@@trifectakush Me too! I was wondering the exact same thing within the first 30 mins 😂 I think people are overreacting with the hate, I’m gonna rewatch it too just to support. Loved it.
Unfortunately I don't think that is true, our culture is too postmodern and hyper stimulating to revisit things like that. We have lost the capacity to do that under the weight of all the outrage and fragmentation.
@@Deivede73 of course, he had depression, but him becoming the joker after his findings about his mother and the abuse he endured as a child was what led him to euthanize her, ideate and plan his suicide the way we saw it, which was what was shown to us in the rehearsing for the Murray show both in his apartment and right before coming onstage, the dance on those stairs was the dance of disinhibition of life, nihilism and self destruction, he was dancing towards his death, and that's really what joker represented for Arthur originally, before the plans changed of course
Wonderful review. I will continue to defend this movie, because as painful as it was to watch, it was the best movie I have seen so far in this year, and I am convinced, as time goes by, people will start to appreciate it.
I have been watching alot of videos on this movie as to see what the general reception is and it's to my surprise that you are the first to not completely dog on the film. Thank you for sharing your veiw. There is a quote from an anime that I keep in my head circulating as much as possible "closed minded people will always hate what they don't understand". From this video, I see/believe that you have taken a step into the world of trying to/successfully understanding what this movie is trying to portray and it is very warming to see a take that isn't completely negative. I hope you have a wonderful day, I look forward to seeing more content from you and your open mind ❤. Take care everyone.
Damien Walter called it "radical cinema" and also gave it this positive, thoughtful review: "Many of the one-star ratings for Joker Folie Adieux are angry that Stephanie Germanotta isn't as hot as Margo Robie. Robbie's Harley Quinn is one of the all-time great sex fantasies up there with chain mail bikini Leia; super-villain as porn star. Stephanie Germanotta and her Lady Gaga Alter Ego laughs at these male sex fantasies about women; her Harley Quinn is a depiction of what the real women under the makeup of our hyper sexualized fantasies are actually like and nothing makes us angrier than having our fantasies shown up as cheap. We've been living on a diet of force-fed fantasy for 20 years or more: fantasies of muscular men in Spandex and hot babes fighting evil wearing only a swimsuit, fantasies of boy Wizards, Wars Among the Stars, Games of Thrones, post apocalypses and blue alien avatars computer-generated imagery made it possible to put our wildest fantasies on our screens and we've been gorging on fantasy ever since then along came Todd Phillips and Joaquin Phoenix to smuggle into a superhero franchise at the heart of our fantasies a nugget of pure anti-fantasy! The Joker movies aren't realism; sadly, the fate of the mentally ill in our society is sadder even than the life of Arthur Fleck. Instead, Joker and its sequel are stories about fantasy; how fantasy holds us in a powerful grip, and the cost of living in our fantasies, and like the collision of matter and antimatter, the collision of our fantasy-soaked culture with this anti-fantasy movie is explosive: Joker isn't a Joker movie! Gen Xers and Millennials who remember vertigo Comics will know what Joker is: the Vertigo Comics imprint was where DC let its best creators mess with its IP to remake Batman, Superman and the rest of the pantheon. Vertigo was formed after the success first of Alan Moore's Watchmen 1985, Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns 1986, and Alan Moore's The Killing Joke 1988. Moore, Miller, Grant, Morrison, Neil Gaiman, Warren Ellis, and a cast of writers under editor Burger rewrote the DC Pantheon and created new characters. Many of the best Vertigo-style comics deconstructed the fantasies of superhero comics into sophisticated anti-fantasies that confronted readers with what our fantasies really are. The second group of one-star reviews for The Joker movies are fanboys of Zack Snider enraged or just confused that the Joker doesn't continue the absurd power fantasies of his reign over DC. The first Joker movie was the cinematic equivalent of a Vertigo comic; it was Todd Phillips and Joaquin Phoenix rewriting The Joker archetype as an indie Art House homage to Scorsese's taxi driver with a superhero budget that just happens to be called Joker. It’s a movie about madness and civilization. Madness is the for false punishment of a false solution but by its own virtue it brings to light the real problem which can then be truly resolved. Madness and Civilization by Michelle Fuko is a history of how our society treats the insane. Fuko argues that madness and insanity are categories imposed by society on those at the bottom of society in an act we now commonly call othering. The power structures of civilization are predatory, Fuko's critique argues because they help us deny our own role in this predatory system; we accept a fictional narrative in which the damaged victims of the system are cast as insane. Arthur Fleck is the lowest victim of civilization: an orphan adopted and then abused; he has no status, so fantasizes being adored by a chat show audience; he is not loved so fantasizes a lover; he has no power, so fantasizes killing, which is a fantasy he then acts out. As Fuko argues, Arthur’s fantasies are a false solution that offer no help with the reality of his plight but calling the fantasies of the victim madness is also a false punishment. The first Joker movie is a carefully balanced dialectic between the forces of civilization and the victims of madness; it's deliberately uncertain whether Fleck is a victim to be pitied or a monster to be hated. Joker then goes a step further in its dialectic between madness and civilization Athur’s fantasies not only bring to light his real problems but begin to give Fleck real status and power as he adopts the fantasy persona of Joker that in the Joker sequel will also give him the fantasy of love as folie adieux dives deeper into the sick fantasies of our civilization. As Batman has become an ever-more hilarious parade of good actors putting on a silly costume and cashing a paycheck, Joker is a role that great actors actually want to play: Jack Nicholson's makeup smeared mafiosa, Mark Hamill's shrieking sociopath and of course Heath Ledger’s seminal turn in The Dark Knight, all laid the groundwork for Joaquin Phoenix, the greatest actor of our generation to make Joker into his kind of story. Phoenix is the face of the male victim; the little man broken by the world who hears the lyrics prison blues and thinks “that's me”. The Joker has become more and more the star of the Batman mythos as we've started to realize that billionaire industrialists with delusions of grandiosity might not be the heroes we're looking for (looking at you, Elon Muck) Batman has always been fighting not just crime but the criminally insane, and as we begin to deconstruct the fantasy of insanity used to other civilization's victims, Batman looks less like a hero standing against crime and more like a vigilante “hammer of justice” coming down on the weak and downtrodden and the Joker looks more and more like the rage, anger, violence and destruction of the downtrodden when they finally stand up! The third category of one-star reviews for The Joker movies are people who dismiss them as incel movies. You get the distinct impression these people haven't seen the movies but are simply repeating talking points from the many think pieces attacking the movies on this basis at a time of skyrocketing social inequality it must be comforting for some people to dismiss all the young men alienated from the system and stuck in low paid wage labor with the fantasy that they are all incels. “We have a perfect name for fantasy realized it's called nightmare.” --- Slavoj Zizek Arthur Fleck is finally allowed a moment of true heroism at the finale of Folie Adieux: Fleck's complex fantasies and his Joker persona have brought him the status and power he dreamed of, and Fleck can now see that his fantasies will bring him much much more. Fleck has encountered what the psychoanalyst Jack Lan called the symbolic order of civilization: that web of laws, institutions, status-structures and hierarchies that exist only symbolically by our communal agreement. Fleck has discovered that the symbolic order of civilization can be