The movie is just sad, the whole movie is about Arthur getting played by Lee and punched around by guards and at the end just ultimately losses his character and just dies
Bruh lol i was thinking the same. I LOVED Joker one but when they started talking musical i was out. Seeing the reviews it was no way i was spending money
I was in the group of people who hated Joker. I loved everything about it, from the music to the casting, but what I hated was the narrative that contained all of them. It felt ableist, halfhearted, and non-committal to me. The benefit to the Joker, from the comics, is that he is a converse of Batman. Part of the same equation, but balancing what Batman was. In that sense, while Batman’s childhood trauma scarred him so heavily, and that origin is of the upmost importance, the Joker’s origin, conversely, doesn’t matter at all. It doesn’t matter why the Joker is the way he is. What matters is that he represents a yang to Batman’s yin. So, to me, this movie, addressing a potential origin for the Joker, truly has little value. The sequel’s ending almost justifies my point, due to Arthur’s decision to abandon his “crusade” and turn himself into authorities. Why have two films at all, if the character ends in the same place he began? The journey was circular. It’s like a person trying a food they already know they’re not going to enjoy, but they eat it, anyway.
yeah because he did the same thing with antman quantamania, at first he called it a brilliant movie and etc. and then months later when it was clear most people disliked secret Invasion, then he switched up and started dragging that movie down too. lol.
We, as the audience are Harley. Harley (we) wants Arthur to be the Joker. Harley was disappointed at the end that Arthur was not the joker, as we disappointed that the movie didn't bring the Joker persona from the comic. I think it was intentional by Todd.
It was intentional, but it wasn’t very well executed. Very surface level. The movie isn’t really a legal drama, or a character study, or a real musical, or resonate commentary of society. It’s a lot of Todd wasting everyone’s time and money.
I agree. I definitely wanted him to embrace that Joker persona, but part of why is because there really is a lot of horrific injustice in that world, so the idea that it just consumes him and that's all, folks just left me kinda hollow. Arthur started to embrace it, then the guards brutally abused him in some horrific way that isn't confirmed but we can imagine and that just snuffs out the last remaining life in him. You'd almost expect it to backfire on them by being the catalyst that forces Arthur to recede and Joker to take over, but nope. Just left the movie feeling deflated as a result.
I really think what Puddles said in court was the thing that got through to Arthur. Arthur always liked Puddles and wouldn't hurt him, the thing that he now fears Arthur showed him that he just wants to be Arthur. (My Interpretation)
Exactly he is the only person alive who knew Arthur before, the real Arthur and not the myth. That and the kid idolising the myth so much that the guards kill him wakes Arthur up to break the myth
The film is genial on multiple levels, Phillips literally made the lady gaga character to represent the fans of the first movie who were obsessed with the joker and wanted him to go on a rampage, but as he refused to do so she left him, like the fans right now that are mad because he’s not the real joker. To add to that, Arthur explicitly says to the jurors (us the public again) that nobody cares about Arthur fleck but only about the joker personality because you, like the blood-thirsty society, wanted explosions, fire, passion... But you got what you deserved: another truth - that no one cared about good people, everyone only cared about the entertainment.
@@badassbard3295 he’s not a good person but he’s also not evil, just very very broken and mentally ill, people wanted to see his illness as entertainment and exploit him but the message of the film is that you should have empathy for him even with all the bad things he’s did and not idolizing the joker persona
But, then, this movie is called Joker, not "Fleck the movie." Is like doing a movie like Indiana Jones, and then the sequel they say, no, Indiana doesn't exist, he always was Junior Jones, and he never fought the nazis, and he regrets stealing all this artifacts for the museum.
The movie exists because the first one did major business. Not sure why Gaga's character had to be named Harley Quinn other than marketing. She could have been any Manson girl inspired character and it would have been the same minus the musical numbers.
Ironically, the ending is practically a beat-for-beat of Willem Dafoe's Joker pitch to Todd Phillips in 2021 or 2022. Willem Dafoe took notice to how many people wanted him to play the Joker and his pitched having someone be inspired by Arthur's Joker, but this Joker would be slightly different, essentially having two different Jokers in the same film with one of them eventually killing the other. I thought that it was going to be a simpler version of Geoff Johns' Batman The Three Jokers with one Joker being the criminal and the other being the comedian. Although in this film, it seems the inmate was the comedian and Arthur was the clown because he realized his life was a joke as he died.
Ok, at first, upon watching, I thought this sequel was very unnecessary, since it just reiterates -- and in a more on-the-nose manner -- the points of the first movie... But seeing people's reaction to it, I realize that Folie a Deux might actually be a meta-modernist masterpiece where the author blatantly bashes the audience for liking the first movie for all the wrong reasons. I mean, it's just wild that people watched the first film and still were expecting Arthur to become a criminal mastermind supervillain with source-accurate Harley Quinn by his side. Arthur is just a sad, simple guy, suffering from a disorder, and left utterly alone with his condition. He is 100% consistent and credible character throughout both films and gets a very believable closure. And Todd Philips and Joaquin Phoenix spend 200 millions of corporate money to get this point across and piss off general audience that was ready to throw money at the screen to see a maniac going on another killing spree. That's brilliant! It's just so sad that the message of the first film went over people's heads. "The worst part about having a mental illness is that people expect you to behave as if you don't :)"
It would be brilliant if the movie was actually complex and interesting but it’s not. I don’t care if this was the “real” Joker or not either. Just like the first film this movie is just derivative of other films but just so happens to have a DC character slapped onto it. This film brings nothing new to the table or to the discussion it’s trying to have.
@@ApolloPlanetary The first film is "What if we take a classic comic book villain and make it a grounded film about a disturbed person failed by society and make it look as Scorsese would have made it back in the 80s." That's pretty much how stories are made in postmodernist era: you take existing concepts and play with them putting into new contexts. The second film is "Ok, seems like people don't care about this disturbed person failed by society, they only care about the comic book villain. Let's give them what they want/deserve but in a way the comic book Joker would give it." This story doesn't work outside the audience's discourse on the first film, which moves it into a meta-modern territory. Yet people still use the old framework and looking for other movies to connect/explain what's going on. Is it another "rip-off"? Is it part of some comic movie universe? Is it a Dark Knight prequel? People have all rights and means to dislike and interpret any media as they desire, and both Jokers can easily be found derivative, unnecessary, or boring. But both films have a clear creative intent, which sets them apart from studio-made, committee-written blockbusters. And that, I think, earns respect.
This movie could've been the joke about 2 guys who didn't like being in a mental asylum, so they both go to the rooftop to escape. One of them jumps without any problem but the other one doesn't want to because he's afraid. Arthur could've been the guy who's afraid to jump and the guy who jumps without fear is the real comic accurate Joker played by someone like Wilem Dafoe.
I haven't seen the new one, but after I saw the first one, I kept saying, this is not the Joker. It was a powerful, psychologically rich crime drama ... but he was not THE Joker. He was not the criminal mastermind who was Batman's greatest enemy. He was some guy who went insane while wearing clown makeup. Now that I know what happens to him (I don't care about being spoiled), I feel vindicated.
The first one feels like Todd Phillips wanted to do a homage to Taxi Driver and King of Comedy, and he figured if he called it Joker it would get funded since superhero movies were really popular. I actually really liked the second one because it was silly and didn’t take itself seriously, I wanted to watch Joaquin Phoenix and Lady sing and goof off.
