I loved the idea of it being a musical, thinking we were getting a movie about Joker and Harley on a rampage, and the musical aspect is how they see themselves. It made perfect sense until I saw the actual movie
THANK YOU FOR POINTING OUT THE WEIRD TALK-SINGING! I was kind of shocked in MOST of Gaga's numbers in this film, she sounds...bad?? But not necessarily bad, just pitchy (like you said) and weirdly airy, like she's not actually singing or is moreso whisper-singing. 'Gonna Build a Mountain' is one of the best numbers in this film simply because they actually get to sing and vibe with the instrumental instead of just...standing there and singing like they're trying not to disrupt the next door neighbors.
@@toyosibee.mp3 u should listen to the companion album Gaga released, “Harlequin- over there she sang like how the musician side of her should sound but it wouldn’t make sense in the film. So we’ve explained she had to sing “poorly” because the character wasnt supposed to be great at singing. Theres music of all genres so obviously there will be a crowd who appreciates and love them, be it Tom Hooper’s Les Mis or not. Even if its a niche one doesn’t mean you have better taste than others.
The trailer focuses on showing that joker 2 would be similar in genre and a very natural continuation to joker 1. Not a musical. If they did that, this movie also would have earned a ton of money, this was very dumb.
We knew it was going to be a musical since three years ago. Maybe the posters or wathever didn't convey it, but that's how it was announced since looong ago
@@goober479 If you want to interpret it that way, sure. But it’s also established with the Joker as a character that he keeps remembering his past differently. The entire movie could be the way he wants to see his life leading up to becoming the Joker, or a BS version he tells others to garner sympathy. The first movie left it open for interpretation. I’m not talking about his motives as shown at the end, I’m talking about the fact that you can’t entirely trust the story of a guy who breaks into delusions(Same with his initial standup scene where he imagined everyone laughing) and goes around unaliving people.
In the one scene where Arthur and Lee “sing” to each other through the Arkham visitation room, the only thing I could think of in that moment is what would happen if the diner scene in Heat had Robert de Niro and Al Pacino sing that dialogue to each other. Sounds awesome in theory, but would probably be cringe if shot and performed in the same way that it was in the actual movie. That’s exactly how it felt in Joker: Folie A Deux, and is indicative of how poorly the musical numbers fit overall.
such a shame since i genuinely enjoy musicals but so many directors dont know how to direct a musical and it ends up shitty. guess ill be sticking to mamma mia, the greatest showman, and tangled forever.
I mean if this film just followed Harley I'd be 100% on board for her to be singing. Just follow a woman who falls for a mad man and her watching his trial obsessively/trying to end up in the hospital with him so she can break him out and fix his broken heart. We already saw that the music in Arthur was expressed through uncomfortable dance not vocal singing
Thank god for this video. I can't stand watching another review hating on this film for being a musical rather than being a bad musical! Musical is amazing when it's done right.
It's almost as if Todd Phillips thinks Joker overshadowed his original character drama, and his character became invisible again. Who does this director think he is, thinking he is allowed to have a voice? The gall.
My opinion is this depiction of joker is FAR too realistic. And I’m not talking about not falling into acid and all that jazz. Look at the caped crusader show for example. The Harley depiction is very realistic, but there’s still this dark whimsy about her Harley persona. The Batman movie works because Batman himself is a pretty down to earth realistic hero (but surrounded by somewhat fantastical villains). Taking those villains and pulling the lever to full realism…it just doesn’t work to me. To me these aren’t Joker (and Harley). They feel too real of people. Not saying most other depictions romanticize their mental illness, I’m far from saying that. These depictions are just…someone nee
The Lizzie McGuire Movie, right? Damn, I don’t know how well it holds up outside of the animated bits but even if it doesn’t it’s better than Joker’s weirdly bad musical, and I didn’t even watch the first one. As someone who doesn’t like musicals, can movie executives stop trying to hide them from the public? It pissed me off with the Mean Girls revival and it pisses me off now because it just feels condescending in the same way that a musical fan might have felt after they went to see Into the Woods’ film expecting music and no James Corden.
Yeah, I WANT to know if a movie is a musical, because I _like_ musicals. I’d be frustrated if I went to see a movie only to find out it’s a totally different genre than what was advertised. In fact, I’d feel downright scammed. Especially if it’s a bad movie.
@@thatonepossum5766 We both feel ripped off. Hell, the only reason I dislike musicals is because I just don’t enjoy them as much as other movies, but goddamn, enough with the faux à deux. If you’re a musical, just *be a musical.*
I agree. There were definitely good moments in it that shone imo, which I can't _really_ say about MG. The bad moments were really bad though, and the good wasn't enough to make it good. It ended up this blend of 'some parts are decent, some parts are cringy'-_OKish_
The whole point of the musical numbers, besides the foile a deux, is a progression of Joker’s character from the first movie. He sings and dances, albeit more likely, but becomes more in tune with the music in him as the movie progresses. After Joker is fully embraced at the end of the first, he can’t fully stop. When he finds Harley, she seeks to be like Joker, so the pair express themselves through song. That was my takeaway. I enjoyed it.
I think Joker highlight some interesting things about musical movies. For many years musical movies has been look down upon, by the audience who believes know better and critics. But musicals are a hard genre to make, not everyone can make a musical movie and that’s why not many directors tries, because you need some sort of knowledge of how a musicals works in all their stages: the music, the choreography, the actors, the costumes, the stages, etc. It was a bold move from Phillips to attempt to do something he doesn’t have a knowledge of, but it wasn’t the right choice or the right material to begin with. He couldn’t put against two genres more different than the other one and that has such alienated fanbase as well, it’s like trying to do Fast and Furious the musical.
"any time arthur is about to transition into a song, he starts to timidly speak-sing in a way that is as obnoxious as it is off-key" ah yes. the dear evan hansen (2021) approach
Really tired of these non musical musicals. I thought they were doing the wisper singing and than turn it into a more classic musical production as the delusion grows, but for most of it, thats not true. Even the bigger show scenes, it doesnt feel musical. Side note, i thought it was interesting that they seem to reference Char and Amy Winehouse, both woman who argueably got taken advantage of by they partners, but harley is clearly the abuser in this version. It made me feel like the director was questioning the abuse of these woman I know its nitpicky, but if youre going to bring the Harley Joker deignamic into the real world and flipping it, im gonna read into it
A great breakdown of the technical events of what makes a good musical. Informative AND helps me understand and articulate what seemed so ‘off’ about this movie.
For me at least, musicals are often an exploration of fantasy vs reality. If we go by this, I really think the musical numbers here work quite well considering the films themes centre A LOT on Arthur's fantasies and how his mental illnesses play into this, hell even the joker himself could be said to be a facade, meaning we don't know whether it's real or not. It's deliberately ambiguous if that makes sense. I completely get your points, but idk I thought the movie worked well as a dark inversion of musical tropes
I love watching people go full "COPE ON A ROPE" and try to defend it. Nevermind the betrayal of character and that it retroactively taints the original film, it committed the WORST sin a movie can make: It was BORING. I asked the theater for a refund despite finishing the movie, and they were kind enough to accommodate me.
