warped picture.
No evidence to suggest Todd was forced to do this or it was to spite the audience, non, zero, zilch. And when I ask people to present it, it;s all "Well, you gotta read between the lines"
Nah, it's the narrative falling apart.
So many butthurts haters in the comments. The movie was great.
This guy gets it
'look how intelligent i am, i got the Joker 2 and nobody else got it' lool well done bro, u like a shyte movie
@@JesusofNazareth6666 you don't have to be intelligent to get Joker 2. That's the sad thing
@@TheOneNerd1 yeh u aint
So enlighten me, what don't I get? Let me guess. "The movie was about telling it's incel fans to fuck off, that's what another RUclipsr told me"
@@TheOneNerd1 that you aint clever..and the word incel means nothing, through overuse
He’s a fucking kid man let him be
No offense. You sound like Kevin from ,,the office"
I can see that. I have a little bit of fat guy voice
@TheOneNerd1 it sound cool. And BTW very good video
@@dominus05 Thank you for watching.
Cringe take
Which one?
You’re literally bullying a child. Everyone at his age has cringe takes, what good does calling him cringe do? You were his age once and naive just trying to get by. Let a kid grow, the voice is AI it’s not actually him
@@BennjkSyd I may be cringe, but I would never be cringe enough to use an AI Voice. That's all natural baby.
@ what do you mean? How old are you then?
@BennjkSyd im certainly not a child. Not sure where you got that from.
lol u trying so hard so hard to be subversive but u failing bro, like the movie did
@@JesusofNazareth6666 nah
@@TheOneNerd1 yep, u aint clever bro
@@JesusofNazareth6666 no you
He’s a fucking high schooler man don’t be so harsh. He’s putting videos out trying the RUclips thing, don’t be so harsh
@@TheOneNerd1 hahaha u didnt sound like a kid, but now you do - 'no, you' 🤣😂😅