reshaped by his fantasy! His Joker persona strikes the symbolic order in all its weakest places and threatens to shatter it. Given a public platform at his own trial, Joker has the power to incite the revolution of the downtrodden masses that could bring the civilization of Gotham crashing down; but Fleck finds the moral courage to let go of Joker and the power his fantasy can grant him, and in that moment becomes a better human than most of those who sit in judgment over him. He admits: “It was all just a fantasy; there is no Joker.” but Arthur’s choice is also driven by the nightmare that awaits anyone unfortunate enough to actually realize their fantasy. In “the plague of fantasies” the philosopher Slavoj Zizek catalogues the nightmarish collaborative fantasy that is modern capitalist civilization. Arthur’s fantasies have manifested in what Zizek calls “The Impossible Gaze”: in the age of mass media we fantasize ourselves through the Gaze of a mediated audience: sports, reality-TV, chat shows. In becoming Joker, Arthur Fleck discovers that the crowd who cheer him turn out to be a crazed mob, the legal system that judges Joker is revealed to be just public theater, the media to be the prison and its guards. The reality of the “impossible gaze” he fantasized is a living nightmare, and the manic-pixie dream-girl that Arthur Fleck had always dreamed of finding turns out to be just another human playing out her own fantasy. She tells him: “We're not going away,Arthur; all we had was the fantasy, and you gave up.” Stephanie Germanotta might be the only actor who could go toe-to-toe with Joaquin Phoenix in the depiction of insanity and victimhood intertwined. Lady Gaga is a deconstruction of the male gaze, displaying all the symbols of the male sexual fantasy, then selectively amping them up to a repulsive absurdity. Germanotta’s Harley Quinn is a performative fantasy put on just for Arthur Fleck. When we first meet her the fantasy girl in the insane asylum is a constructed persona designed to seduce Joker the real woman behind the fantasy is by turns broken, manipulative, lost, powerful, genuinely insane, and coldly realistic. The reason men so easily accept simplified fantasies of femininity is because the real human behind them is always unknowably complex. Joker and its sequel are going to be two of the most hated superhero franchise movies for a long time to come. Audiences fat on our decades-long feast of CGI fantasies are never going to welcome the bitter taste of reality on our plate, but for anyone ready to think critically about the theme of fantasy itself, Joker and Folie Adieux are masterpieces of radical cinema and a timely warning that civilizations which cannot face the madness of our conjoined fantasies will be overwhelmed by them."
@erdelegy: You misspelled the Clinton’s, Obama, Biden, Harris and Walz. We all know you libtards are racists domestic terrorists. You hate America and Americans, and are 100% for illegal-alien-criminal-invaders.
I like your positive, philosophical review of "Joker: Folie a' Deux!" As the director Todd Phillips intended, you interpret it as a deep deconstruction of the comic book supervillain and comics fandom in an art film. The sequel continues Arthur Fleck's sympathetic Loser Archetype portrayal. It shows the grim realities of prison life, such as his police brutality, sexual assault, and stabbing, rather than him leading a prison gang and becoming a mob boss, or permanently escaping, like in most prison or gangster movies.
Yes indeed. It seems some people hate it when they don't get the same old predictable same-old action movie with a cathartic "yeah! Sock it to 'em!" payoff, or when they are expected to actually deal with symbolism and human vulnerability.
Still, you shouldn’t feel better than others for responding differently to this movie. Maybe they have the privilege to live in a fantasy world. We don’t.
@@MyMateGeorge ironically some of the aspects, that viewers had a vocal problem with, are old tropes, just not for comic book movies- seeing a main character in a prison movie get sexually assaulted and shanked is par for the course, yet in this context, it causes a kind of critical outrage, that almost seems to deny, that these kinds of things happen around us, every day. and nobody wants to see that, either.
This helped me understand the complexity of the movie. I wanted it to be a marvel, but it’s like you say much deeper after your review. I think it’s a really good movie. Thanks.
I believe Joker 2 is about Arthur Fleck, who wants to let the world know he's tired of wearing the mask of Joker no matter if someone else takes his place.
Its so amazing how even the fans of the original movie the people in real life who liked him for who they thought he was rejected Arthur when he decided he wanted to give up being Joker. The people in the real world are kicking him down just like in the movie. DAMN Todd Phillips is a genius the greatest artist of our age. Its hard to see where the movie ends and the real world begins.
So the movie is pretty much a middle finger to anyone who liked the first one. Todd Phillips really believes that we “idolized” joker? No we fucking didn’t. Everyone knew that what Arthur did in the first movie is WRONG. But we understood him because of how society just casts aside people with mental illness. THAT was the deeper meaning of the first movie. It’s a fucking character study. We care about Arthur, but the second movie literally just takes a shit on anyone who slightly cared about Arthur. I hate this movie. And I hate Todd Phillips. Pretentious wannabe film.
I have seen Joker 2 and thoroughly enjoyed it. It appears to me that it’s being slated because cinema goers are expecting another Joker movie akin to the first and they really just don’t get it!
It’s called Joker if it was a film not called Joker id love it but this film had no point and tbh if it wasn’t called Joker no one would see it so it’s a lose lose.
The best description word for this movie is "Epilogue". It's not a movie №2 or a sequel or whatever. It's the epilogue of the movie Joker, and it's (very good) written as such. A dark ending for a dark comedy.
I loved it, don't understand why it got bad reviews. Tragic Arthur Fleck, whom no one loved or wanted, The Joker on the other hand, thr alter ego, admired by many..
It’s funny me and my husband both saw it during previews and we loved it. We knew it would be divisive but we were shocked at how many people hated it. I remember a little movie that was critically panned on release too: The Empire Strikes Back. Time heals all wounds.
It was REALLY about ensuring that the "wrong kind" of people who heavily identified with the first movie, were fully alienated and forced to watch their everyman anti-hero reduced to nothing.
which is imo pretty cringe. just because people tend to identify with villains doesn't mean they "identify too much" with them. 99,99 % know he is the villain.
the whole story proves the rage joker has against the system not only in the first movie but in the dc universe, as the joker he is a god, a role model for the revolution, the people's person. and as arthur he is nobody, a random guy w severe mental problems who killed six people and no one truly cares about him, not even his alter ego, joker, or the fans who failed to understand the depth of it all.
THANK YOU for giving this Film the praise it deserves. I feel we live in a society (oh jeah, I really did that!) that just wants to see the world burn. All the critics are in it. THEY are the people that killed Arthur Fleck (TP metaphor). I just thought it was a fantastic (yet forced) sequel. Amazingly done! Thank you.
This film is shining a spotlight on who actually paid attention to the first movie and who didnt. Its also fascinating that they are reacting exactly the way Todd Phillips had the Joker supporters act in the film. It really does show that people legitimately did not get the first film and damn sure dont get this one. It isnt as good as the first movie but this film is fucking with a lot of dumbass people that im just enjoying the chaos of it all.
So the movie is pretty much a middle finger to anyone who liked the first one. Todd Phillips really believes that we “idolized” joker? No we fucking didn’t. Everyone knew that what Arthur did in the first movie is WRONG. But we understood him because of how society just casts aside people with mental illness. THAT was the deeper meaning of the first movie. It’s a fucking character study. We care about Arthur, but the second movie literally just takes a shit on anyone who slightly cared about Arthur. I hate this movie. And I hate Todd Phillips. Pretentious wannabe film.