I think a higher up said "musical" and the writer went "okay", but never wrote a musical in their entire life, nor did research in order to do so. Not only due to the lack of set up and explanation of why the Joker would suddenly be singing. However, typically in a Jukebox musicals, even they're not original, they typically pick songs that relate to that character(s) in the moment. Sometimes they even write the musical based off the songs they selected to have it make more sense. Across the Universe (a jukebox musical with all Beatles songs) is an excellent example of a jukebox musical done right. All the songs they chose are amazing, everyone sounds beautiful, all the songs go along with the plot. Looked it up out of curiosity and technically each writer has been involved in only one "musical" project. I say it in quote marks cause 8 mile is one of them and I don't know if I'd count that as a "musical".
i hate how hollywood decided to start despising musical movies as if musicals haven't carried a large portion of the movie industry since the '30s. like I feel its the 'look at this guy' humour from marvel seeping into everything where they can't take anything that is 'gritty reality' remotely seriously. i haven't watch it yet but from reading some articles it felt like they were taking the piss of the musical genre. there's deconstruction, there's satire and there's being ignorant, to use an existing genre in a new and interesting way effectively you have to extensively understand the genre itself and it felt from all accounts the people working on the movie didn't.
Personally I love musicals and I think the speak-singing was ok cuz it’s also what we do naturally when showering or alone expressing. However I do find this movie’s musical numbers so frequently repetitive that I find them annoying and out of tone unlike what La la land achieved. I appreciate how the 2019 Joker dealt with music (the bathroom dancing, stairs dancing, Murray’s Franklin show), subtle yet effectively immersive, and I do love some songs of Joker 2 like Close to you and The Joker. Sadly many other songs feel overlong when few sentences of singing the song can already show the emotions and belting out the full song felt unnecessarily stretched, including For once in my life, Gonna build a mountain, and If you go away.
Here’s the thing.. this COULD be a musical. Batman & musicals are very intertwined. There have been Batman musicals. Shit, even Justice League & B:TAS had musical elements. One of the most iconic parts of Arleen Sorkin’s character is the episode of B:TAS Harlequinade! Harley canonically could sing so having Gaga “unlearn” singing felt so cheap. The issue with this is that Todd Phillips was pissy that his Taxi Driver ripoff film had to bank off of DC’s property because it was “popular” (he only used the Joker to tell this story in the original because it was popular) & he doesn’t actually like DC. So now he’s taking it out on us, and I wouldn’t be surprised if this movie was made to flop, since him and Joaquin were both ADAMANT they didn’t want a sequel! If this one doesn’t do good at the box office? Boom, I get a paycheck and the studio doesn’t call to ask me to do a third, I can build a portfolio with two Joker movies under my belt. It’d be genius if it wasn’t such a spiteful waste of time. This isn’t just a middle finger to a money hungry studio, it’s a middle finger to musicals and a middle finger to the audience paying their hard earned money for this film YOU didn’t want to make! It’s clear the only reason they’re making Arthur Fleck “not the Joker” because they wanted there to be conflict, because if this followed the plot of the first movie where he IS the Joker, there would be no reason for Lee to not like him! Also, that serenading sequence could’ve been done so well if it didn’t weirdly end with Harley shooting the Joker… The Joker is a narcissist (in every other iteration of his relationship with Harley, at least). I can absolutely see him doing a duet with Harley and getting mad when she turns her attention to the audience since he wants her attention on HIM. It could’ve easily been “he gets mad at her for looking away, she apologizes and returns her attention to him, he makes some snippy remark like ‘don’t do it again’ song finishes SCENE END”. You wanna build conflict around that?? Have him push Harley around a bit, or even be too dependent or have her be too clingy or something… OR make it a them against the world story?? Why have Harley Quinn in this if she’s not HARLEY QUINN?? The outfits are horrific too. The Joker gets these outfits that look reminiscent of The Joker… meanwhile Harley’s in these weird 1960s presidential suits… this whole movie is a spiteful mess and as a fan of Harley & musicals, it pisses me off. So much wasted potential. Also, right on the money about the first Joker being pretentious. It’s giving Todd Phillips just showed his ass on this one and now everyone can see how pretentious he is because god forbid people like the villain HE made.
That scene from the Lizzie McGuire movie is what made my sister and me beg Mom to go back and let us see it again in theaters. We thought the pop star getting exposed would be like okay, he’s a little off key or off rhythm, we were not prepared for how hilariously over the top they took it and we needed a second round of scream laughing
the “Dancing in the Moonlight” needle drop really threw me out of it too. Despite the name of the song… just very tonally jarring. And a odd disruption of the diegetic musical elements.
I’ve only seen the first one and I watched it alone and much after it was released, and without any preconceptions I enjoyed it for what it was and that was a cathartic unbound expression of shadow selves as a reaction to the shadow of corruption and hypocrisy in high positions who mask their dark selves in an abuse of their station, I’m sad that there was a musical aspect fell flat because otherwise I might have still been interested (edit: I think I shouldve have watched the movie first so I can make my own critical view, big rip!)
I thought the movie was fantastic. I honestly don't get the hate. Song is the dream. The delusion. At the end, Arthur is coming to grips with reality and doesn't want to sing anymore. He no longer wants to perform. Joker has outgrown him and taken a life of its own. And his fans, including Harley who represents them, still want to live in that delusion of their idealized Joker. I came out of the theater beaming. I was honestly surprised afterward to see how much people hated it. The reaction I've seen since is downright animus. As if Todd Phillips kicked their dog. I can understand people disliking the movie, but I can't understand people getting hostile toward it.
I enjoyed the film, but you've definitely given a lot of perspective on why it doesn't commit to the musical aspect as much as it should. Which is a shame because it could have easily been considered one of the best films of this year if it did. Hopefully something comes along and kicks off a film musical resurgance.
I’m so glad you mentioned the meaning of “Folie Á Deux” because not everyone knows French 😵💫 I’m so ashamed that I find Cats more tolerable than this movie because MY GOD, Joker 2 was just BORING. I also find it uncomfortable that we has some random sex scene, Lee’s confession of being pregnant, but it didn’t have much impact to the whole story and wasn’t mentioned much until near the end.