It wasn't some big secret that he wasn't "THE JOKER". It was explicit in the movie and in interviews. It's an Elseworlds story. A different take on the character and the world. Not everything has to be a literal one to one copy/paste of what happened in a comic 30 years ago
We have to be a better audience and give that movie time WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT JOKER making a origin film makes no sense if you think about it having someone in the background planning for the right time and creating chaos as soon as you see him.. I mean that's the joker you seriously couldn't have watched the first one and thought he was going to be the main clown
@@6ides548 No, we need better quality and people who ACTUALLY love the property! It's clear he DIDN'T want to make this movie- It's disrespecting our own audience. IMAGINE you went to see Batman, but the movie centers around Jim Gordon & Batman's in it at the end for 5 mins. Yet, most of the film is saying Batman is a weak monster who can't fight. & we get 80 minutes of Bruce crying about his parents in the background. THEN, the sequel says the guy u watched WASN'T the Real Batman, he inspired the REAL Batman.....Ahh, WHY DID I WATCH A FAKE BATMAN- IN A BATMAN MOVIE
I supposed I should be glad that Joker: Folie a Deux is the last of the franchise and that Todd Philips is gone. In a recent interview he said that Arthur wouldn't fight Batman and would see him as "the alpha male". So, if Arthur was going to look at Batman from a place of admiration, then there's really no point of him ever becoming the Joker as he would've had no motivation to commit crimes.
Yes, Todd Phillips gave you the Joker that you want at the end of the movie. The joker that everybody wanted, the psychopath that killed Arthur Fleck and scarred his face.
I thought it was interesting they turned joker into a character and not a single person. The persona can be adapted by whoever has the power to wield it. Too bad they didnt expand on the other guy who killed fleck. The two movies also show a realistic way the joker persona could be created to the public
There are multiple issues I have. 1. It isn’t about the Joker. It is about a random person named Arthur Fleck 2. The first movie actually makes a good commentary about a society not caring for the lower class, people with mental disorders, and not providing adequate support. The second movie prosecutes that concept by implying that the people who resonated with that are actually delusional and they have the illusion that they are the main character when really they are as random as Arthur. 3. It’s an absolute tragic end to a great concept. Instead of showing the flaws in society and the consequences of it, it ends up showing how Arthur goes from having a terrible life, to finally snapping, and then when he finally admits to his actions he ends up getting stabbed to death for it.
It’s about the inspiration of the origin story of joker, it’s a tragedy and even be Batman’s half brother’s story . Batman’s half brother created the joker but so did Batman’s dad. Arthur never experienced love and thought he met someone who loved him for being Arthur fleck. Her delusion was loving him for being the joker as a split persona, that was the folie deux two people delusional .
Why you think the movie doesn't work is why it actually works. Your insignificant meaningless person becomes a symbol for a society sitting on a powder keg .The powder keg erupts from one seemingly insignificant persons decent into madness that acts as a catalyst for a society that consumes to much junk media. Arthur's misfortunes set of a chain of events where you at the end see the rise of the Joker that we got in the Dark Knight.
@@jorgerivera5374 That's not ever supposed to be what this film was about. This feels like Rise of Skywalker, where Abbrams just looked at every fan theory and tried to please everyone. This is the same thing, just giving us a "more comic accurate joker". Instead of centering Author and giving him some sort of agency. He couldn't even die the way he wanted to die
It’s about the society that created the joker It’s still making a good commentary about people with mental disorders and not getting adequate support. They literally were trying to execute someone with mental disorders instead of getting him help. The joker supporters rather descend into chaos rather than fix societal problems in a civil way. Is that not delusional? Is that not a flaw of society? Is sentencing a man with severe mental and emotional trauma to death instead of getting him help not flawed? Tour of stuff happens all the time. A man was literally executed last week even after prosecutors tried to get a stay of execution because of new evidence suggesting that he didn’t do it and witnesses admitting to lying and the victim’s family asking them to not do it because they don’t think he did it. They still executed him. I saw plenty of our society in this movie. Arthur let all those anarchists down and yeah one of them killed him for it. Just like how if say a famous politician realized everything he was doing was wrong and tried to correct course his fanbase would decimate him for it. Or say a movie didn’t tell the story you wanted it to tell how you wanted them to tell it then it becomes a “tragic end to a great concept.”
Seriously, I've never seen a video where he enjoyed what they're talking about. The only time he has anything positive to say, is when he's talking movies or TV shows that came out when he was a kid/teen and that everyone, with time, agrees are great
Gaga and the psycho at the end represents toxic fans of the first movie, she fell in love with the Joker she saw in the in universe movie him the news version... both her and the psycho represent the disappointment the writers knew the toxic fans would have, and the male "fan" k!lls him out of disappointment in the end.
@@aquaticambiance He was never the Joker tho, he didnt have it in him..he's a guy who broke, that the people were trying to make the Joker WE want, who inspires the Joker everybody wants..
I get the contrast to the first movie, I just felt like it was not executed well and Harley as the villian was just eh. She barely did much or appeared much to do anything. Visually it looked as good as the first movie but musical was just not it.
It made no sense!!! Okay so it’s said that author isn’t the real joker… okay I can dig that BUT you put Harvey dent and Harley Quinn in it… that’s where I’m lost cause Bruce in this is a kid still right? Well Harley Harvey and Bruce are literally around the same age!!!! So no… I didn’t like it! Enjoyed the first one… hated the 2nd 🤷🏾
If you have to explain a movie to people so they “understand” it was actually good and not as “bad” as they think, then the producers did a bad job and by transference the movie is actually bad.
@@Scarylookingblinkyguy Regardless of why it’s bad, doesn’t change the fact that it’s bad. It just seems like some influencers are trying to influence the mass by “explaining” that they simply don’t understand that it’s actually good
Get ready for weeks of the majority of people correctly calling it out as crap and a pretentious minority saying that whoever disliked it just "didn't get it" and it's actually a masterpiece 😂
People are so toxic about this film literally showing what the entire film was about people wanted to see joker so bad but when it wasn’t what they expected they are disappointed
Matt’s response is essentially why this movie is missing. People are so focused on the surface of this film (and the original) that they are not seeing the real meaning and purpose of both. It’s a shame because the movie is so much better than it’s getting credit for.
You go to a movie called "Joker" to see the Joker & at the end they tell you he isn't the Joker. I knew it would be a waste of time, thanks, now I won't need to see it till streaming 😁
I mean... Did you honestly think a joker solo origin would work WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT HIM this is probably the ONLY way it works having him show up and flip everything on its head it misdirected EVERYONE I think that's what the joker is this was a story about the idea of joker you can't tell me when you heard that laugh and his mannerisms I mean that's the joker
Lmao you didn’t understand anything that was explained, Arthur never was the joker. Arthur simply created the persona and inspired others, Arthur has wanted to die since the first movie. Arthur is also to old to be the joker Bruce is a kid in the film, Arthur as the Joker would’ve been in his 50/60s.
@@morbidzombii I also think this movie was the idea of joker Arthur put on the clown shit as a mask to make himself feel better this was a whole misdirect if you think about it the 2 movies are just one whole act like a play imo and in typical joker form it played with our heads and threw everyone off. I mean come on a joker solo film\origin... we know NOTHING about joker this is the perfect way to build something up in a guy struggling with the laughing condition the clown makeup and we say "JOKER" when all it is is a guy who is broken by society and the ending IS PERFECT "You thought he was struggling with mental illness This guy is PURE EVIL his laugh was so menacing I had to go look up leaks just to hear it again and man... The way he held the knife his mannerisms I think the movie is great it'll take more time for people to look at it from a different angle
He was the original joker.. I thought it was all spelled out?? He inspired the psychopath that wanted to take over the persona of the joker he idolized
@@6ides548 do you know what would have worked? The sequel to joker instead of being a sequel would have been another story of the origins of the joker, so they would also have respected the comics since in reality joker has no origins, but says a different origin every time
What this movie basically feels like is Todd Phillips trolling everybody. He just has that personality and I wouldn’t put it past him that this is exactly what this movie really was made for.
I loved the ending because the movie was over and there wouldn't be another boring musical number. That inmate is not the Dark Knight Joker. Harvey Dent wrecks that timeline.