It is a movie about Arthur Fleck, a sad Clown who for some reason is called Joker, names of DC characters appear but it is Arthur's movie, as shown in the movie, there is no Joker and no Batman in this Universe it was just Arthur trying to be the fantasy that people expected of him
Unnecessary sequel but I felt it was a logical conclusion to Arthur Fleck's sad and tragic life. I like the film's themes about sensationalism. People wanted a Joker movie but got an Arthur Fleck movie and I think that was the point. Great video and great comments.
You're the guiding light in a sea of close minded infinity world movie analysts. Love that your style uses inner wisdom guided by compassion. Incredible work on this video. Your mind is ahead of this time
I just saw _Joker: Folie à Deux_ last night. I get why many people hate it, but the joke's on them (pun intended): THEY are the Joker's followers in the film. They read only the shallowest aspect of the first film and embraced it, completely oblivious to its deeper meanings. All they saw was the Joker; their fantasy villain coming to life from the pages of their beloved comic books. They didn't see Arthur. A quick survey of the RUclips, anti-work commentariat shows that - like those followers in the film - they reject Arthur and want to kill him. The film is probably going to bomb, and they will dance on its grave, not comprehending that it was a devastating critique of them all along. To be fair, I did see one video that seemed to grasp this. Its conclusion was that the second film is a contradiction, that it doesn't understand its audience and hates it. But what the maker didn't get is that both films understood their audience perfectly - it's THEY who don't get it. It's a brilliant film, not without its faults, but beautifully made. You know, I watch these creators, the ones who bemoan the state of _Star Wars_ and Marvel, and I agree with them a good deal of the time. LucasFIlm and Marvel have been cranking out garbage of late - mostly because of plain old terrible writing, but also because they treat these properties like vehicles for social propoganda. But the _Joker_ films are different. They're not polemics (for either the Left or the Right). Rather, they are a masterful critique of our age, of the hollow posturing and hyperbolic rhetoric of both sides in the American culture wars. The haters would do well to shut up and listen, for once.
YES!! YES!! YES!! I thought I was the only one who got and understood these movies!! Bravo good sir!! It's not 'Arthur Fleck' on trial in the 2nd movie, it's the 1st movie itself! I'm willing to bet Todd Phillips is the first filmmaker ever to make a movie that grossed over 1 billion dollars and actually be pissed off about it, because it actually proved him right and made all that money for all the wrong reasons. Also, Phillips already knew how this movie would be received, as that too was predicted in the movie. Rejected by the 'fans', represented by Lee (who also speaks for all the 'Joker' followers in the movie) and killed by 'toxic fandom', represented by the inmate with Arthur at the end of the film. The parting shot is basically telling those 'fans', "I tried to say something to you twice, you didn't understand and you reacted just as predicted. Now f**k off and go watch Heath Ledger!" These two movies are absolute masterpieces!!
Well said! Thank goodness, someone who actually has the ability to understand serious and intelligent critical thinking and the ability to recognise nuance and subtlety - actually GETS it.....there is so much DAMN shallowness out there. Don’t drink the Koolaide......don’t be a follower. Please - start taking responsibility for your own actions and the very real consequences. This comment has redeemed my faith in the intelligence of the audience....well the critical thinking audience! I salute you! The Koolaide followers ARE Harley Quinn - rejecting the movie/ Arthur due to their own shallowness and inability to take responsibility for being a real human with real feelings. This is not cookie cutter Superhero movie, it’s a deep exploration of human suffering and the fight for authenticity
@@mandyclark6602 Here's something I think you'll really appreciate: 'Arthur Fleck' -- 'Fleck sounds a lot like 'flick'. 'Art' is short for 'Arthur'....'Art flick'. 🤫😀 Arthur Fleck/'Art Flick' is masquerading as a comic book character/movie for the purpose of getting attention. 🤨
My head cannon is that death of Joker was methaporical or was his psyche killing the victim personality of Arthur the "psychopath" is the real Arthur and I believe that he was SA'd by the guards that night when they beat him in the washroom them assault him took away his individuality the real him because before this he is developing and expressing the Joker as him even when faced with encounting his sexual trauma again he jokes to the guard if he will buy him a drink but after they sa him he regress into his dual personality Arthur- The Victim in order to keep him sane in a way the Arthur personality is like his inner child as we were told in the court room he was SA'd as a child so him going through the trauma again at Arkham made him put on the persona of Arthur to feel safe. See it like this if he's damned when being the Joker (his real self) then his self defense mechanism is Arthur. I more theories like the last scene of Harley wasn't real and perhaps even after the court was bombed that could have been his actual death bc he was the closest to the explosion and after the dust cleared was seemingly the only one in the court room. The guy he met with Joker make up on outside was the persona of Joker trying to keep him alive but Arthur ran to Harley to his old apartment which he confessed to her he hated his defense mechanism made him attach to Harley bc if his real self The Joker hated that apartment nothing even Harley could bring him to return I also theorize that the Harkey we see in he last scene is actually dead and committed suicide in the apartment when Arthur declared the Joker was all an act (which isn't true, the goal of the self defense mechanism personality, Arthur Fleck- The Victim, is to keep himself in line with society my evidence is when The Victim 'died' he didn't fight psychopath like how when faced with SA from the guards he at least retaliated and punch one this the victim didn't fight the psychopath but accept the role society placed on him by still trying to walk to the guards even after being stabbed, Mury's last words to Joker was essentially if your are downtrodden or victim run to cops notify them and Arthur Fleck is the one that idolize Mury while Joker is the one that pulled the trigger as he knew Mury made him weak)- I say this to say that Arthur meeting Harley again was him confront his loss of her and the Arkham "death" was the innocent part of Joker, the victim Arthur, being let go or dying by his true personality The Joker. My main evidence beside the crowd being abscence in the court is also after he confront Harley again on the stairwell the cops seemingly not only knows where he is but that he returned to the apartment, the cops wouldn't know where Arthur fled to for multiple reason including the fact there was assumed doppelgangers of Joker around Gotham dressing and wearing his make up anyone of them could have been accused they wouldnt be able to find Arthur plus Harley rented his apartment if there's a new tenant why would he go back there so the cops behind him in that scene aren't real is The Victim incarcerating himself by accepting not only was society sees him as but also what he believes what "he fucking deserves" I believe the psychopath that killed him was his true personality freeing Arthur from his slavery to the system and grief of Lossing Harley. I would if there is a third movie for us to see Arthur or in this case the fully developed Joker to have the scars on his face that he carved. And for those who this the psychopath is Ledger's Joker it's not the Gotham city in the Dark Knight is based in Chicago while the one in The Joker is said in the movie to be in New York also Thomas Wayne in the Joker looks nothing and acts nothing like the Thomas in the Nolan films unless it can be interpreted that Bruce had an idolized view of his father in the Nolan verse but that too much theory bc why would the directors of Joker 2 think that far. To conclude I believe that the psychopath that "killed" Arthur is Arthur and weither or not he died in the court bombing or is still alive Arthur Fleck- The Victim is dead. Ps. Thanks for listening to my Ted-Talk🤡
Thank you for this review! Everyone should like or dislike any film at their leisure, it is just entertainment after all. I just really dislike the new rhetoric of: this is boring, rather than: I found it boring. To me this sequel is maybe not "the" but at least "a" logical conclusion to the first one; and I usually dislike musical films. As someone in the comments pointed out: Angry fans wanted a movie about the Joker and got a movie about Arthur Fleck instead.