@@TheWritersBlockOfficial Personally I enjoyed how gutsy the director was in deconstructing the hype and glorification around this serial murder-psychopath character. It takes courage to look the people who made your first film successful in the eye and tell them that their fantastical, romanticized ideas of anarchy and extremity were the opposite of what they intended to get across. Now with the addition of the sequel, the two Joker films carry the same message that the first three Dune books do; that it's dangerous to worship people as some kind of messianic figure. Without the sequel, this point wouldn't have been made (just to be clear: in my eyes that alone shouldn't have earned the sequel its right to be made though). This second movie wasn't subtle about it, either. It was surprising to me, in a weird mixture of equal parts refreshing and disappointing, to see a director build so much momentum simply to make the point that their main character wasn't 'all that' from the get-go, with no way for the character to return in the end. He was burning bridges with the weirdos that took what they thought Joker 1 was trying to say and ran with it, and that's something I don't think we'll be seeing much of, ever. Secondly, over the years the Joker-Harley relationship has been equally romanticized as this quintessential 'toxic, complicated relationship' that somehow confuses admiration and fandom with actual love or something along those lines. _Finally_ we get a dynamic of these characters' relationship with each other where Harley Quinn takes some, if not most, of the blame for the horrible way they relate to each other. One of the ways she manipulates Arthur (which you address in your review), is singing the song from that old movie Arthur likes. She clearly doesn't give a rat's buttocks about the film, but she knows he does, which is why she sings it. She sings it so the audience knows the kind of character she really is, or at least that's how I saw that based on her other manipulative behavior before and after the parts where she sings that song. In the end it's even left ambiguous whether she really was pregnant with his child, which made me think the director actually did arthouse films earlier as that's a classic arthouse thing to pull. The technical execution of this film as a genre film though, yeah it's not great. I don't think it's as awful as some people want to convince others of, but it wasn't great. They sent too many mixed signals with the way the songs were employed as well as with the technicality of the singing in an attempt to make it appear conceptually layered (or that's the impression the musical aspects gave me). Sometimes they were fantasy set in a fantasy land, and sometimes they were fantasy set in reality, and sometimes the singing was actually kind of good in the fantasy setting and sometimes it wasn't, and sometimes the singing was bad during the parts set in reality, and at other times you knew it was coming and worked decently. They mixed so many signals with the use of the songs that each time a song was done, there was no internal logic in the film to make sense of the purpose of that particular song as well as of its technical execution in the overall story.
That awkward moment when you realize that Lizzie McGuire movie made an actual singer sing badly on purpose and Joker 2 made Lady Gaga sing badly because reasons🤣
I mean it's definitely primarily Harley and Joker. The second "joker" is just another example of that and gives a wider meaning to Folie a Deux. It's like "The Last Jedi". It refers to Luke Skywalker, but the movie adds depth to the title by revealing that the full meaning is that Luke Skywalker decides NOT to be The Last Jedi
- first song: Arthur is told that he will be put to death, and all he can think about is Harley - second song: Harley proves how happy she makes Arthur - third song: sounds somewhat like a siren, symbolizing how she’s dragging him down - fourth song: starts off cringey but Harley loves it, and that’s what matter. Also the song picks up when Harley is on screen, further emphasizing who the song is for - Fifth song: even on the way to the courthouse Arthur is still thinking of Harley - Sixth song: right after the fifth song we see Harley sing about the joker and how cheating is great entertainment - Seventh song: joker singing and then getting shot is a juxtaposition to emphasize the weight of the betrayal - Eighth song: Harley further manipulates Arthur by singing to him and reinforces their relationship - Ninth song: song glorifying the ecstasy of jokers victim hood, it’s a coping mechanism after his past obsession just obliterated his fantasy - Tenth song: Harley rewards joker for firing his lawyer with a song - Eleventh song: Harley has no idea of Arthur’s hardships and sing about how awesome life is, right after Arthur gets raped
I already didn't have fun not having fun watching the first movie, it just didn't really connect with me like it seemed to with so many people, so there was no way I was interested in a sequel, and after hearing so many bad things, I'm not at all interested even more. And yet, that's the entire reason I want to see it because now it's so bad, I kind of want to see just how bad it is. Maybe that's the point of the movie, it's all a joke. The movie is just the absolute opposite of what came before because there was never supposed to be a sequel in the first place, and now everyone can laugh at Warner Bros. for ever doing this. And instead of just running away to say that he had nothing to do with it, the director stayed to make sure that every cent was wasted just so that someone else didn't get all the flack because it's his joke, not their failure. I can't say for sure because I haven't seen the movie, but maybe this is the most Joker movie ever because it only makes sense to the one telling the joke.
I think the problem is it's not bad in a fun way. It's just dreary. Not thematically (thought it also is in that way) but you can tell the director didn't want to make this movie. He's actively said so and made deliberate choices to inflate the budget and refuse feedback. Like I think the script and overall narrative were lacking in 1 but it at least felt like they wrote TRYING to say something (even if all they said was basically "mental health!?!??!?! Really makes you think huh!?!??!"). But folie a deux actively tries to spite the first movie. Like the screenplay for the first movie LITERALLY SAYS "He IS the Joker" at the end. If they really wanted to reverse the last film, folie a deux shpuld have said "joker" was the movie made about Arthur and now this is real life. It would still be pretentious as heck but at least it wouldn't contradict itself in a way that makes it feel like the creators didn't remeber what they wrote in the first film
Gone with the times when Victor/Victoria, Moulin Rouge, Chicago and Mamma Mia dilogy were smash hits... "we've done bad because people don't like musicals blah blah blah!"
Musicals are one of the hardest genres to write for film because you really can’t half-ass it. You either fully commit to the conventions of the genre or you don’t do it at all. There is no middle. Hollywood doesn’t seem to get this in their attempt to appeal to as many people as possible.
That's a great point. I think across all genres Hollywwod is largely afraid to niche down because they want broad appeal. But the broad appeal winds up translating to generic content that doesn't connect with people. The example I always go to is with The Last Jedi vs Rise of Skywalker. Ep 8 was super divisive with fans loving it or hating it. But just about everyone who saw it felt strong feelings. Ep 9 just kind of happened. If you're making art make it for somebody specific cause nothing is for everyone.
I think its pathetic theyre saying this movie was made, specifically to piss off its own fans. What, you spent millions and millions and did all this to troll some kids??? HA gimme a break.
damm this is a really good analysis, i wish hollywood wouldn’t be so embarrassed about musicals, it’s a shame steven spielberg doesn’t want to make a musical again, i thought his west side story was brilliant
A lot of rude comments here. It's awesome and cool if the general audience enjoyed this movie but I know most musical folks will not, which is what this review is. It's a review from the viewpoint of a person who likes and engages with musicals thus evaluates the movie from a comparative standpoint with other musical movies they've seen. Before you dub him a hater and insult his content remember consuming media is a subjective experience based on each individuals personal life and past media consumption. A person who enjoys superhero movies and a person who enjoys musicals are going to have vastly different opinions about this movie and both of these opinions are valid and critically valuable. Same with musical folks, don't be rude to those who enjoyed the movie. Let's value each others opinions and coexist one argument doesn't need to invalidate another.
I feel like I understand the intent with it but I guess (I haven't seen it myself yet) it doesn't quite hit right. Singing, even if it sounds bad, is totally a coping mechanism for some people. And I think it's meant to feel off or uncomfortable. But it needs more than just- haha hey lookat these goobers talk singing! Couple a silly geese!
I’m guessing it’s supposed to be jokers theatrical operatic outlook on life. It’s what he’s envisioning in his work as being the joker of the world. But idk, it’s overdone imo. Takes me out the seriousness of the character
2:35 Arthur always had music in him, in the first movie it's shown a lot, so he doesn't need any outside motivation to sing, he's just full of music as it is, and always has been, that makes sense
All I can tell is that it will certainly be VERY something... good? Bad? to early to say. But based on the trailers i feel like there's no way it's just "fine".