The ending was really bold. Basically saying “my joker is the real joker. The joker everybody loves is fucking nothing and I don’t care about him whatsoever”. I can’t stop rethinking it
Loved it! I work in a state prison with mentally ill inmates. This was accurate in the way they escape reality through different ways such as music and imagination!
Normal people escape reality everyday in so0o many ways as well lol… there’s probably more mentally ill people outside of state prison than in & not for nothing, those people you look after should be in an institution for their mental health illnesses & not in a state prison
One of the things I didnt like was the interaction between the two in the hospital. Correct me if I'm wrong but I have tough time believing that they would introduce Arthur to the singing group and I'm pretty sure there is no way the guard would allow them to be alone and flirt with each other and there is no way she would be able to access him alone in solitary. Although you could make the argument that these events took place in his mind. But overall I liked the film.
I think the use of Harvey was to reflect on his own duel identity. He refused to believe jokers diagnoses despite later in the lore, him having that exact diagnosis. I loved seeing them use the bomb to be Two Faces origin without focusing too much on that. I can see a two face spin off from this if they are going for cash cows
"For once in my life, I have someone who needs me" Arthur thought he finally found someone who loves him for him, but the reality was that people loved the idea of the Joker more than Arthur the person. He spent the entire movie thinking that people embraced him, but at the end, he finally accepts that no one ever loved him as Arthur, they only loved the nasty side of him that he never wanted to come out in the first place.
It's obvious that the first movie was too real in pointing out the crisis of mental illness mixed with an environment of extreme inequality. The psychology of the Joker is very anti 1%, so they hire one of the richest, most famous celebrities they can in order to divert/destroy everything about The Joker.
Once they showed that weirdo that always agrees that shitty movies or shows are good, I had to stop the video. I already know he’s gonna say it’s amazing 💀
The best part of the movie is guessing from scene to scene, what’s real and what’s not. There’s no montage showing you what was fake, like in the end of the first movie. You have to piece it together. I think none of the characters whose spoke directly to Arthur were real, besides, maybe the judge, and the psychiatrist. Harley was in his head, his lawyer was in his head (he had two lawyers, and both of them disappeared when he said he wanted to fire his lawyer. In the real world people just saw on fire the other guy). The guards who talk to him as well as the other inmate who liked him were in his head. The clue was that the singing represented something that wasn’t real, and the giveaway was when the guard started, singing himself, along with the backing track that’s supposedly going on in Arthur’s head. The guard was in his head too. There’s one scene where Harley and Arthur’s lawyer are arguing in front of the press. This happened inside of jokers head. This is the voice in his head, telling him to lean into the madness, with the rational voice in his head, trying to talk him down. It was like the angel and devil on his shoulders. It’s very cleverly done. You think “oh this character must be real because they’re talking to another character.” Both characters weren’t real.
I'm sorry I see what they're trying to do. I loved the first movie but this second one was hard to watch especially during the singing. This was a horrible ( Joker ) movie and in the same sentence it was a good movie though. It was depressing AF too. 😂 They should have done anything else.
Ryan… Thank you for actually understanding this film. So many people are disappointed and I feel they are just missing the point. I thought it was equally impactful as the first film. It completes the thought from the first film. Cheers!
Thanks for agreeing with me. I felt crazy to have loved the movie. The music was a bit over the top but I loved everything in it. I loved the first movie because Arthur was failed by Gotham, How on earth do you let a child go back to their abuser? I loved the second movie, because Gotham failed Arthur again. How on earth can our protectors break us like that. How dare the rich make the experience of Arthur into a movement that's just utter chaos? Arthur's Joker persona was meant just for his mind, not to glamorize as an anti-government sentiment.
Bro... saw it last night in IMAX... this film was a deep dive in to the demented brain of HQ and the fractured mind of AF. This was a brilliant film and crafty put together.
No..... Its like fight club. He says he is not the joker. She leaves him. He has a visitor (her) he kills the version of himself she didn't want. He cuts himself and creates the version of joker we all know.
So, what I’m hearing a lot is “I liked it because…” and then goes into some random theory they made up in their heads, or “I liked the movie because Lady Gaga has a great singing voice”. No actual redeeming quality on the movie, just speculation. The problem here is that they did a bait and switch. They went “Joker and Harley” and then went “oh no! It’s Never-Was Joker and Lee! Yall were just wrong!” Which is major gaslighting.
@@KristinaMaca8 and here we go! The classic “you just didn’t get it” reply. If thousands and thousands of people say it was bad and it was because “they didn’t get it”, then that means the director did a shit job because he made a movie just for himself. Great work!
It's a geat movie! You have to look at the bigger picture when watching this movie; who is it about, what is he like, what is his whole life like, why music? Because it follows the story and completes it more smoothly than ordinary dialogue could, and at the end of the day this is a shared madness/delusion. It definitely doesn't deserve the hate It's gotten
Great conversation! I'm glad people appreciated it. I thought it was perfect for what they were going for. I would also liken Lee's fascination of Joker to the character of Duchess Josiana in The Man Who Laughs. She tries to seduce and manipulate Gwynplaine who develops an affection for her until he comes to understand her only interest was fascination and gawking at his condition and celebrity.
In JOKER Todd wanted to make a homage to Taxi Driver and King of Comedy. In this JOKER FAD he makes a depressing, dark and twisted homage to La La Land
This video and these comments 10/10. I was a bit disappointed when I left the theater, but y’all’s commentary was insightful! I still think it felt cramped between the excessive music, but overall a decent movie.
I don't think Lee (Harley) ever really existed. I think the only time she was real was when Arthur initially passed that by the music room. She popped out and did the same motion he envisioned his neighbor doing before he started seeing her everywhere but she was never really there. He split himself into a whole nother character, Harley.
The issue with the first film is that it wanted to provide commentary on how society pushed the poor and downtrodden to madness but also reveled in and played in the Joker aesthetic. It made the idea of Arthur Fleck becoming the Joker “cool” to audiences. Now, in the second film, Phillips tries to reverse track and condemn the viewer for thinking the Joker is “cool.” But then he ends the movie with an inmate being inspired by and taking up the mantle of the Joker because you could say he thinks the Joker is “cool.” Huh????
@similaritiesendhere I don't really jump in RUclips comment sections and tell my life story. I usually comment something related to the video or subject matter of the video. Kinda feels like the point of these comment sections. To comment on the video, not brag about myself. I mean I could go on and on about the fact that I own my own house, 2 vehicles, I have 2 jobs, a loving son and beautiful wife, I used to be a pornstar so I've been with beautiful women, I'm not in debt, and I'm not even 30 yet.... but this doesn't seem like the appropriate place to speak about myself. Nor did anybody ask me about myself. So I'm going to do like a normal person, and comment on the video. But thanks for being a dick for no exact reason. I'm sure everybody in your life really appreciates when you do that to them.
here to say that the film was a brilliant head-flip on the first one (which wasn't even a classic comic book movie to begin with). not sure why people expected a classic comic book movie sequel given that...........
I thought the movie was really good. The acting was great. The setting was really dark and It was a very sad story actually. The story had some good twists and it seemed like a meaningful. I went into the movie after hearing the bad reviews so I had low expectations. I came out thinking it was very good. Some of the singing seemed awkward but overall I thought the movie was very good.
Thank you Screen Crush! For always studying and deciphering the actual script, themes and characters. NewRockstars couldn’t hold a candle in that department. Ryan is too smart and dedicated ✊🏾
I love this channel and this comment isn’t about this video in particular it’s about the people of todays age but it’s not a movie or show that comes out that people don’t find something to complain about it’s crazy if I ran Hollywood and the the whole movie industry I would just shut everything down because I would be tired of people saying they don’t like everything that’s put out it’s so weird I’m not sure what’s wrong with people now days
I know you didn’t really pick a side but this channel is starting to feel like a “the fans/masses are wrong for having a negative opinion” and “it’s your fault for not understanding the creative constructs this media has to offer you dumb dumb” I’ve found colton to be my literal opposite in terms of what I like versus what he likes. That’s okay and I’m glad that there is variety in reviews. It’s just that sometimes I feel like this channel is trying their hand at being controversial and it feels not very genuine. Still watch every video. Your breakdowns are dope.