Right it wasn't the " worst film ever " like people said. It's just DC/Joker fan's wanted a film of Joker running around Gotham with Harley commiting crimes.
Im still gonna wait to see it on streaming. I appreciate your points and I respect the movie telling Uber fans to f themselves, but I felt it could’ve been done better. I like the end idea that Arthur’s death inspired a more dangerous Joker. One who enjoys the chaos and misery…because it’s funny. Not like Arthur’s which was out of pain and retribution.
I think your evaluation the first positive one I’ve seen I feel you saw the deeper meanings Directors often don’t tell the story the way the audience wants or expects Haven’t seen it yet but am going in open minded I liked how dark and complex the first film was
Excellent analysis. Thank goodness some people are able to think beyond the predictable, shallow, cut-and-paste, instantly-forgettable disposable fluff that makes up most Hollywood output these days. It seems lots of people wanted the fluff and were disappointed when they got something much deeper and more creative. ✌️🤡
Finally a review of the movie that doesn't just hate on it. I liked both Joker and Joker 2. I mean we didn't need another boring standard comic book movie sequel to the first one, I think this was much more interesting. I personally saw this movie as the story of two mentally ill people having a relationship from their point of view (and mostly Artur's point of view from his fantasies inside of his head) in an off-kilter point of way, which is much more interesting than a standard comic book movie.
I shall well miss Joaquin Phoenix as Arthur Fleck. His performances in both movies were absolutely brilliant. My wish is that Todd Philips can somehow resurrect Arthur Fleck and make the Joker Films a trilogy. 🙏🏼🤔
I saw someone else complaining ‘what was all the building a mountain stuff’ and I think your views reflect my own. The mountain is a system of Chaos that will envelop and tower over Gotham, the very thing that Heath’s Joker was trying to achieve in the Dark Knight however Arthur succeeded where Heath failed as his actually took root. Harley envisioned her and Arthur standing atop the mountain as the Bonnie and Clyde that so many of the fan boys wanted but systems of chaos never work. They don’t lift people up, their foundation (Arthur) is the people they destroy. At least Heath’s Joker understood Chaos by its very nature can’t be controlled and didn’t want to. Arthur is the perfect symbol created by and destroyed by chaos.
Wow! The best analysis of this movie! I thought I was alone. Thank you. Before watching it I heard only bad reactions and got ready for something awful. But I was so surprised by what I saw. For me Joker 2 wasn't boring. I understood the message and idea behind it. The more I think about the meaning, the more I'm fascinated by the movie. It's not perfect. It has flaws. But there are so many great, unique elements in it. Some music numbers weren't necessary, but some were integral to the story. I loved the solo song by Lee, when she is applying the make up. It has a great transition. Arthur is beaten down, suffering in the prison cell and the next scene is Lee singing cheerfully, celebrating her success. For her it's a game, that she loves. It makes her feel alive. She doesn't care about Arthur, she cares only about being in the spotlight with The Joker. There's a sense of threat coming from Lee. when she is singing to Arthur. She is like a deadly siren hypnotising him, enabling his delusion. It"s so apparent in the scene where Lee came to visit Arthur in prison. I really hope, that more people will come around this movie. It's a cautionary tale. It's a realistic approach to a character of Arthur. We have two movies about him and not the Joker - the genius mastermind. Arthur is a weak and sick person, who no one cared about. He was unseen, until he put on clown make up and killed somebody on TV. People put Joker on a pedestal as their symbol of freedom, but even then no one saw the man behind the mask. - Knock, knock. - Who is there? - Arthur Fleck. - Who?
Joker 2019 shows us how victims choose to be the villians. Thee is nothing any deeper then that. The joker 2 is about the day dreams of a psciopath. But of course "we dont get it" quoting a violent narcsist. Good take there.
THANK YOU!!! Finally someone else seems to get it... I have been championing this movie since watching it at the first showing of it's run and so far I have yet meet anyone else who see's it in the same light as I. Now I can point people to your breakdown, it's much more in depth of the same argument I have been making. Thank you for it. By the way, I think the 2 movies are modern masterpieces in cinema.
I respect your deconstruction and assessment of the film, however, this depiction is not as consistent with original 2019 film as you give it credit for. Arthur cannot completely disregard “Joker”, why would he go back to a state that makes him sick in the first place? It is his only escape and he makes a choice to embody that at the end of the first film. “There is no Joker - because he cannot uphold the weight of his followers’ expectations” is such a weak shift that isn’t enough to justify a change of character on such a scale.
I think you're viewing the film through superhero movie logic. The Joker that people wanted Arthur to be isn't a realistic character, and he only became the Joker in the first place because it made people acknowledge his existence. He gives his reasoning for it in the first film. It isn't like he was reborn. He is still Arthur. Even when he's using the Joker persona on the Murray Franklin show he's doing so to advocate for Arthur. Arthur is and always has been a gentle person at bottom and what he wanted most of all was to be heard and understood. But he found that he couldn't do that as Joker because all they wanted to hear and understand was the media construct about shooting people in the face and burning everything down.
I enjoyed both Joker and Folie. Rather than just remake Joker bigger with more explosions they went in a new way, with occasional brutal violence. Yes the sequel could have done with a bit of cutting, but then so did The Batman. Its ending was, for me, the only way it could have.
We’re angry at the movie, just how in the film the people are angry at the Joker. Mental illnesses and disorders come in different colors and sizes. (-I miss you Luis-)❤
The most important line was when he said “I don’t want to sing anymore.” All relationships are based on fantasy and they only work if the fantasy isn’t broken. Some people literally sing and some people ride higher when everything feels right. When you quit “singing” the relationship is dead. The joker was gutted by Harley so he wasn’t going to sing anymore and that’s why he was stabbed and replaced. If you ain’t singing someone else will.
While I think it's silly people exaggerated how bad the film was I still understand why they hated it. It's advertised as a DC/Joker film but they really showed none of that in the movie.
I am suprised that a possible redemption isnt mentioned. He confesses his sins, regrets them, and as he is dying sings a christian song. He gives a sort of prayer. To me, if no other movies are made, I think it could imply a salvation at the end.