Wait- why didn’t you like the original Joker though? I thought the substance was very much there and struck a potent collective chord. It seemed like a pretty perfectly executed anti-hero story, particularly written for this moment in this country. If you don’t resonate with it honestly good for you (sincerely, that’s great), but I do think that anyone that’s been on the receiving end of how callous and cold this society can be to those in need thinks that the original Joker has plenty of substance
I totally understand the Joker connecting with people and I very much enjoy certain aspects of it (Phoenix's performance, the cinematography, the score) but I think Tod Phillips and the screenplay didn't say much. It talks ABOUT Mental Health and society neglecting people, but it doesn't really have a message because it can't commit to whether or not it wants to glorify or condemn the Joker/Arthur. In the same way it is blatantly copying the King of Comedy/Taxi Driver, it's messaging doesn't have anything unique to say. It gives the illusion of depth without ever actually tackling nuance. It's a vibes based movie that could have just been a short film with how little it actually says. EDIT: I think the Joker and Joaquin Phoenix tapped into an experience/reality that often get's overlooked. But my problem is that Todd Phillips tapped into that by accident (especially if you see how he treated the second movie). I feel the movie didn't have a well structured narrative that developed the themes effectively. It's like how the Star Wars Prequels have really deep themes and politics, but they're executed poorly. I think the Joker is like Anakin -- deep characters that are better than the movies that they're in
@@TheWritersBlockOfficial Ahhhh okay, I get that. To be honest, it's been a while since I've seen it so I can't really speak to it's structural merits/flaws off of memory, I'm only remembering how deeply visceral and powerful it felt. But, I definitely hear you on Phillips stumbling onto that depth almost in spite of himself. I appreciate your craftsman's perspective :)
@mamalotus8988 visceral is such a great word. For me I loooove the final act of the film I just wish it was more set up and that the movie had more of a narrative drive. Like I would have loved if they made it more of a focused thriller/mystery of Arthur really searching for the truth about his father possibly being Thomas wayne (i know they have a scene or 2 about this but I think this should have been the focus for acts 1 and 2). But the parts that work work really well. Which is why it's extra funny that the sequel actively tries to refute those exact parts
@@TheWritersBlockOfficial I feel you! It's like Phillips spent 200mil on a sequel just to MAKE SURE everyone knew that the most successful parts of the Joker were indeed an accident, ha. You know, I just watched The Purge: Election Night the other day (never seen the rest of the franchise), and it feels like a decent parallel to how you're describing the Joker, in the sense that it's a pretty-underwhelming-but-entertaining-enough execution of some surprisingly powerful themes which maybe aren't fleshed out to perfection, but, still do hit in a satisfying way. Especially in the context of the superficiality that I've come to expect from blockbusters......... And as far as I'm concerned, a win is a win! Hahah, I'll take it
Totally fair. I really enjoy little mermaid. Aladdin and Cinderella. But the musical elements are some of the weaker aspects and generally just downgrades from the originals
I think it's pretty bold and short sided to say a movie is "objectively" bad. Anyways, this movie was objectively pretty solid and interesting, and I was able to just accept the musical bits. You don't need a set-up! In my opinion. I think it worked fine as it is. There were some bits I didn't like, the story kind of slumped in the middle- but on the whole, I don't understand the hatred for it. It's like I watched a different movie from everyone else. I want to watch it again. I think in 20 years or so, people will come around on this movie.
Actually listen to the critique. This is not a bad review. It's why this didn't work well as a musical. You just want to tune out anything that isn't overwhelming, rapturous praise. You're the problem.
Now I just want to watch this even more. Often if the masses don't understand it, it has something more interesting to say and is thus a better piece of cinema.
@@ThePrinceofHisOwnKingdom he will cook a literal piece of shit because everyone saying it tastes bad makes him want to eat is even more. Often if the masses don t understand the refined taste of shit it has something more interesting to make you feel and is this a better meal
Is Hollywood wrong about Musicals? Or should they stick to the stage???
They’re wrong about good musicals.
If Hazbin Hotel proves anything, it's that you just have to make your musical good and/or enjoyable for people to care and adore it.
I mean, Chicago won the Oscar for Best Picture
@@bemiatto67look I love the movie version of Chicago but that movie won because of Harvey
Movie musicals can work and do work. Like In the Heights or animated Disney musicals (Wish not withstanding). Hollywood just doesn't get musicials
I loved the idea of it being a musical, thinking we were getting a movie about Joker and Harley on a rampage, and the musical aspect is how they see themselves. It made perfect sense until I saw the actual movie
i was getting that same idea too
I'm embarrsed for the movie.. It's so bad
THANK YOU FOR POINTING OUT THE WEIRD TALK-SINGING! I was kind of shocked in MOST of Gaga's numbers in this film, she sounds...bad?? But not necessarily bad, just pitchy (like you said) and weirdly airy, like she's not actually singing or is moreso whisper-singing. 'Gonna Build a Mountain' is one of the best numbers in this film simply because they actually get to sing and vibe with the instrumental instead of just...standing there and singing like they're trying not to disrupt the next door neighbors.
U do know she’d intentionally sang poorly because Lee is not a singer?
Only those in Arthur’s mind is when Gaga sang well?
@@EagerCompass-mm7gj You probably really like the singing style choices in Todd Hooper's Les Mis, huh?
No it was in an interview where she said she had to try to unlearn singing @toyosibee.mp3
@@toyosibee.mp3 u should listen to the companion album Gaga released, “Harlequin- over there she sang like how the musician side of her should sound but it wouldn’t make sense in the film. So we’ve explained she had to sing “poorly” because the character wasnt supposed to be great at singing.
Theres music of all genres so obviously there will be a crowd who appreciates and love them, be it Tom Hooper’s Les Mis or not. Even if its a niche one doesn’t mean you have better taste than others.
It would have been better if she knew how to whisper sing with a falsetto, but she doesn’t seem to have that skill 😆
I love how nothing in the trailer indicated that it was going to be a musical.
Yes! I enjoy musicals, but I totally agree it should've indicated it has musical numbers...
To many people it did. And even if it didn’t to you, it was announced way before its release that it would be a musical.
I knew it was going to be a musical because it was leaked that there was musical numbers in it?
The trailer focuses on showing that joker 2 would be similar in genre and a very natural continuation to joker 1. Not a musical. If they did that, this movie also would have earned a ton of money, this was very dumb.
We knew it was going to be a musical since three years ago.
Maybe the posters or wathever didn't convey it, but that's how it was announced since looong ago
Having a sequel to a movie whose ambiguity was part of the point was the inherently bad idea here.
What’s ambiguous about Joker? he shouts the point of the movie out loud before shooting Murray in the face.
@@nickymo The fact that he’s an unreliable narrator, calling into question the entire series of events and their validity.
@@robertlauncher the ambiguity is ended when his psychosis is revealed though. We get his motives pretty clearly.
@@goober479 If you want to interpret it that way, sure. But it’s also established with the Joker as a character that he keeps remembering his past differently. The entire movie could be the way he wants to see his life leading up to becoming the Joker, or a BS version he tells others to garner sympathy. The first movie left it open for interpretation. I’m not talking about his motives as shown at the end, I’m talking about the fact that you can’t entirely trust the story of a guy who breaks into delusions(Same with his initial standup scene where he imagined everyone laughing) and goes around unaliving people.