They side with the studio who gives them free previews, access, and pays their bills every time. No matter what the audience is saying. Sad to see them sell out like this.
Strong disagree. 90% of the time, I agree wholeheartedly with SC's take. Colton seems to be the writer I agree with most. I actually think they do a good job of offering the criticisms even when they seem to like something. I dunno. Have you considered that maybe it is just you?
They filmed this before the movie was released to general audiences. They're not calling the "fans" dumb for having a negative opinion. They didn't know what the audience reaction to this movie was
I like the idea of spinning the tables & having Harley be the villain against Joker, I just don't think the movie went far enough with it. There was a lot of great ideas in this movie, but most of them just didn't go far enough.
I loved the movie. For me, it really embodied the loss of control in Arthur's life from both his incarceration and his mental state. At almost no point in the movie is Arthur the driving force of the plot and when he is, he faces dire consequences. Things just happen to Arthur for no real reason, and that's life. In the first movie, Arthur could take control of his life with violence, but this movie really seems to condemn that and turn it towards him. The movie never gives you what you want. You want some message about society, you want spectacle, you want resolution, but you get none. You get what you deserve.
There is no valid explanation for this treachery. There is no need to pretend you have to look so much deeper into the premise. Neither movie should be named Joker. Because the only joke is on the audience.
First time I really disagree with you guys. Remove every "I think" and "I feel that" from this and review the movie as is. The movie that is presented had a mess of a plot; told instead of showed much or the interesting society commentary; and every character acted randomly. That might work if it was just from Authors POV; But this movie wasn't. The trial was televised, why? Plot. The judge allowed anything to go in trail, Harley was able to literally do whatever the plot needed her to do, including talking to the press and getting VIP seats at a trail, and walk around a crimal phyc ward with no issues. And no development with Arthur's character. He started as a depressed mentally ill Patient, And dies as a depressed mentally ill patient. The musical numbers did nothing and, where the least of this movies issues. Seriously, review the movie that is on screen first, then talk about how it made you feel.
I just saw the movie. I loved it better than the first movie. This one was also more of a musical. I saw the first movie as more of commentary about what this second movie is expanding on. Both movies seem to point out the reaction of the mob based on a fantasy.
This movie was engrossing from start to finish. When Arthur confessed to his crimes dressed as joker, in his quiet depressed Arthur voice, it was a very powerful scene, and seemed like Arthur's redemption. I never felt the first joker was The joker, so glad to see he isn't.
Your explanation of this movie confirms that I’m not delusional about the meaning of this movie LOL. Because I tried having this conversation on Reddit and those clowns DO. NOT. GET. IT.
I agree with Matt Singer's points on this seemingly putting the first films and its viewers on trial, I think the audience was the real joke of the film. It's like I was being punished for liking the first film when trying to get into this one, it's like the film intentionally deconstructs the point of the first film and cheapens it in every way. What was the point of following Arthur's journey into madness and embracing his mental illness from the corrupt society, when he ultimately doesn't even become the "real" Joker? Having Arthur be a steppingstone for the "real" Joker ultimately makes his character pointless.
🌏 Get exclusive NordVPN deal here ➵ NordVPN.com/screencrush It’s risk free with Nord’s 30 day money-back guarantee!✌
Toxic fandom??? You sound like a weak minded beach
I appreciate your reviews and this was a really original take.
How much the movie paying you
How much dose it pay to be a shill ?
The movie is just sad, the whole movie is about Arthur getting played by Lee and punched around by guards and at the end just ultimately losses his character and just dies
Damn yeah
It reminds me a lot of Joker: The Man who stopped laughing.
Arthur’s always wanted to die since the first movie.
Dude gets played by the love of his life life. Gets SA’d & beat. Loses his identity and then murdered. WHAT KIND OF MOVIE IS THIS-
@@MoleyRusselsWart_ the Joker who frowns?
This is the first time I've watched one of these with no intentions of seeing the actual movie
Bruh lol i was thinking the same. I LOVED Joker one but when they started talking musical i was out. Seeing the reviews it was no way i was spending money
Same
I was in the group of people who hated Joker. I loved everything about it, from the music to the casting, but what I hated was the narrative that contained all of them. It felt ableist, halfhearted, and non-committal to me. The benefit to the Joker, from the comics, is that he is a converse of Batman. Part of the same equation, but balancing what Batman was. In that sense, while Batman’s childhood trauma scarred him so heavily, and that origin is of the upmost importance, the Joker’s origin, conversely, doesn’t matter at all. It doesn’t matter why the Joker is the way he is. What matters is that he represents a yang to Batman’s yin. So, to me, this movie, addressing a potential origin for the Joker, truly has little value.
The sequel’s ending almost justifies my point, due to Arthur’s decision to abandon his “crusade” and turn himself into authorities. Why have two films at all, if the character ends in the same place he began? The journey was circular. It’s like a person trying a food they already know they’re not going to enjoy, but they eat it, anyway.
This is over. Time to close the curtain
Never wanted to watch it, but was curious how it would end. Found myself here.
Ryan is incredibly skilled at making a movie I thought was terrible actually sound good lol
9:45 going up is where I was like dang didn't realise that 😅
It’s called cheques
yeah because he did the same thing with antman quantamania, at first he called it a brilliant movie and etc. and then months later when it was clear most people disliked secret Invasion, then he switched up and started dragging that movie down too. lol.
@rogerrubio9540 Gotta remember this is a company he does whatever his bosses and producers say so if the audience says it bad he'll say it's bad
If you over analyze you can make anything sound good
We, as the audience are Harley. Harley (we) wants Arthur to be the Joker. Harley was disappointed at the end that Arthur was not the joker, as we disappointed that the movie didn't bring the Joker persona from the comic. I think it was intentional by Todd.
Todd’s an idiot and wasted WB money and Time
It was intentional, but it wasn’t very well executed. Very surface level.
The movie isn’t really a legal drama, or a character study, or a real musical, or resonate commentary of society. It’s a lot of Todd wasting everyone’s time and money.
Why not give the people what they want
I agree. I definitely wanted him to embrace that Joker persona, but part of why is because there really is a lot of horrific injustice in that world, so the idea that it just consumes him and that's all, folks just left me kinda hollow. Arthur started to embrace it, then the guards brutally abused him in some horrific way that isn't confirmed but we can imagine and that just snuffs out the last remaining life in him. You'd almost expect it to backfire on them by being the catalyst that forces Arthur to recede and Joker to take over, but nope. Just left the movie feeling deflated as a result.
The movie was INTENTIONALLY bad to prove a point? Well that's not the dumbest defense i've heard for this movie sukking....so there's that.
I really think what Puddles said in court was the thing that got through to Arthur. Arthur always liked Puddles and wouldn't hurt him, the thing that he now fears Arthur showed him that he just wants to be Arthur. (My Interpretation)
Puddles is my favorite character in these movies
Puddles lines' are the heart of the film!
Yes exactly. Puddles really really sees Arthur
Exactly he is the only person alive who knew Arthur before, the real Arthur and not the myth. That and the kid idolising the myth so much that the guards kill him wakes Arthur up to break the myth
Agreed, snapped his ass right out of it
The film is genial on multiple levels, Phillips literally made the lady gaga character to represent the fans of the first movie who were obsessed with the joker and wanted him to go on a rampage, but as he refused to do so she left him, like the fans right now that are mad because he’s not the real joker. To add to that, Arthur explicitly says to the jurors (us the public again) that nobody cares about Arthur fleck but only about the joker personality because you, like the blood-thirsty society, wanted explosions, fire, passion... But you got what you deserved: another truth - that no one cared about good people, everyone only cared about the entertainment.