Oh wow that's an amazing point which I totally should have mentioned! Not sure if that's what Todd Phillips was intending to convey, as he loves the ambiguity and I've heard quite a few people involved say that the ending is about the making of a new Joker. But I think this is really interesting point. I might do a follow up video. Thanks for your comment!
people don't mention it because they didn't get it in the first place, I mention this under another video, and I got replies like "what are you on about" it's like they only watched every other minute of the movie
I loved this film and believe it is an underrated masterpiece. I think one day it will be appreciated, but I think it went over the heads of a lot of people. I don't think the ending is as conclusive and straightforward as people think it is. There are so many inconsistencies about it that it leaves you thinking. One idea is that Arthur is not the "real Joker" and only inspires someone else to become the Joker. Another is that it's still just a fantasy in his head and he's in an insane asylum somewhere. Another that popped into my head was that Arthur isn't even dead. Is Arthur's killer even real or is he yet another fabrication in his mind? What happened to the seventh victim at the end of the first movie? No one in the court even mentioned her nor did Arthur even acknowledge her, which leads me to believe that it hasn't happened yet. Who was the visitor waiting for Arthur? My personal viewpoint is that Arthur killed his own ego in order to fully immerse himself into his shadow The Joker. Arthur Fleck was a man who killed out of necessity, but still retained a sense of empathy which is what allowed him to release someone like Puddles. We're left to believe that someone who let Puddles go would just kill and innocent social worker at the end? It makes no sense, only a vicious psychopath devoid of empathy would kill an innocent human being. At the end of this film, Arthur has been so degraded that he is devoid of all empathy. After being brutalized by the guards and abandoned by Leigh (likely also a fantasy) he decided to go ahead and kill Arthur Fleck entirely and succumb to his own shadow. The ending of the first movie is, in fact, the ending of the second movie. The visitor is the social worker and he kills her at the end. Remember that Joker exists entirely in a world of fantasy and cannot exist as long as Arthur Fleck is around.
Honestly that wasnt even the problem it was the fact they made the most notorious comic books villains movie a musical that was somehow boring. Which is honestly impressive with the amount of talent the cast and director has
That’s a beautiful interpretation, but I’ll say this: it is more beautiful than the movie I saw. What I saw was an epic fail in terms of narratology; there were problems everywhere, a slow pacing, underdeveloped characters, a lack of focus, musical numbers that did not help to put forward the story, and so on. I prefer your interpretation, very much focused, than the movie.
the so called 'audience' who are mad at joker 2, don't even know what the original joker, the dc joker, is actually like. they think 'ohh he must have had such a hard time, that he developed mulitple personality disorder', ' oh he must have had a really troublesome past' , 'oh the joker was always right the wholetime, the society is actually screwed '.......... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! this is what generation by generation people have gotten wrong about that og character, and this what LITERALLY every 'joker' movie ( cesar romero, heath ledger, jack nicholson, you name it ) has been always trying to remind them about....... only in their own various flavours...... He is an agent of CHAOS, he DOES NOT NEED any reason whatsoever to be bad or evil, he's just evil for the sake of being evil, the well-nurtured tussy-cushy asses of general audience who claim to be a ' fan ' of the og joker " JUST WON'T GET IT " ,that has been the point of EVERY JOKER MOVIE OR COMIC.... as said in the nolan's ' the dark knight ' - " some people just can't be reasoned with, they JUST wanna watch the world burn " ( once again NO UNDERSTANDABLE/LOGICAL reason for that whatsoever ). infact this is the reason that there IS NO ORIGIN story of the joker in the first place, he can come from literally anywhere , that's the whole point, you can NEVER point towards a particular category of upbringing/work-environment/form-of-government/society/etc and say that there can't be any evil in these conditions, evil lies in the very human nature, for no reason at all, at some or other point of time every human being will get a kick by breaking the rules, all the wrongs/bads happening to anybody is just an excuse(the people who have it all have also been seen as a criminal, and even those who had nothing). The only difference is that in reality people have the opposite side of evil too, its always a spectrum . and this is why the joker hates batman, cuz according to joker bad stuff happen to everybody and since everyone is evil inherently , to varying degrees, they can be manipulated to bring anarchy/disorder/chaos in the world, but batman refuses to be evil even when many bad things happen to him..... and so did everyone on the ship in the last scene in the nolan's dark knight, proving nolan's ( or any director's) point that joker doesn't cares about what happened to you or not, how much good you have done or what crimes you have done, to him evryone could be manipulated to the verge or the point of absolute madness and chaos, but only joker thinks that way not evryone.....in reality everybody has sympathy too......... and in todd philip's joker duology he used that very quality of sympathy of the audience against them, and showed them that if there actually could have been a dc joker in real life (i highly doubt its biologically possible since either the person would be just a zombie, or would have some sort of sympathy i.e. A PAST OR A REASON for doing that stuff........ they may not admit it, but they will have, once again if they aren't completely deranged else in that case they won't be having the super manipulative powers of joker....... ) then how much would it be easy for him to manipulate you into thinking that he is the good guy, and ANARCHY/CHAOS etc is the greater good...... the very last scene of joker 2 proves this point, 'you get what you fuckin deserve', by the one who is supposedly and allegedly the real joker - you think the world is full of candies and nuts, wanna be the guy with the big heart, here i hope you have a big gut too...... stab-stab-stab....... 'to joker everyone's evil' else he will show to them that evil does exists..... (except in the last scene of nolan's dark knight, a perfect ending too, not everyone's evil, and you can't do shit to prove elsewise either), that inmate was the real joker, he didn't needed a sobby , sad, " ahh! the corruption", "ahh! the people " kind of backstory to stab arthur, unlike arthur, the inmate is just a complete maniac, who is evil just for the sake of it.... and that's why joker 2 is exactly on point, here the real og joker is the audience itself , exactly - nothing funny about it, " how won't arthur become the joker, why does the movie undoes the 1st movie, you know what - the joker 2 gets what it fuckin deserve, wanna be the guy with the big heart hope you got big wallet tooo since this is definitely gonna be a flop/disaster " the joker is the characterization of that very evil that is inherent in every single being, its just exagerrated to the point where its shown to become absolutely chaotic (thus can't exist in real life).......
I thought the first one was definitely better. But people overlook the deeper theme of you reap what you sow. As the phrase goes: when fighting monsters do not become a monster.
Finally!! I’ve been thinking it this whole time, the wast majority of the audience completely missed the point. The people who call this movie a miss, boring and bad are having the same reaction as the people in the movie who were idolising Joker and didn’t care about or see Arthur Fleck. In the end Arthur dies by the hands of his own once fan, and in such a pitiful way, to drive home the point and wrap up the theme of his life. It’s so beautifully and tragically poetic, this is a perfect sequel and ending of the story, and an outstanding movie through and through!!🫡
I like how you connect themes of movies to The Bible in some sense. Great dissection, I had the same thought after I saw Joker 2 as well, the ending yet controversial to most I found it very justifiable in a sense. It kinda felt like a massive intention by Todd Phillips to just connect the movie to the audience watching it and really exposing two different crowds who enjoyed the first Joker for opposite reasons.
The joker is a MKULTRA project. ( Funded by Wayne industries). Arthur was groomed to potentially become "the joker"... Arthur wasn't up for the task so they found another candidate (fake Heath) to take up that joker role... Lee (wealthy family) is Arthur's HANDLER. Brought in to active that joker inside Arthur's trauma. Music cues are triggers. ... She dangled love in front of Arthur if only he becomes this agent of chaos... Choosing Arthur as candidate #1 is a total failure... Not even bombing the courthouse and allowing him to escape works. (Who bombed the court house?) Random joker fans ? Or professional contractors. (Wayne industries contractors?) Arthur to far gone into the incel world so they chose a rrun of the mill psychopath (fake Heath) ... I'm conclusion: joker is a MKULTRA program. Funded by Wayne industries and friends. Why? Destabilize Gotham. Private prison, private police contracts .... Eventually mr. Wayne becomes a victim to this program. (Program PAL).... IRONICALLY the same friends that worked on the joker program created the necce
So Thomas Wayne is an anarcho-capitalist. Makes sense why his son goes around beating up the mentally insane instead of running for office and improving things. He has enough money to be completely independant.