Unless you wanna tell me the whole girlfriend thing was a pointless side plot, which I don’t think so
In the one scene where Arthur and Lee “sing” to each other through the Arkham visitation room, the only thing I could think of in that moment is what would happen if the diner scene in Heat had Robert de Niro and Al Pacino sing that dialogue to each other.
Sounds awesome in theory, but would probably be cringe if shot and performed in the same way that it was in the actual movie. That’s exactly how it felt in Joker: Folie A Deux, and is indicative of how poorly the musical numbers fit overall.
such a shame since i genuinely enjoy musicals but so many directors dont know how to direct a musical and it ends up shitty.
guess ill be sticking to mamma mia, the greatest showman, and tangled forever.
The idea of delusions as musical numbers can work well. Crazy Ex Girlfriend had full musical numbers represented in the character's head
I loved crazy ex girlfriend lol the music is fantastic 💜
@Toseuteuu settle for me and santa Ana winds are my faves
I mean if this film just followed Harley I'd be 100% on board for her to be singing.
Just follow a woman who falls for a mad man and her watching his trial obsessively/trying to end up in the hospital with him so she can break him out and fix his broken heart.
We already saw that the music in Arthur was expressed through uncomfortable dance not vocal singing
That moment when Hazbin Hotel is now the best edgy musical of 2024
well no…
@@gogogogig Out of curiosity, which one would you say it is?
well thats such a bad idea that barely anyone has done it
@@gogogogig Yes
This timeline is cursed 😭
Thank god for this video. I can't stand watching another review hating on this film for being a musical rather than being a bad musical! Musical is amazing when it's done right.
A musical worse than Mean Girls is Cats. It just doesn't get worse.
Les Miserable was pretty awful too.
@@wiinterflowers4277 would you say it was... miserable?
@@wiinterflowers4277 Les Mis defender here. Doesn't deserve the hate. Except for Russell Crowe.
@@wiinterflowers4277 it was okay, but they should have made sure that ALL the cast can sing well enough.
Cats it's worse but remember we all collectively decided to forget that movie exists
Here's the real issue. the Joker was never a Joker movie. They slapped that in at the last second to make money. So now their aimless.
It's almost as if Todd Phillips thinks Joker overshadowed his original character drama, and his character became invisible again. Who does this director think he is, thinking he is allowed to have a voice? The gall.
My opinion is this depiction of joker is FAR too realistic. And I’m not talking about not falling into acid and all that jazz. Look at the caped crusader show for example. The Harley depiction is very realistic, but there’s still this dark whimsy about her Harley persona. The Batman movie works because Batman himself is a pretty down to earth realistic hero (but surrounded by somewhat fantastical villains). Taking those villains and pulling the lever to full realism…it just doesn’t work to me. To me these aren’t Joker (and Harley). They feel too real of people. Not saying most other depictions romanticize their mental illness, I’m far from saying that. These depictions are just…someone nee
The Lizzie McGuire Movie, right? Damn, I don’t know how well it holds up outside of the animated bits but even if it doesn’t it’s better than Joker’s weirdly bad musical, and I didn’t even watch the first one.
As someone who doesn’t like musicals, can movie executives stop trying to hide them from the public? It pissed me off with the Mean Girls revival and it pisses me off now because it just feels condescending in the same way that a musical fan might have felt after they went to see Into the Woods’ film expecting music and no James Corden.
Yeah, I WANT to know if a movie is a musical, because I _like_ musicals. I’d be frustrated if I went to see a movie only to find out it’s a totally different genre than what was advertised. In fact, I’d feel downright scammed. Especially if it’s a bad movie.
@@thatonepossum5766 We both feel ripped off. Hell, the only reason I dislike musicals is because I just don’t enjoy them as much as other movies, but goddamn, enough with the faux à deux. If you’re a musical, just *be a musical.*
It’s not great but it’s definitely not worse than Mean Girls.
I agree. There were definitely good moments in it that shone imo, which I can't _really_ say about MG. The bad moments were really bad though, and the good wasn't enough to make it good. It ended up this blend of 'some parts are decent, some parts are cringy'-_OKish_
The whole point of the musical numbers, besides the foile a deux, is a progression of Joker’s character from the first movie. He sings and dances, albeit more likely, but becomes more in tune with the music in him as the movie progresses. After Joker is fully embraced at the end of the first, he can’t fully stop. When he finds Harley, she seeks to be like Joker, so the pair express themselves through song. That was my takeaway. I enjoyed it.
I think Joker highlight some interesting things about musical movies. For many years musical movies has been look down upon, by the audience who believes know better and critics.
But musicals are a hard genre to make, not everyone can make a musical movie and that’s why not many directors tries, because you need some sort of knowledge of how a musicals works in all their stages: the music, the choreography, the actors, the costumes, the stages, etc.
It was a bold move from Phillips to attempt to do something he doesn’t have a knowledge of, but it wasn’t the right choice or the right material to begin with. He couldn’t put against two genres more different than the other one and that has such alienated fanbase as well, it’s like trying to do Fast and Furious the musical.
"any time arthur is about to transition into a song, he starts to timidly speak-sing in a way that is as obnoxious as it is off-key" ah yes. the dear evan hansen (2021) approach
Evan Hansen is a tree
God I hope Jenny Nicholson will make a 4 hour video essay about this one too 🙏
Honestly if the musical is bad but Lady Gaga's harlequin album is good it'll be the funniest possible outcome
Really tired of these non musical musicals. I thought they were doing the wisper singing and than turn it into a more classic musical production as the delusion grows, but for most of it, thats not true. Even the bigger show scenes, it doesnt feel musical. Side note, i thought it was interesting that they seem to reference Char and Amy Winehouse, both woman who argueably got taken advantage of by they partners, but harley is clearly the abuser in this version. It made me feel like the director was questioning the abuse of these woman
I know its nitpicky, but if youre going to bring the Harley Joker deignamic into the real world and flipping it, im gonna read into it
Rocky Horror Picture Show 75' is the best musical
SING TO ME PAOLO!!!!!!
Your based taste in movies was not lost!
love to see it
More like Junker! Got his ass.
Okay this was a banger LMFAO the “got his ass” killed me
Hahahaha 😂😂
Boom
A great breakdown of the technical events of what makes a good musical. Informative AND helps me understand and articulate what seemed so ‘off’ about this movie.
For me at least, musicals are often an exploration of fantasy vs reality. If we go by this, I really think the musical numbers here work quite well considering the films themes centre A LOT on Arthur's fantasies and how his mental illnesses play into this, hell even the joker himself could be said to be a facade, meaning we don't know whether it's real or not. It's deliberately ambiguous if that makes sense. I completely get your points, but idk I thought the movie worked well as a dark inversion of musical tropes
Good point!
I love watching people go full "COPE ON A ROPE" and try to defend it.
Nevermind the betrayal of character and that it retroactively taints the original film, it committed the WORST sin a movie can make: It was BORING.
I asked the theater for a refund despite finishing the movie, and they were kind enough to accommodate me.