I really like this take 👌
But Arthur is not a good person. So your whole thing falls apart right there and then
@@badassbard3295 he’s not a good person but he’s also not evil, just very very broken and mentally ill, people wanted to see his illness as entertainment and exploit him but the message of the film is that you should have empathy for him even with all the bad things he’s did and not idolizing the joker persona
But, then, this movie is called Joker, not "Fleck the movie." Is like doing a movie like Indiana Jones, and then the sequel they say, no, Indiana doesn't exist, he always was Junior Jones, and he never fought the nazis, and he regrets stealing all this artifacts for the museum.
🤯🫡 that’s entertainment
Finally a reviewer that gets it. So many people have forgotten the main point of the original film and general media literacy.
For real. People forget that cinema is an artform
The movie exists because the first one did major business. Not sure why Gaga's character had to be named Harley Quinn other than marketing. She could have been any Manson girl inspired character and it would have been the same minus the musical numbers.
Ironically, the ending is practically a beat-for-beat of Willem Dafoe's Joker pitch to Todd Phillips in 2021 or 2022. Willem Dafoe took notice to how many people wanted him to play the Joker and his pitched having someone be inspired by Arthur's Joker, but this Joker would be slightly different, essentially having two different Jokers in the same film with one of them eventually killing the other. I thought that it was going to be a simpler version of Geoff Johns' Batman The Three Jokers with one Joker being the criminal and the other being the comedian. Although in this film, it seems the inmate was the comedian and Arthur was the clown because he realized his life was a joke as he died.
Ok, at first, upon watching, I thought this sequel was very unnecessary, since it just reiterates -- and in a more on-the-nose manner -- the points of the first movie...
But seeing people's reaction to it, I realize that Folie a Deux might actually be a meta-modernist masterpiece where the author blatantly bashes the audience for liking the first movie for all the wrong reasons.
I mean, it's just wild that people watched the first film and still were expecting Arthur to become a criminal mastermind supervillain with source-accurate Harley Quinn by his side.
Arthur is just a sad, simple guy, suffering from a disorder, and left utterly alone with his condition. He is 100% consistent and credible character throughout both films and gets a very believable closure.
And Todd Philips and Joaquin Phoenix spend 200 millions of corporate money to get this point across and piss off general audience that was ready to throw money at the screen to see a maniac going on another killing spree. That's brilliant!
It's just so sad that the message of the first film went over people's heads.
"The worst part about having a mental illness is that people expect you to behave as if you don't :)"
Bingo !
It would be brilliant if the movie was actually complex and interesting but it’s not. I don’t care if this was the “real” Joker or not either.
Just like the first film this movie is just derivative of other films but just so happens to have a DC character slapped onto it. This film brings nothing new to the table or to the discussion it’s trying to have.
@@ApolloPlanetary can you give examples of films it's a "derivative" of?
@@ApolloPlanetary The first film is "What if we take a classic comic book villain and make it a grounded film about a disturbed person failed by society and make it look as Scorsese would have made it back in the 80s."
That's pretty much how stories are made in postmodernist era: you take existing concepts and play with them putting into new contexts.
The second film is "Ok, seems like people don't care about this disturbed person failed by society, they only care about the comic book villain. Let's give them what they want/deserve but in a way the comic book Joker would give it."
This story doesn't work outside the audience's discourse on the first film, which moves it into a meta-modern territory. Yet people still use the old framework and looking for other movies to connect/explain what's going on. Is it another "rip-off"? Is it part of some comic movie universe? Is it a Dark Knight prequel?
People have all rights and means to dislike and interpret any media as they desire, and both Jokers can easily be found derivative, unnecessary, or boring.
But both films have a clear creative intent, which sets them apart from studio-made, committee-written blockbusters.
And that, I think, earns respect.
Do you get high on your own elitism?
You sir have a gift of words. You almost made this sound like a good movie.
🤣🤣
This movie could've been the joke about 2 guys who didn't like being in a mental asylum, so they both go to the rooftop to escape. One of them jumps without any problem but the other one doesn't want to because he's afraid. Arthur could've been the guy who's afraid to jump and the guy who jumps without fear is the real comic accurate Joker played by someone like Wilem Dafoe.
I see what you did there.
So even a worse movie
@@BlackThreath1234You didn't read The Killing Joke, huh?
@@IanICee yeah I get it but doesn't make sense to base the movie around that
Could have made a light bridge for him to cross
Not only was this a bad sequel and musical, but also a "Bad Romance." 😅
I see what you did there 😂😂💀✅
Boooo. Take this Thumbs Up from me and gtfo
this comment is on every joker video we get it fam
Got em!
Said With a "PokerFace".😜
I haven't seen the new one, but after I saw the first one, I kept saying, this is not the Joker. It was a powerful, psychologically rich crime drama ... but he was not THE Joker. He was not the criminal mastermind who was Batman's greatest enemy. He was some guy who went insane while wearing clown makeup. Now that I know what happens to him (I don't care about being spoiled), I feel vindicated.
The first one feels like Todd Phillips wanted to do a homage to Taxi Driver and King of Comedy, and he figured if he called it Joker it would get funded since superhero movies were really popular. I actually really liked the second one because it was silly and didn’t take itself seriously, I wanted to watch Joaquin Phoenix and Lady sing and goof off.
It wasn't some big secret that he wasn't "THE JOKER". It was explicit in the movie and in interviews. It's an Elseworlds story. A different take on the character and the world. Not everything has to be a literal one to one copy/paste of what happened in a comic 30 years ago
If he's NOT Joker, why make 2 movies called "Joker"😢
It's simply "Sad Clown". This ending should've been in part 1
For money, and look, it litteraly talks
We have to be a better audience and give that movie time WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT JOKER making a origin film makes no sense if you think about it having someone in the background planning for the right time and creating chaos as soon as you see him.. I mean that's the joker you seriously couldn't have watched the first one and thought he was going to be the main clown
@@6ides548 No, we need better quality and people who ACTUALLY love the property!
It's clear he DIDN'T want to make this movie- It's disrespecting our own audience.
IMAGINE you went to see Batman, but the movie centers around Jim Gordon & Batman's in it at the end for 5 mins.
Yet, most of the film is saying Batman is a weak monster who can't fight. & we get 80 minutes of Bruce crying about his parents in the background.
THEN, the sequel says the guy u watched WASN'T the Real Batman, he inspired the REAL Batman.....Ahh, WHY DID I WATCH A FAKE BATMAN- IN A BATMAN MOVIE
Because why y’all ALWAYS gotta be so literal?
@@dice268926 Why do the call it a Big Mac when its not really that Big ?
I supposed I should be glad that Joker: Folie a Deux is the last of the franchise and that Todd Philips is gone. In a recent interview he said that Arthur wouldn't fight Batman and would see him as "the alpha male". So, if Arthur was going to look at Batman from a place of admiration, then there's really no point of him ever becoming the Joker as he would've had no motivation to commit crimes.
Finally a channel who understood the movie
This version of the Joker, out of all of them, is the worst interpretation. This isn’t Joker, it’s two movies about a dude named Arthur Fleck.
He literally wasn't the Joker in the first one. Did you watch the first one? Did you comprehend it? How the fuck is this a surprise?
Yes, Todd Phillips gave you the Joker that you want at the end of the movie. The joker that everybody wanted, the psychopath that killed Arthur Fleck and scarred his face.
So you didn't get anything right?
@@MogtheMad0422 who said it was a surprise?
@@BlackThreath1234 I got that I wasted my time on a shitty movie.
I thought it was interesting they turned joker into a character and not a single person. The persona can be adapted by whoever has the power to wield it. Too bad they didnt expand on the other guy who killed fleck. The two movies also show a realistic way the joker persona could be created to the public
There are multiple issues I have.