As someone with the same life, split personnality, the first movie hurt me and impacted me so much it gave me Arthur and Joker alters. I feel and still go through the same as him. For me, no matter the movie or else, Joker was always an alter. I see it, all the time. No matter the meaning of the end, cant.
No . . . I would agree with you on the meaning if Todd was actually interested in snapping the super fans out of their delusion, but he is only interested in making fun of them. There would be more of a divide than just a few people getting it and the rest hating it (it's ranking in the low 30s right now on the review sites.) One RUclips critic dug up an interview of Phillips for The Joker and he only made a Joker film because the studio wanted a Joker film and he wanted to make a movie about someone like Arthur Fleck, but couldn't sell it because Hollywood doesn't like to take chances on something that might not work at all. There was a way to do this that would have fleshed it out for people who needed to be sold on the argument that they shouldn't hero worship someone who isn't a hero. Fleck or Joker . . . both are and will always be villians. . . . and they wanted to be villians. Ok . . . BUT Phillips wrote the script for Joker in the traditional sense, Deux was put together in pieces. They would (Phoenix and Phillips) would write what they were going to shoot for the next few scenes, they would shoot it, and then they would work on the next part of the script- rinse, repeat. I'm sure your dive of the movie was intentional because you picked it up, but if you're going to let down an audience, be careful how you do it and what you're hoping for- you just might get it. I was okay with The Joker, and maybe if I watch Deux a couple of more times, maybe I'll be ok with it too. Right now, as someone who likes to write, I would never intentionally write an 'f*#% you' story for people just 'cause you know- 'f*#% you' (let's not deny it- that's how a lot of moviegoers felt like when watching this sequel.) I simply just wouldn't write a sequel to begin with.
I see both sides of the coin with J2. Some of the scenes were just plain annoying and unnecessary. I don't think there should have been as many musical elements in it. But if you can get past that, it's where a logical sequel would end. I found it very depressing at times (in a good way). Don't think Harvey Dent needed to be in it tbh (unless he ends up having son called Harvey Dent Jr later on). The ending is the fly in the ointment. If we are led to believe that Fleck's killer is Heath Ledger's Joker, then it doesn't explain how he's barely aged in the Dark Knight, baring in mind J2 took place in the early-mid 1980's. Either way though, it clearly has created a division, with far more people hating it than liking it. I don't like musical films (apart from Wizzard of Oz). So a fair few scenes were cringeworthy for me. JP was again the stand out performance but Gaga did OK too. J1 was a better film overall. J2 felt like an unnecessary tragic gamble.
The Joker is a Dionysian figure while Batman is Apollonian. Jack Nicholson's Joker played Prince's Partyman while disfiguring paintings. The ending is an homage. It's not meant to be Heath Ledger's Joker. It can be viewed as meaning that the Joker persona is not tied to one person. Or it's an answer to people who said, "Arthur is 30 years older than Bruce, how are they going to fight?"
Maybe. But it’s hard to ignore the similarities Heath and the young man in the final scene shared, bearing in mind nearly everyone knows the Joker from dark knight. They could’ve hire any young male for the role. They could’ve scrapped the face cutting in the background and they could’ve told him to laugh differently. But they didn’t. So it kinda sh!ts on 2 films for the price of one in a lot of DC fan’s eyes. Not an avid DC fan myself but can understand any frustration of continuity such fans would have… and unfortunately people are now jumping on the hate bandwagon, which I don’t think the film deserves at all. I was more moved by J2 than I was J1. The mirror held up to society this time showed the consequences of such fantasies carried out in the first movie. Whether they are truly real world consequences remains debatable, as not all punishments are the same around the world. I would assume it’s feasible for a mentally ill person charged with multiple murders could be put on death row? (not the case in western Europe anymore). J2 was a film about the tragic downfall of Arthur Fleck. That’s why it hurts. It’s why ultimately it’s a clever movie. It just needed a few tweaks to make it a perfect antidote to J1 though imo. Doesn’t deserve the amount of hate it’s getting tbh.
My issue is, it is a product meant to bring about a trilogy or so I thought, the director did not want to continue I get it, good movie, surprising shit, but, I did want to see this weird version grow into what would have been, connected to the penguin series and the batman, not a fan boy but, indeed wanted to get that, hearing that WB and the DC ppl want to go back to their Canon and this is not to be, well, big tease for us. But certainly very good performances, artistry, just disappointed a bit
Joker 1 and 2 is pretty much filmed the same way Kill Bill 1 and 2 were filmed. The first film contains most of all the violence of the story while the second film has little to no death but instead a fleshing out of the story and its filmed in a completely different style. Both films in both franchises feel like 2 totally different films and I think its the only way to appreciate these kinds of movies.
I’m glad I’m not alone at seeing the genius this Director made!! And at the same time same screw you WB I know this wasn’t you want you wanted i’m out hopefully u make some money!! But I’m out !! felt like a joke 🎉😂😂😂😂😂💙💙
Excellent, poignant and summed up the movie well. While many have written it off, perhaps down the line people can reappraise it and realize how much this film has to say about human nature.
The most shocking scene was the one when we were spoon fed the reality of mental illnesses. Anybody that knows, knows… how brilliantly horrible the differences between a psychopath and a sociopath are. The line: -stop singing… use words- just so to the point.
Finally a good thorough analysis of these two movies. I haven't seen either of them. But I have seen tons of reviews claiming the first was great and the e second was a disaster. And then some thrashing of Robert de Niro thrown in as well.
What a cynical analysis. I don’t understand people that get off on tragedy. This is a movie about a pre established character and for the protagonist of the film to become an npc in his own movie is total and complete bullshit. Arthur has to accept the Joker persona or the whole thing falls flat. There’s no arc. It’s just 2 hours of a guy getting his ass kicked.
I’m gonna be honest I actually liked and thought it was a good movie. Tried not to listen to what other people thought but I still knew lots of people didn’t like the idea or how it was.
Describing the world is a thing even a child can do but to understand why the city is as described that’s a start of an intellect and a thinker I suggest and recommend you start on that journey
To be honest, I've always thought it was incredibly stupid when creators got upset because "the audience didn't understand their work the way they, the creators, THINK we, the audience, should understand it." The truth is that every work of art, once exposed to the world, ceases to be the property of the creator, takes on a life of its own and receives interpretations from the audience that often differ from those of the creator of the work (something that is natural, since different people have different perspectives). C'est la vie. Therefore, getting upset about this is whining and, in the case of people who want to indoctrinate the public, it also indicates a lack of character.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Finally someone who actually paid attention to what they're watching. Great analysis.
I believe the genius in this will be recognized as time goes on
I really hope it ends up getting the recognition it deserves. This was an amazing film
Am hoping that too
I loved it. Going to re watch on Sunday. I was an hour into the movie wondering what everyone was complaining about 😂
@@trifectakush Me too! I was wondering the exact same thing within the first 30 mins 😂 I think people are overreacting with the hate, I’m gonna rewatch it too just to support. Loved it.
Unfortunately I don't think that is true, our culture is too postmodern and hyper stimulating to revisit things like that. We have lost the capacity to do that under the weight of all the outrage and fragmentation.