I even made some crappy rhyme as a result “This movie, I wish there was something much more, but this movie turned out to be a massive bore.” 💀
I think a higher up said "musical" and the writer went "okay", but never wrote a musical in their entire life, nor did research in order to do so. Not only due to the lack of set up and explanation of why the Joker would suddenly be singing. However, typically in a Jukebox musicals, even they're not original, they typically pick songs that relate to that character(s) in the moment. Sometimes they even write the musical based off the songs they selected to have it make more sense. Across the Universe (a jukebox musical with all Beatles songs) is an excellent example of a jukebox musical done right. All the songs they chose are amazing, everyone sounds beautiful, all the songs go along with the plot.
Looked it up out of curiosity and technically each writer has been involved in only one "musical" project. I say it in quote marks cause 8 mile is one of them and I don't know if I'd count that as a "musical".
i hate how hollywood decided to start despising musical movies as if musicals haven't carried a large portion of the movie industry since the '30s. like I feel its the 'look at this guy' humour from marvel seeping into everything where they can't take anything that is 'gritty reality' remotely seriously. i haven't watch it yet but from reading some articles it felt like they were taking the piss of the musical genre. there's deconstruction, there's satire and there's being ignorant, to use an existing genre in a new and interesting way effectively you have to extensively understand the genre itself and it felt from all accounts the people working on the movie didn't.
Personally I love musicals and I think the speak-singing was ok cuz it’s also what we do naturally when showering or alone expressing.
However I do find this movie’s musical numbers so frequently repetitive that I find them annoying and out of tone unlike what La la land achieved.
I appreciate how the 2019 Joker dealt with music (the bathroom dancing, stairs dancing, Murray’s Franklin show), subtle yet effectively immersive, and I do love some songs of Joker 2 like Close to you and The Joker.
Sadly many other songs feel overlong when few sentences of singing the song can already show the emotions and belting out the full song felt unnecessarily stretched, including For once in my life, Gonna build a mountain, and If you go away.
Here’s the thing.. this COULD be a musical. Batman & musicals are very intertwined. There have been Batman musicals. Shit, even Justice League & B:TAS had musical elements. One of the most iconic parts of Arleen Sorkin’s character is the episode of B:TAS Harlequinade! Harley canonically could sing so having Gaga “unlearn” singing felt so cheap. The issue with this is that Todd Phillips was pissy that his Taxi Driver ripoff film had to bank off of DC’s property because it was “popular” (he only used the Joker to tell this story in the original because it was popular) & he doesn’t actually like DC. So now he’s taking it out on us, and I wouldn’t be surprised if this movie was made to flop, since him and Joaquin were both ADAMANT they didn’t want a sequel! If this one doesn’t do good at the box office? Boom, I get a paycheck and the studio doesn’t call to ask me to do a third, I can build a portfolio with two Joker movies under my belt. It’d be genius if it wasn’t such a spiteful waste of time. This isn’t just a middle finger to a money hungry studio, it’s a middle finger to musicals and a middle finger to the audience paying their hard earned money for this film YOU didn’t want to make! It’s clear the only reason they’re making Arthur Fleck “not the Joker” because they wanted there to be conflict, because if this followed the plot of the first movie where he IS the Joker, there would be no reason for Lee to not like him! Also, that serenading sequence could’ve been done so well if it didn’t weirdly end with Harley shooting the Joker… The Joker is a narcissist (in every other iteration of his relationship with Harley, at least). I can absolutely see him doing a duet with Harley and getting mad when she turns her attention to the audience since he wants her attention on HIM. It could’ve easily been “he gets mad at her for looking away, she apologizes and returns her attention to him, he makes some snippy remark like ‘don’t do it again’ song finishes SCENE END”. You wanna build conflict around that?? Have him push Harley around a bit, or even be too dependent or have her be too clingy or something… OR make it a them against the world story?? Why have Harley Quinn in this if she’s not HARLEY QUINN?? The outfits are horrific too. The Joker gets these outfits that look reminiscent of The Joker… meanwhile Harley’s in these weird 1960s presidential suits… this whole movie is a spiteful mess and as a fan of Harley & musicals, it pisses me off. So much wasted potential. Also, right on the money about the first Joker being pretentious. It’s giving Todd Phillips just showed his ass on this one and now everyone can see how pretentious he is because god forbid people like the villain HE made.
I agree with the points brought in this video and I would change a couple of things in this movie, but I overall enjoyed it. Bear with me! 😅
That scene from the Lizzie McGuire movie is what made my sister and me beg Mom to go back and let us see it again in theaters. We thought the pop star getting exposed would be like okay, he’s a little off key or off rhythm, we were not prepared for how hilariously over the top they took it and we needed a second round of scream laughing
the joke maker didn't even tell a single joke
the “Dancing in the Moonlight” needle drop really threw me out of it too. Despite the name of the song… just very tonally jarring. And a odd disruption of the diegetic musical elements.
I feel like 99.9% of the time turning something that isn't a musical into a musical rarely ends well I feel like it isolates a lot of the audience
I’ve only seen the first one and I watched it alone and much after it was released, and without any preconceptions I enjoyed it for what it was and that was a cathartic unbound expression of shadow selves as a reaction to the shadow of corruption and hypocrisy in high positions who mask their dark selves in an abuse of their station, I’m sad that there was a musical aspect fell flat because otherwise I might have still been interested (edit: I think I shouldve have watched the movie first so I can make my own critical view, big rip!)
I thought the movie was fantastic. I honestly don't get the hate.
Song is the dream. The delusion. At the end, Arthur is coming to grips with reality and doesn't want to sing anymore. He no longer wants to perform. Joker has outgrown him and taken a life of its own. And his fans, including Harley who represents them, still want to live in that delusion of their idealized Joker.
I came out of the theater beaming. I was honestly surprised afterward to see how much people hated it. The reaction I've seen since is downright animus. As if Todd Phillips kicked their dog. I can understand people disliking the movie, but I can't understand people getting hostile toward it.
I enjoyed the film, but you've definitely given a lot of perspective on why it doesn't commit to the musical aspect as much as it should. Which is a shame because it could have easily been considered one of the best films of this year if it did. Hopefully something comes along and kicks off a film musical resurgance.
I’m so glad you mentioned the meaning of “Folie Á Deux” because not everyone knows French 😵💫
I’m so ashamed that I find Cats more tolerable than this movie because MY GOD, Joker 2 was just BORING. I also find it uncomfortable that we has some random sex scene, Lee’s confession of being pregnant, but it didn’t have much impact to the whole story and wasn’t mentioned much until near the end.
Brilliant analysis as always. You articulated all that I was feeling but had yet to put to words.
11:57 "Evil like Me" is sung between Mal and her mother Maleficent. Evie is the daughter of the Evil Queen.
i really enjoyed the movie. i don't understand the hate
That's dope! What did you enjoy about it?
@@TheWritersBlockOfficial Personally I enjoyed how gutsy the director was in deconstructing the hype and glorification around this serial murder-psychopath character. It takes courage to look the people who made your first film successful in the eye and tell them that their fantastical, romanticized ideas of anarchy and extremity were the opposite of what they intended to get across. Now with the addition of the sequel, the two Joker films carry the same message that the first three Dune books do; that it's dangerous to worship people as some kind of messianic figure. Without the sequel, this point wouldn't have been made (just to be clear: in my eyes that alone shouldn't have earned the sequel its right to be made though). This second movie wasn't subtle about it, either. It was surprising to me, in a weird mixture of equal parts refreshing and disappointing, to see a director build so much momentum simply to make the point that their main character wasn't 'all that' from the get-go, with no way for the character to return in the end. He was burning bridges with the weirdos that took what they thought Joker 1 was trying to say and ran with it, and that's something I don't think we'll be seeing much of, ever.