1. It isn’t about the Joker. It is about a random person named Arthur Fleck
2. The first movie actually makes a good commentary about a society not caring for the lower class, people with mental disorders, and not providing adequate support.
The second movie prosecutes that concept by implying that the people who resonated with that are actually delusional and they have the illusion that they are the main character when really they are as random as Arthur.
3. It’s an absolute tragic end to a great concept. Instead of showing the flaws in society and the consequences of it, it ends up showing how Arthur goes from having a terrible life, to finally snapping, and then when he finally admits to his actions he ends up getting stabbed to death for it.
It’s about the inspiration of the origin story of joker, it’s a tragedy and even be Batman’s half brother’s story . Batman’s half brother created the joker but so did Batman’s dad. Arthur never experienced love and thought he met someone who loved him for being Arthur fleck. Her delusion was loving him for being the joker as a split persona, that was the folie deux two people delusional .
Why you think the movie doesn't work is why it actually works. Your insignificant meaningless person becomes a symbol for a society sitting on a powder keg .The powder keg erupts from one seemingly insignificant persons decent into madness that acts as a catalyst for a society that consumes to much junk media. Arthur's misfortunes set of a chain of events where you at the end see the rise of the Joker that we got in the Dark Knight.
You couldn’t have said it better!
@@jorgerivera5374 That's not ever supposed to be what this film was about. This feels like Rise of Skywalker, where Abbrams just looked at every fan theory and tried to please everyone.
This is the same thing, just giving us a "more comic accurate joker". Instead of centering Author and giving him some sort of agency. He couldn't even die the way he wanted to die
It’s about the society that created the joker
It’s still making a good commentary about people with mental disorders and not getting adequate support. They literally were trying to execute someone with mental disorders instead of getting him help.
The joker supporters rather descend into chaos rather than fix societal problems in a civil way. Is that not delusional? Is that not a flaw of society? Is sentencing a man with severe mental and emotional trauma to death instead of getting him help not flawed? Tour of stuff happens all the time. A man was literally executed last week even after prosecutors tried to get a stay of execution because of new evidence suggesting that he didn’t do it and witnesses admitting to lying and the victim’s family asking them to not do it because they don’t think he did it. They still executed him.
I saw plenty of our society in this movie. Arthur let all those anarchists down and yeah one of them killed him for it. Just like how if say a famous politician realized everything he was doing was wrong and tried to correct course his fanbase would decimate him for it. Or say a movie didn’t tell the story you wanted it to tell how you wanted them to tell it then it becomes a “tragic end to a great concept.”
Matt didnt like it? What a surprise.🙄
Right 😂 dude doesn’t like anything
Seriously, I've never seen a video where he enjoyed what they're talking about. The only time he has anything positive to say, is when he's talking movies or TV shows that came out when he was a kid/teen and that everyone, with time, agrees are great
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Yea but this movie was ASS LOL
So they turned Harley Quinn into Gypsy Rose.. nice..
Gaga and the psycho at the end represents toxic fans of the first movie, she fell in love with the Joker she saw in the in universe movie him the news version... both her and the psycho represent the disappointment the writers knew the toxic fans would have, and the male "fan" k!lls him out of disappointment in the end.
Almost like the fans came in wanting to see( The Joker )
@@aquaticambiance He was never the Joker tho, he didnt have it in him..he's a guy who broke, that the people were trying to make the Joker WE want, who inspires the Joker everybody wants..
What did you think of the movie?
Promising first half but pathetic mid and ending
The 1st was better.
Please explain the edging
I get the contrast to the first movie, I just felt like it was not executed well and Harley as the villian was just eh. She barely did much or appeared much to do anything. Visually it looked as good as the first movie but musical was just not it.
It made no sense!!! Okay so it’s said that author isn’t the real joker… okay I can dig that BUT you put Harvey dent and Harley Quinn in it… that’s where I’m lost cause Bruce in this is a kid still right? Well Harley Harvey and Bruce are literally around the same age!!!! So no… I didn’t like it! Enjoyed the first one… hated the 2nd 🤷🏾
This movie should have been called "Joker: Fully a Douche"
Lmao
You're reacting the way the movie predicted you would lol
If you have to explain a movie to people so they “understand” it was actually good and not as “bad” as they think, then the producers did a bad job and by transference the movie is actually bad.
Director said he made it bad on purpose. Google it theres an interview. They wanted to punish Batman fans.
@@Scarylookingblinkyguy Regardless of why it’s bad, doesn’t change the fact that it’s bad. It just seems like some influencers are trying to influence the mass by “explaining” that they simply don’t understand that it’s actually good
Joker 2’s budget was $200 million… someone stole money, and the director saying he made a bad movie on purpose would be suspect #1.
Get ready for weeks of the majority of people correctly calling it out as crap and a pretentious minority saying that whoever disliked it just "didn't get it" and it's actually a masterpiece 😂
Agreed
People are so toxic about this film literally showing what the entire film was about people wanted to see joker so bad but when it wasn’t what they expected they are disappointed
very good point ...what they are missing is the underlying powder keg that was the Gotham socio and political structure.
I know I was disappointed.
I love how it seems Todd wanted to make sure Joker 3 couldn’t happen he makes Arthur renounce the Joker persona then fucking die
I got the 3 Joker vibes from the movie: Arthur, the young kid following the Joker, and the Psychopath that kills him.
I wouldn't watch 🤷🏾♀️ part 2 wrong it for me.
Matt’s response is essentially why this movie is missing. People are so focused on the surface of this film (and the original) that they are not seeing the real meaning and purpose of both.
It’s a shame because the movie is so much better than it’s getting credit for.
Name one good thing about it
The issue is that this film IS surface level.
Nahhh it’s a shit movie mate 😂
You go to a movie called "Joker" to see the Joker & at the end they tell you he isn't the Joker. I knew it would be a waste of time, thanks, now I won't need to see it till streaming 😁
I mean... Did you honestly think a joker solo origin would work WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT HIM this is probably the ONLY way it works having him show up and flip everything on its head it misdirected EVERYONE I think that's what the joker is this was a story about the idea of joker you can't tell me when you heard that laugh and his mannerisms I mean that's the joker
Lmao you didn’t understand anything that was explained, Arthur never was the joker. Arthur simply created the persona and inspired others, Arthur has wanted to die since the first movie. Arthur is also to old to be the joker Bruce is a kid in the film, Arthur as the Joker would’ve been in his 50/60s.
@@morbidzombii I also think this movie was the idea of joker Arthur put on the clown shit as a mask to make himself feel better this was a whole misdirect if you think about it the 2 movies are just one whole act like a play imo and in typical joker form it played with our heads and threw everyone off.
I mean come on a joker solo film\origin... we know NOTHING about joker this is the perfect way to build something up in a guy struggling with the laughing condition the clown makeup and we say "JOKER" when all it is is a guy who is broken by society and the ending IS PERFECT
"You thought he was struggling with mental illness
This guy is PURE EVIL his laugh was so menacing I had to go look up leaks just to hear it again and man... The way he held the knife his mannerisms I think the movie is great it'll take more time for people to look at it from a different angle
He was the original joker.. I thought it was all spelled out?? He inspired the psychopath that wanted to take over the persona of the joker he idolized
@@6ides548 do you know what would have worked? The sequel to joker instead of being a sequel would have been another story of the origins of the joker, so they would also have respected the comics since in reality joker has no origins, but says a different origin every time
What this movie basically feels like is Todd Phillips trolling everybody.
He just has that personality and I wouldn’t put it past him that this is exactly what this movie really was made for.
Thank you Screen Crush for being one of the only channels to have an insightful view of this film and therefore a better understanding of it.
I REALLY like this movie and Harley being the Villain is Spot on, she built him up and then broke him.... and that ending had me STUNNED 😢
A great way if you want to introduce the Heath Ledger character as the psychotic inmate as the assumption of Prime Earth 1 Joker.