People who like joker 2:
"You wouldn't get it"
👏👏👏😊
?
funnily enough, that's what Arthur said at the end of Joker 1
I watched so many reviews of this movie since it came out and your breakdown has got to be one of the best ones I’ve seen!
“I just hope my death makes more sense than my life”
CENTS
and it certainly did, how tragic
He wanted to kill himself from the beginning. He becoming the joker didnt really changed that
In my fantasy I would be like the Phoenix?
@@Deivede73 of course, he had depression, but him becoming the joker after his findings about his mother and the abuse he endured as a child was what led him to euthanize her, ideate and plan his suicide the way we saw it, which was what was shown to us in the rehearsing for the Murray show both in his apartment and right before coming onstage, the dance on those stairs was the dance of disinhibition of life, nihilism and self destruction, he was dancing towards his death, and that's really what joker represented for Arthur originally, before the plans changed of course
I like the fact that the joker's first victim was actually Arthur Fleck himself
and when arthur realized it, it was too late
As shown in the cartoon prologue of the movie
@@TheShrouded ye
Wonderful review. I will continue to defend this movie, because as painful as it was to watch, it was the best movie I have seen so far in this year, and I am convinced, as time goes by, people will start to appreciate it.
I have been watching alot of videos on this movie as to see what the general reception is and it's to my surprise that you are the first to not completely dog on the film. Thank you for sharing your veiw.
There is a quote from an anime that I keep in my head circulating as much as possible "closed minded people will always hate what they don't understand". From this video, I see/believe that you have taken a step into the world of trying to/successfully understanding what this movie is trying to portray and it is very warming to see a take that isn't completely negative.
I hope you have a wonderful day, I look forward to seeing more content from you and your open mind ❤.
Take care everyone.
Damien Walter called it "radical cinema" and also gave it this positive, thoughtful review: "Many of the one-star ratings for Joker
Folie Adieux are angry that Stephanie
Germanotta isn't as hot as Margo Robie.
Robbie's Harley Quinn is one of the
all-time great sex fantasies up there
with chain mail bikini Leia; super-villain as porn star. Stephanie Germanotta and
her Lady Gaga Alter Ego laughs at these
male sex fantasies about women; her
Harley Quinn is a depiction of what the
real women under the makeup of our hyper
sexualized fantasies are actually like
and nothing makes us angrier than having
our fantasies shown up as
cheap. We've been living on a diet of
force-fed fantasy for 20 years or more:
fantasies of muscular men in Spandex and
hot babes fighting evil wearing only a
swimsuit, fantasies of boy Wizards, Wars
Among the Stars, Games of Thrones, post
apocalypses and blue alien avatars
computer-generated imagery made it
possible to put our wildest fantasies on
our screens and we've been gorging on
fantasy ever since then along came Todd
Phillips and Joaquin Phoenix to smuggle
into a superhero franchise at the heart
of our fantasies a nugget of pure anti-fantasy! The Joker movies aren't realism;
sadly, the fate of the mentally ill in
our society is sadder even than the life
of Arthur Fleck. Instead, Joker and its
sequel are stories about fantasy; how
fantasy holds us in a powerful grip, and
the cost of living in our fantasies, and
like the collision of matter and
antimatter, the collision of our fantasy-soaked culture with this anti-fantasy
movie is explosive: Joker isn't a Joker
movie! Gen Xers and Millennials who
remember vertigo Comics will know what
Joker is: the Vertigo Comics imprint was
where DC let its best creators mess with
its IP to remake Batman, Superman and
the rest of the pantheon. Vertigo was
formed after the success first of Alan
Moore's Watchmen 1985, Frank Miller's The
Dark Knight Returns 1986, and Alan
Moore's The Killing Joke 1988. Moore,
Miller, Grant, Morrison, Neil Gaiman,
Warren Ellis, and a cast of writers
under editor Burger rewrote the DC
Pantheon and created new characters. Many
of the best Vertigo-style comics
deconstructed the fantasies of superhero
comics into sophisticated anti-fantasies
that confronted readers with what our
fantasies really
are. The second group of one-star reviews
for The Joker movies are fanboys of Zack
Snider enraged or just confused that the
Joker doesn't continue the absurd power
fantasies of his reign over DC. The first
Joker movie was the cinematic equivalent
of a Vertigo comic; it was Todd Phillips
and Joaquin Phoenix rewriting The Joker
archetype as an indie Art House homage
to Scorsese's taxi driver with a superhero
budget that just happens to be called
Joker. It’s a movie about madness and
civilization. Madness is the for false
punishment of a false solution but by
its own virtue it brings to light the
real problem which can then be truly
resolved. Madness and Civilization by
Michelle Fuko is a history of how our
society treats the insane. Fuko argues
that madness and insanity are categories
imposed by society on those at the
bottom of society in an act we now
commonly call othering. The power
structures of civilization are predatory,
Fuko's critique argues because they help
us deny our own role in this predatory
system; we accept a fictional narrative
in which the damaged victims of the
system are cast as insane. Arthur Fleck is
the lowest victim of civilization: an
orphan adopted and then abused; he has no
status, so fantasizes being adored by a
chat show audience; he is not loved so
fantasizes a lover; he has no power, so
fantasizes killing, which is a fantasy he then
acts out. As Fuko argues, Arthur’s
fantasies are a false solution that
offer no help with the reality of his
plight but calling the fantasies of the
victim madness is also a false
punishment. The first Joker movie is a
carefully balanced dialectic between the
forces of civilization and the victims
of madness; it's deliberately uncertain
whether Fleck is a victim to be pitied or
a monster to be hated. Joker then goes a
step further in its dialectic between
madness and civilization Athur’s fantasies
not only bring to light his real
problems but begin to give Fleck real
status and power as he adopts the
fantasy persona of Joker that in the
Joker sequel will also give him the
fantasy of love as folie adieux dives
deeper into the sick fantasies of our
civilization. As Batman has become an
ever-more hilarious parade of good
actors putting on a silly costume
and cashing a paycheck, Joker is
a role that great actors actually want to
play: Jack Nicholson's makeup smeared
mafiosa, Mark Hamill's shrieking sociopath
and of course Heath Ledger’s seminal turn
in The Dark Knight, all laid the
groundwork for Joaquin Phoenix, the
greatest actor of our generation to make
Joker into his kind of story. Phoenix is
the face of the male victim; the little
man broken by the world who hears the
lyrics prison blues and
thinks “that's me”. The Joker has become
more and more the star of the Batman
mythos as we've started to realize that
billionaire industrialists with
delusions of grandiosity might not be
the heroes we're looking for (looking at you, Elon Muck) Batman has
always been fighting not just crime but
the criminally insane, and as we begin to
deconstruct the fantasy of insanity used
to other civilization's victims, Batman
looks less like a hero standing against
crime and more like a vigilante “hammer
of justice” coming down on the weak and
downtrodden and the Joker looks more and
more like the rage, anger, violence and
destruction of the downtrodden when they
finally stand up! The third category of
one-star reviews for The Joker movies are
people who dismiss them as incel movies.
You get the distinct impression these
people haven't seen the movies but are
simply repeating talking points from the
many think pieces attacking the movies
on this basis at a time of skyrocketing
social inequality it must be comforting
for some people to dismiss all the young
men alienated from the system and stuck
in low paid wage labor with the fantasy
that they are all incels.