Secondly, over the years the Joker-Harley relationship has been equally romanticized as this quintessential 'toxic, complicated relationship' that somehow confuses admiration and fandom with actual love or something along those lines. _Finally_ we get a dynamic of these characters' relationship with each other where Harley Quinn takes some, if not most, of the blame for the horrible way they relate to each other. One of the ways she manipulates Arthur (which you address in your review), is singing the song from that old movie Arthur likes. She clearly doesn't give a rat's buttocks about the film, but she knows he does, which is why she sings it. She sings it so the audience knows the kind of character she really is, or at least that's how I saw that based on her other manipulative behavior before and after the parts where she sings that song. In the end it's even left ambiguous whether she really was pregnant with his child, which made me think the director actually did arthouse films earlier as that's a classic arthouse thing to pull.
The technical execution of this film as a genre film though, yeah it's not great. I don't think it's as awful as some people want to convince others of, but it wasn't great. They sent too many mixed signals with the way the songs were employed as well as with the technicality of the singing in an attempt to make it appear conceptually layered (or that's the impression the musical aspects gave me). Sometimes they were fantasy set in a fantasy land, and sometimes they were fantasy set in reality, and sometimes the singing was actually kind of good in the fantasy setting and sometimes it wasn't, and sometimes the singing was bad during the parts set in reality, and at other times you knew it was coming and worked decently. They mixed so many signals with the use of the songs that each time a song was done, there was no internal logic in the film to make sense of the purpose of that particular song as well as of its technical execution in the overall story.
That awkward moment when you realize that Lizzie McGuire movie made an actual singer sing badly on purpose and Joker 2 made Lady Gaga sing badly because reasons🤣
LET’S GOOOOOOOO
11:59 Mal, not Evie.
“Much like the victim of a motorcycle accident, this video is coming to you in three parts.”
Literally threw me off laughing, had to rewind the vid 💀
I was almost an extra in mean girls 2024, didn't get a chance because we were waiting on hearing from some friends and they never got back to me
You must offer yourself to get roles in Hollywood
They should have thrown out the movie and just released the entirely more interesting trailers to movie theatres, plus the outtakes and deleted scenes
I had a theory they wanted a « I’m just Ken » moment… but the songs were not originals so…
I liked the movie but I wouldn't call it deep
A lot of people think the title refers to the joker and Harley… But I think it refers to the two jokers.
I mean it's definitely primarily Harley and Joker. The second "joker" is just another example of that and gives a wider meaning to Folie a Deux. It's like "The Last Jedi". It refers to Luke Skywalker, but the movie adds depth to the title by revealing that the full meaning is that Luke Skywalker decides NOT to be The Last Jedi
11:59 For your comparison - Her name is Mal not Evie that's the blue haired girl lol
- first song: Arthur is told that he will be put to death, and all he can think about is Harley
- second song: Harley proves how happy she makes Arthur
- third song: sounds somewhat like a siren, symbolizing how she’s dragging him down
- fourth song: starts off cringey but Harley loves it, and that’s what matter. Also the song picks up when Harley is on screen, further emphasizing who the song is for
- Fifth song: even on the way to the courthouse Arthur is still thinking of Harley
- Sixth song: right after the fifth song we see Harley sing about the joker and how cheating is great entertainment
- Seventh song: joker singing and then getting shot is a juxtaposition to emphasize the weight of the betrayal
- Eighth song: Harley further manipulates Arthur by singing to him and reinforces their relationship
- Ninth song: song glorifying the ecstasy of jokers victim hood, it’s a coping mechanism after his past obsession just obliterated his fantasy
- Tenth song: Harley rewards joker for firing his lawyer with a song
- Eleventh song: Harley has no idea of Arthur’s hardships and sing about how awesome life is, right after Arthur gets raped
There were that many damn songs sung in this Joker Movie..?
Shame because the first film was great
I already didn't have fun not having fun watching the first movie, it just didn't really connect with me like it seemed to with so many people, so there was no way I was interested in a sequel, and after hearing so many bad things, I'm not at all interested even more. And yet, that's the entire reason I want to see it because now it's so bad, I kind of want to see just how bad it is. Maybe that's the point of the movie, it's all a joke. The movie is just the absolute opposite of what came before because there was never supposed to be a sequel in the first place, and now everyone can laugh at Warner Bros. for ever doing this. And instead of just running away to say that he had nothing to do with it, the director stayed to make sure that every cent was wasted just so that someone else didn't get all the flack because it's his joke, not their failure. I can't say for sure because I haven't seen the movie, but maybe this is the most Joker movie ever because it only makes sense to the one telling the joke.
I think the problem is it's not bad in a fun way. It's just dreary. Not thematically (thought it also is in that way) but you can tell the director didn't want to make this movie. He's actively said so and made deliberate choices to inflate the budget and refuse feedback.
Like I think the script and overall narrative were lacking in 1 but it at least felt like they wrote TRYING to say something (even if all they said was basically "mental health!?!??!?! Really makes you think huh!?!??!"). But folie a deux actively tries to spite the first movie. Like the screenplay for the first movie LITERALLY SAYS "He IS the Joker" at the end.
If they really wanted to reverse the last film, folie a deux shpuld have said "joker" was the movie made about Arthur and now this is real life. It would still be pretentious as heck but at least it wouldn't contradict itself in a way that makes it feel like the creators didn't remeber what they wrote in the first film
You completely nailed it
Did they just forget that Pheonix played Johnny cash and is able to carry a tune?😅
Gone with the times when Victor/Victoria, Moulin Rouge, Chicago and Mamma Mia dilogy were smash hits... "we've done bad because people don't like musicals blah blah blah!"
Musicals are one of the hardest genres to write for film because you really can’t half-ass it. You either fully commit to the conventions of the genre or you don’t do it at all. There is no middle. Hollywood doesn’t seem to get this in their attempt to appeal to as many people as possible.
That's a great point. I think across all genres Hollywwod is largely afraid to niche down because they want broad appeal. But the broad appeal winds up translating to generic content that doesn't connect with people. The example I always go to is with The Last Jedi vs Rise of Skywalker. Ep 8 was super divisive with fans loving it or hating it. But just about everyone who saw it felt strong feelings. Ep 9 just kind of happened.
If you're making art make it for somebody specific cause nothing is for everyone.
I didn't hate the movie, but this was a good critique.
Thank you
I think its pathetic theyre saying this movie was made, specifically to piss off its own fans. What, you spent millions and millions and did all this to troll some kids??? HA gimme a break.