I loved the ending because the movie was over and there wouldn't be another boring musical number. That inmate is not the Dark Knight Joker. Harvey Dent wrecks that timeline.
The ending was really bold. Basically saying “my joker is the real joker. The joker everybody loves is fucking nothing and I don’t care about him whatsoever”. I can’t stop rethinking it
I also think it is an awesome “enging”. (There is a spelling error in the title)
Edit: it has now been fixed. You’re welcome.
It is a bad movie, with details of brilliance and an incredible ending that opens the door to the appearance of Batman's true nemesis.
Loved it! I work in a state prison with mentally ill inmates. This was accurate in the way they escape reality through different ways such as music and imagination!
Normal people escape reality everyday in so0o many ways as well lol… there’s probably more mentally ill people outside of state prison than in & not for nothing, those people you look after should be in an institution for their mental health illnesses & not in a state prison
One of the things I didnt like was the interaction between the two in the hospital. Correct me if I'm wrong but I have tough time believing that they would introduce Arthur to the singing group and I'm pretty sure there is no way the guard would allow them to be alone and flirt with each other and there is no way she would be able to access him alone in solitary. Although you could make the argument that these events took place in his mind. But overall I liked the film.
@@johngallagher72 I haven't' seen the movie but other comments said she was rich and paid off the guards to be alone with Arthur
I think the use of Harvey was to reflect on his own duel identity. He refused to believe jokers diagnoses despite later in the lore, him having that exact diagnosis. I loved seeing them use the bomb to be Two Faces origin without focusing too much on that. I can see a two face spin off from this if they are going for cash cows
"For once in my life, I have someone who needs me" Arthur thought he finally found someone who loves him for him, but the reality was that people loved the idea of the Joker more than Arthur the person. He spent the entire movie thinking that people embraced him, but at the end, he finally accepts that no one ever loved him as Arthur, they only loved the nasty side of him that he never wanted to come out in the first place.
It's a star is born, but in reverse.
I like the movie but this is an underrated hilarious comment😂😂😂
I havent seen the movie but i got what you meant 🤣🤣
A star is aborted?
@@chenxi8633 Not in my state you don't!
In a Theory i would say we get Joker 3 which is called Joker & Batman as first scene Arthur wakes up in the hospital
Don’t use the dc license if you’re not going to make a dc movie.
It’s ok at best but calling it joker ruins it.
Thank's ScreenCrush for giving well thought out, insightful movie analyses that I gladly pass off as my own.
I've seen a porno back in the 90s, that had a Joker in it, that was more comic book accurate then this $200 million waste of studio money.
It's obvious that the first movie was too real in pointing out the crisis of mental illness mixed with an environment of extreme inequality.
The psychology of the Joker is very anti 1%, so they hire one of the richest, most famous celebrities they can in order to divert/destroy everything about The Joker.
Once they showed that weirdo that always agrees that shitty movies or shows are good, I had to stop the video. I already know he’s gonna say it’s amazing 💀
The best part of the movie is guessing from scene to scene, what’s real and what’s not. There’s no montage showing you what was fake, like in the end of the first movie. You have to piece it together.
I think none of the characters whose spoke directly to Arthur were real, besides, maybe the judge, and the psychiatrist. Harley was in his head, his lawyer was in his head (he had two lawyers, and both of them disappeared when he said he wanted to fire his lawyer. In the real world people just saw on fire the other guy). The guards who talk to him as well as the other inmate who liked him were in his head. The clue was that the singing represented something that wasn’t real, and the giveaway was when the guard started, singing himself, along with the backing track that’s supposedly going on in Arthur’s head. The guard was in his head too.
There’s one scene where Harley and Arthur’s lawyer are arguing in front of the press. This happened inside of jokers head. This is the voice in his head, telling him to lean into the madness, with the rational voice in his head, trying to talk him down. It was like the angel and devil on his shoulders.
It’s very cleverly done. You think “oh this character must be real because they’re talking to another character.” Both characters weren’t real.
I'm sorry I see what they're trying to do. I loved the first movie but this second one was hard to watch especially during the singing. This was a horrible ( Joker ) movie and in the same sentence it was a good movie though. It was depressing AF too. 😂 They should have done anything else.
If he would've fought back at anytime... It would've been better. But that ever happened
Man, you guys get a lot of hate, but I love how engaging this channel is. Keep up the good work!
Ryan… Thank you for actually understanding this film. So many people are disappointed and I feel they are just missing the point. I thought it was equally impactful as the first film. It completes the thought from the first film. Cheers!
Screencrush has the same take I had, Harley is the bad guy. Personally I loved the movie
I would love to see her leading the new joker gang over what we got 😢
Most people forget that joker 1 and 2 are loosely based on the DC joker. Arthur is mentally ill, and thought he was joker.
Yep, I actually questions how many of these superhero fans actually read the comics.
This video is a mountain of unique connections and interpretations most people aren’t even trying to make with this movie rn. Excellent work gang
Thanks for agreeing with me. I felt crazy to have loved the movie. The music was a bit over the top but I loved everything in it. I loved the first movie because Arthur was failed by Gotham, How on earth do you let a child go back to their abuser? I loved the second movie, because Gotham failed Arthur again. How on earth can our protectors break us like that. How dare the rich make the experience of Arthur into a movement that's just utter chaos? Arthur's Joker persona was meant just for his mind, not to glamorize as an anti-government sentiment.
Bro... saw it last night in IMAX... this film was a deep dive in to the demented brain of HQ and the fractured mind of AF. This was a brilliant film and crafty put together.
@@John-l4u4p And a great tie into the Dark Knight Joker
I agree, someone who gets it!
@@johngallagher72 It cant be a tie in to Dark Knight Joker because it's not the same universe
No..... Its like fight club.
He says he is not the joker. She leaves him. He has a visitor (her) he kills the version of himself she didn't want. He cuts himself and creates the version of joker we all know.
So, what I’m hearing a lot is “I liked it because…” and then goes into some random theory they made up in their heads, or “I liked the movie because Lady Gaga has a great singing voice”. No actual redeeming quality on the movie, just speculation. The problem here is that they did a bait and switch. They went “Joker and Harley” and then went “oh no! It’s Never-Was Joker and Lee! Yall were just wrong!” Which is major gaslighting.
Exactly! I feel like I watched something completely different than some people. The movie just isn’t good
Maybe that it splits reality so much for it's viewers is what makes it great... Maybe you didn't get it😅😁
@@KristinaMaca8 and here we go! The classic “you just didn’t get it” reply. If thousands and thousands of people say it was bad and it was because “they didn’t get it”, then that means the director did a shit job because he made a movie just for himself. Great work!
@@twothirtyfours bingo 🎯
It's a geat movie! You have to look at the bigger picture when watching this movie; who is it about, what is he like, what is his whole life like, why music? Because it follows the story and completes it more smoothly than ordinary dialogue could, and at the end of the day this is a shared madness/delusion. It definitely doesn't deserve the hate It's gotten
@@GM-we7nl All the hate the movie is getting proves you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.
Well the movie is bombing. So all of u are wrong esp SC.
I think the ending just explains that the Joker is not a person but an idea and that's how the Joker lives on.
I guess it's okay that someone likes this trash, but I think this is the point. If you don't take the trash out you will eventually eat sh*t.
Great conversation! I'm glad people appreciated it. I thought it was perfect for what they were going for. I would also liken Lee's fascination of Joker to the character of Duchess Josiana in The Man Who Laughs. She tries to seduce and manipulate Gwynplaine who develops an affection for her until he comes to understand her only interest was fascination and gawking at his condition and celebrity.
In JOKER Todd wanted to make a homage to Taxi Driver and King of Comedy. In this JOKER FAD he makes a depressing, dark and twisted homage to La La Land
Yes
This video and these comments 10/10. I was a bit disappointed when I left the theater, but y’all’s commentary was insightful! I still think it felt cramped between the excessive music, but overall a decent movie.