All this explanation just made me appreciate even more Once More With Feeling (Buffy) as one of the best episodes on tv
damm this is a really good analysis, i wish hollywood wouldn’t be so embarrassed about musicals, it’s a shame steven spielberg doesn’t want to make a musical again, i thought his west side story was brilliant
A lot of rude comments here. It's awesome and cool if the general audience enjoyed this movie but I know most musical folks will not, which is what this review is. It's a review from the viewpoint of a person who likes and engages with musicals thus evaluates the movie from a comparative standpoint with other musical movies they've seen. Before you dub him a hater and insult his content remember consuming media is a subjective experience based on each individuals personal life and past media consumption. A person who enjoys superhero movies and a person who enjoys musicals are going to have vastly different opinions about this movie and both of these opinions are valid and critically valuable. Same with musical folks, don't be rude to those who enjoyed the movie. Let's value each others opinions and coexist one argument doesn't need to invalidate another.
great video!!!
Thank you!
Wow, That mic is huge...
I gotta fix something on the descendants commentary is that is not Evie but Mal the name of the girl
Yeah I always confuse the two names. Probably cause evie is my favorite and I want her to be the lead
I think the idea of a joker musical could work if it’s done well. Clearly it wasn’t done well here
I feel like I understand the intent with it but I guess (I haven't seen it myself yet) it doesn't quite hit right. Singing, even if it sounds bad, is totally a coping mechanism for some people. And I think it's meant to feel off or uncomfortable. But it needs more than just- haha hey lookat these goobers talk singing! Couple a silly geese!
They need to go watch JC Superstar. There is a RAW musical!! Holy smoke!
I thought the first movie was terrible. I was bored and a little grossed out until the end. When this was announced, I knew it would be bad.
And he also played Johnny Cash
I’m guessing it’s supposed to be jokers theatrical operatic outlook on life. It’s what he’s envisioning in his work as being the joker of the world. But idk, it’s overdone imo. Takes me out the seriousness of the character
the fact cant stop laughing was not sung is such a miss
2:35 Arthur always had music in him, in the first movie it's shown a lot, so he doesn't need any outside motivation to sing, he's just full of music as it is, and always has been, that makes sense
He danced, he didnt sing.....a bit different but okay lol
@@Sticky_icky420 Yeah i came to think that his Joker needs to dance but not sing. Singing just destroys his style
WHY JUST WHY?
I bet that Wicked is going to be even worse than both Joker 2 and Mean Girls lmfao. 😂
All I can tell is that it will certainly be VERY something... good? Bad? to early to say. But based on the trailers i feel like there's no way it's just "fine".
@@TheWritersBlockOfficial Imo, the Wicked movie looks awful and don't even get me started on how I don't like Ariana Grande...
Maybe if they did one song ? That dumb song frim the frist one kept playing but we dont need the whole thing a musical
ehm... its actually MAL....
Another day, another review on a bad musical.
That wasn't Evie that was Mal lol
Dang my bad. I always confuse their names when talking about the movies
Fr I love musicals is not shit ones
Wait- why didn’t you like the original Joker though? I thought the substance was very much there and struck a potent collective chord. It seemed like a pretty perfectly executed anti-hero story, particularly written for this moment in this country.
If you don’t resonate with it honestly good for you (sincerely, that’s great), but I do think that anyone that’s been on the receiving end of how callous and cold this society can be to those in need thinks that the original Joker has plenty of substance
I totally understand the Joker connecting with people and I very much enjoy certain aspects of it (Phoenix's performance, the cinematography, the score) but I think Tod Phillips and the screenplay didn't say much. It talks ABOUT Mental Health and society neglecting people, but it doesn't really have a message because it can't commit to whether or not it wants to glorify or condemn the Joker/Arthur. In the same way it is blatantly copying the King of Comedy/Taxi Driver, it's messaging doesn't have anything unique to say. It gives the illusion of depth without ever actually tackling nuance. It's a vibes based movie that could have just been a short film with how little it actually says.
EDIT: I think the Joker and Joaquin Phoenix tapped into an experience/reality that often get's overlooked. But my problem is that Todd Phillips tapped into that by accident (especially if you see how he treated the second movie). I feel the movie didn't have a well structured narrative that developed the themes effectively. It's like how the Star Wars Prequels have really deep themes and politics, but they're executed poorly. I think the Joker is like Anakin -- deep characters that are better than the movies that they're in
@@TheWritersBlockOfficial Ahhhh okay, I get that. To be honest, it's been a while since I've seen it so I can't really speak to it's structural merits/flaws off of memory, I'm only remembering how deeply visceral and powerful it felt. But, I definitely hear you on Phillips stumbling onto that depth almost in spite of himself. I appreciate your craftsman's perspective :)
@mamalotus8988 visceral is such a great word. For me I loooove the final act of the film I just wish it was more set up and that the movie had more of a narrative drive. Like I would have loved if they made it more of a focused thriller/mystery of Arthur really searching for the truth about his father possibly being Thomas wayne (i know they have a scene or 2 about this but I think this should have been the focus for acts 1 and 2). But the parts that work work really well. Which is why it's extra funny that the sequel actively tries to refute those exact parts
@@TheWritersBlockOfficial I feel you! It's like Phillips spent 200mil on a sequel just to MAKE SURE everyone knew that the most successful parts of the Joker were indeed an accident, ha.
You know, I just watched The Purge: Election Night the other day (never seen the rest of the franchise), and it feels like a decent parallel to how you're describing the Joker, in the sense that it's a pretty-underwhelming-but-entertaining-enough execution of some surprisingly powerful themes which maybe aren't fleshed out to perfection, but, still do hit in a satisfying way. Especially in the context of the superficiality that I've come to expect from blockbusters......... And as far as I'm concerned, a win is a win! Hahah, I'll take it
Hey! I like most of the Disney remakes- no, love.
Totally fair. I really enjoy little mermaid. Aladdin and Cinderella. But the musical elements are some of the weaker aspects and generally just downgrades from the originals
I think it's pretty bold and short sided to say a movie is "objectively" bad.
Anyways, this movie was objectively pretty solid and interesting, and I was able to just accept the musical bits. You don't need a set-up! In my opinion. I think it worked fine as it is. There were some bits I didn't like, the story kind of slumped in the middle- but on the whole, I don't understand the hatred for it. It's like I watched a different movie from everyone else. I want to watch it again.
I think in 20 years or so, people will come around on this movie.
Greatest showman is the worst movie musical of alltime idc… joker is better
Whys that?
i never heard of this lol
Joker 2 it ok film
Love take good take
The movie sucked balls. Full stop.
i disagree
shiyt women want to be in everything
Wrong on all accounts
Another copy cat "bad" review from a dissapointed wannabe film critic..
Actually listen to the critique. This is not a bad review. It's why this didn't work well as a musical. You just want to tune out anything that isn't overwhelming, rapturous praise. You're the problem.
Now I just want to watch this even more. Often if the masses don't understand it, it has something more interesting to say and is thus a better piece of cinema.
Or it s just bad
You say that of Borderlands too?
@@ThePrinceofHisOwnKingdom he will cook a literal piece of shit because everyone saying it tastes bad makes him want to eat is even more.
Often if the masses don t understand the refined taste of shit it has something more interesting to make you feel and is this a better meal
It was awesome. Y'all were just stoked to trash this film
There's so much good in it!
What did you like in particular?
work on your delivery, your Valley girl stress at the end of sentences was annoying
That's incredibly childish. Also, you don't know what a Valley Girl accent sounds like.