I enjoyed the film, i'm glad I went and saw it.
I don't think Lee (Harley) ever really existed. I think the only time she was real was when Arthur initially passed that by the music room. She popped out and did the same motion he envisioned his neighbor doing before he started seeing her everywhere but she was never really there. He split himself into a whole nother character, Harley.
Joker 2 Edging explained
I thought that Joker: Folie a Deux was really good and an interesting movie that didn't care if you liked it or not. Loved it
Of all the song and dance numbers this movie had, how did "I started a Joke" not make the cut.
Honestly the moment they showed the guy who would “become the joker” i knew that he was gonna be the “real joker” they showed him for no reason 😂😂
Amazing how critics and fans hate this film equally
The issue with the first film is that it wanted to provide commentary on how society pushed the poor and downtrodden to madness but also reveled in and played in the Joker aesthetic. It made the idea of Arthur Fleck becoming the Joker “cool” to audiences.
Now, in the second film, Phillips tries to reverse track and condemn the viewer for thinking the Joker is “cool.” But then he ends the movie with an inmate being inspired by and taking up the mantle of the Joker because you could say he thinks the Joker is “cool.” Huh????
I was here before they fixed "Enging" to "Ending" in the title
@@CharlesLalonde-x9i same, it’s been a wild ride
How is somebody else's typo the most interesting thing about YOU?
@similaritiesendhere I don't really jump in RUclips comment sections and tell my life story. I usually comment something related to the video or subject matter of the video. Kinda feels like the point of these comment sections. To comment on the video, not brag about myself. I mean I could go on and on about the fact that I own my own house, 2 vehicles, I have 2 jobs, a loving son and beautiful wife, I used to be a pornstar so I've been with beautiful women, I'm not in debt, and I'm not even 30 yet.... but this doesn't seem like the appropriate place to speak about myself. Nor did anybody ask me about myself. So I'm going to do like a normal person, and comment on the video. But thanks for being a dick for no exact reason. I'm sure everybody in your life really appreciates when you do that to them.
@@CharlesLalonde-x9i The first typo is 150 years old, bro. You saw one and felt special.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned “The Catcher In The Rye” when talking about this movie.
here to say that the film was a brilliant head-flip on the first one (which wasn't even a classic comic book movie to begin with). not sure why people expected a classic comic book movie sequel given that...........
8:45 That’s not his shadow. It’s actually Bigger Joker, from the film Bigger Joker.
Screencrush love everything 🙄
He doesn't like a lot of things? Wdym? Ex. Venom
I thought the movie was really good.
The acting was great. The setting was really dark and It was a very sad story actually.
The story had some good twists and it seemed like a meaningful.
I went into the movie after hearing the bad reviews so I had low expectations.
I came out thinking it was very good.
Some of the singing seemed awkward but overall I thought the movie was very good.
Thank you this is the best review I have seen.
Thank you Screen Crush! For always studying and deciphering the actual script, themes and characters. NewRockstars couldn’t hold a candle in that department. Ryan is too smart and dedicated ✊🏾
Shouldn’t have been Joker if it’s just about a depressed man that wants to be seen 😂 This movie was worse than the last Antman
I highly doubt that. Antman Quantum Dump made my wife refuse to watch any future MCU movies with me.
I love this channel and this comment isn’t about this video in particular it’s about the people of todays age but it’s not a movie or show that comes out that people don’t find something to complain about it’s crazy if I ran Hollywood and the the whole movie industry I would just shut everything down because I would be tired of people saying they don’t like everything that’s put out it’s so weird I’m not sure what’s wrong with people now days
I know you didn’t really pick a side but this channel is starting to feel like a “the fans/masses are wrong for having a negative opinion” and “it’s your fault for not understanding the creative constructs this media has to offer you dumb dumb”
I’ve found colton to be my literal opposite in terms of what I like versus what he likes. That’s okay and I’m glad that there is variety in reviews.
It’s just that sometimes I feel like this channel is trying their hand at being controversial and it feels not very genuine.
Still watch every video. Your breakdowns are dope.
They side with the studio who gives them free previews, access, and pays their bills every time. No matter what the audience is saying.
Sad to see them sell out like this.
Strong disagree. 90% of the time, I agree wholeheartedly with SC's take. Colton seems to be the writer I agree with most. I actually think they do a good job of offering the criticisms even when they seem to like something. I dunno. Have you considered that maybe it is just you?
@@therealmarkg171Just because people have a different opinion than you doesn't mean theres a conspiracy
They filmed this before the movie was released to general audiences. They're not calling the "fans" dumb for having a negative opinion. They didn't know what the audience reaction to this movie was
@@wbennin could be
I'm hearing ppl are walking out of the theater 😮😮😮
I like the idea of spinning the tables & having Harley be the villain against Joker, I just don't think the movie went far enough with it. There was a lot of great ideas in this movie, but most of them just didn't go far enough.
Yes the execution was off
I loved the movie. For me, it really embodied the loss of control in Arthur's life from both his incarceration and his mental state. At almost no point in the movie is Arthur the driving force of the plot and when he is, he faces dire consequences. Things just happen to Arthur for no real reason, and that's life. In the first movie, Arthur could take control of his life with violence, but this movie really seems to condemn that and turn it towards him.
The movie never gives you what you want. You want some message about society, you want spectacle, you want resolution, but you get none. You get what you deserve.
Colton looked like he was getting grounded by his parents right at the start of summer vacation the entire time Matt was talking.
There is no valid explanation for this treachery. There is no need to pretend you have to look so much deeper into the premise. Neither movie should be named Joker. Because the only joke is on the audience.
First time I really disagree with you guys. Remove every "I think" and "I feel that" from this and review the movie as is. The movie that is presented had a mess of a plot; told instead of showed much or the interesting society commentary; and every character acted randomly. That might work if it was just from Authors POV; But this movie wasn't. The trial was televised, why? Plot. The judge allowed anything to go in trail, Harley was able to literally do whatever the plot needed her to do, including talking to the press and getting VIP seats at a trail, and walk around a crimal phyc ward with no issues. And no development with Arthur's character. He started as a depressed mentally ill Patient, And dies as a depressed mentally ill patient. The musical numbers did nothing and, where the least of this movies issues. Seriously, review the movie that is on screen first, then talk about how it made you feel.
Of course he likes it
This enlightened me lol. Honestly thanks for the take as it makes more sense now
Colton is looking like Edward from full metal and I think it’s on purpose
I just saw the movie. I loved it better than the first movie. This one was also more of a musical. I saw the first movie as more of commentary about what this second movie is expanding on. Both movies seem to point out the reaction of the mob based on a fantasy.
This movie was engrossing from start to finish. When Arthur confessed to his crimes dressed as joker, in his quiet depressed Arthur voice, it was a very powerful scene, and seemed like Arthur's redemption. I never felt the first joker was The joker, so glad to see he isn't.
Is it bad
Yes
It sucked
Thank you. I agree, this movie is being criticized way too harshly.
It’s crazy how you guys hated secret invasion but stick up for this dog shit of a movie lol
Your explanation of this movie confirms that I’m not delusional about the meaning of this movie LOL. Because I tried having this conversation on Reddit and those clowns DO. NOT. GET. IT.
I agree with Matt Singer's points on this seemingly putting the first films and its viewers on trial, I think the audience was the real joke of the film. It's like I was being punished for liking the first film when trying to get into this one, it's like the film intentionally deconstructs the point of the first film and cheapens it in every way. What was the point of following Arthur's journey into madness and embracing his mental illness from the corrupt society, when he ultimately doesn't even become the "real" Joker? Having Arthur be a steppingstone for the "real" Joker ultimately makes his character pointless.
Okay but don’t make me pay for that bullshit