“We have a perfect name for fantasy
realized it's called nightmare.” --- Slavoj Zizek
Arthur Fleck is finally allowed a moment of
true heroism at the finale of Folie Adieux:
Fleck's complex fantasies and his Joker
persona have brought him the status and
power he dreamed of, and Fleck can now
see that his fantasies will bring him
much much more. Fleck has encountered
what the psychoanalyst Jack Lan called
the symbolic order of civilization: that
web of laws, institutions, status-structures and hierarchies that exist only symbolically by our communal agreement. Fleck has discovered that the symbolic order of civilization can
be reshaped by his fantasy! His Joker
persona strikes the symbolic order in
all its weakest places and threatens to
shatter it. Given a public platform at
his own trial, Joker has the power to
incite the revolution of the downtrodden
masses that could bring the civilization
of Gotham crashing down; but Fleck finds
the moral courage to let go of Joker and
the power his fantasy can grant him, and
in that moment becomes a better human
than most of those who sit in judgment
over him. He admits: “It was all just a
fantasy; there is no Joker.” but Arthur’s choice is also driven by the nightmare that awaits anyone unfortunate enough to actually realize their fantasy. In “the plague of fantasies” the
philosopher Slavoj Zizek catalogues the
nightmarish collaborative fantasy that
is modern capitalist civilization. Arthur’s fantasies have manifested in what Zizek
calls “The Impossible Gaze”: in the age of
mass media we fantasize ourselves
through the Gaze of a mediated audience:
sports, reality-TV, chat shows. In becoming
Joker, Arthur Fleck discovers that the crowd
who cheer him turn out to be a crazed
mob, the legal system that judges Joker
is revealed to be just public theater,
the media to be the prison and its guards. The
reality of the “impossible gaze” he
fantasized is a living nightmare, and the
manic-pixie dream-girl that Arthur Fleck
had always dreamed of finding turns out
to be just another human playing out her
own fantasy. She tells him: “We're not going away,Arthur; all we had was the fantasy, and
you gave up.” Stephanie Germanotta might be the only actor who could go toe-to-toe with
Joaquin Phoenix in the depiction of
insanity and victimhood intertwined. Lady
Gaga is a deconstruction of the male
gaze, displaying all the symbols of the male
sexual fantasy, then selectively amping
them up to a repulsive absurdity. Germanotta’s Harley Quinn is a performative
fantasy put on just for Arthur Fleck. When we first meet her the fantasy girl in the insane asylum is a constructed persona designed to seduce Joker the real woman behind the fantasy is by turns broken, manipulative, lost,
powerful, genuinely insane, and coldly
realistic. The reason men so easily
accept simplified fantasies of
femininity is because the real human
behind them is always unknowably complex.
Joker and its sequel are going to be two of the most hated superhero franchise movies for a long time to come. Audiences fat on our
decades-long feast of CGI fantasies are
never going to welcome the bitter taste
of reality on our plate, but for anyone
ready to think critically about the
theme of fantasy itself, Joker and Folie
Adieux are masterpieces of radical cinema
and a timely warning that civilizations
which cannot face the madness of our
conjoined fantasies will be overwhelmed
by them."
@@niva9090 I have never heard of that extension to the quote though it seems to work alongside it. Thank you for sharing and have a great day!
I wonder if that quote applies to the general hatred of the former potus
@JH-ug8jp no, we understand he's a liar, a con-man, nothing more.
@erdelegy: You misspelled the Clinton’s, Obama, Biden, Harris and Walz. We all know you libtards are racists domestic terrorists. You hate America and Americans, and are 100% for illegal-alien-criminal-invaders.
I like your positive, philosophical review of "Joker: Folie a' Deux!" As the director Todd Phillips intended, you interpret it as a deep deconstruction of the comic book supervillain and comics fandom in an art film. The sequel continues Arthur Fleck's sympathetic Loser Archetype portrayal. It shows the grim realities of prison life, such as his police brutality, sexual assault, and stabbing, rather than him leading a prison gang and becoming a mob boss, or permanently escaping, like in most prison or gangster movies.
Yes indeed. It seems some people hate it when they don't get the same old predictable same-old action movie with a cathartic "yeah! Sock it to 'em!" payoff, or when they are expected to actually deal with symbolism and human vulnerability.
Still, you shouldn’t feel better than others for responding differently to this movie. Maybe they have the privilege to live in a fantasy world. We don’t.
@@MyMateGeorge ironically some of the aspects, that viewers had a vocal problem with, are old tropes, just not for comic book movies- seeing a main character in a prison movie get sexually assaulted and shanked is par for the course, yet in this context, it causes a kind of critical outrage, that almost seems to deny, that these kinds of things happen around us, every day. and nobody wants to see that, either.
This helped me understand the complexity of the movie. I wanted it to be a marvel, but it’s like you say much deeper after your review. I think it’s a really good movie. Thanks.
I believe Joker 2 is about Arthur Fleck, who wants to let the world know he's tired of wearing the mask of Joker no matter if someone else takes his place.
Then it really sucked at telling that story
Great way to destroy an 80 year old character I'll give you that much 😑
He was Joker for only a day and now he's tired of it? 😂
Its so amazing how even the fans of the original movie the people in real life who liked him for who they thought he was rejected Arthur when he decided he wanted to give up being Joker. The people in the real world are kicking him down just like in the movie. DAMN Todd Phillips is a genius the greatest artist of our age. Its hard to see where the movie ends and the real world begins.
What?
agreed! ...the haters should stick to simple marvel films. amazing how many people really didn't understand the first film AT ALL!
Movie is trash. Why grape Arthur? Why embrace victimhood as what defines you????
So how the same people like the first one?😂😂😂 He did the same thing in the first one. They sould have like this one as well
So the movie is pretty much a middle finger to anyone who liked the first one.
Todd Phillips really believes that we “idolized” joker? No we fucking didn’t. Everyone knew that what Arthur did in the first movie is WRONG. But we understood him because of how society just casts aside people with mental illness.
THAT was the deeper meaning of the first movie. It’s a fucking character study. We care about Arthur, but the second movie literally just takes a shit on anyone who slightly cared about Arthur.
I hate this movie. And I hate Todd Phillips. Pretentious wannabe film.
I have seen Joker 2 and thoroughly enjoyed it. It appears to me that it’s being slated because cinema goers are expecting another Joker movie akin to the first and they really just don’t get it!
It’s called Joker if it was a film not called Joker id love it but this film had no point and tbh if it wasn’t called Joker no one would see it so it’s a lose lose.
Yeah, only the defender of garbage get it. Thats a more about the defenders of garbage then anyone who has good faith critiques about it.
I’m not going to lie.. I was hoping Harley Quinn would show up to rescue him at the end… HOW, she feels nothing, she never will!
People expected the sequel to Joker to be another Joker movie? HERESY!
The best description word for this movie is "Epilogue". It's not a movie №2 or a sequel or whatever. It's the epilogue of the movie Joker, and it's (very good) written as such. A dark ending for a dark comedy.
Just saw the movie, it will be a cult classic
A cult defends it yes, but thsoe beyond this cult find it contemptable as it was made to be just that.
I loved it, don't understand why it got bad reviews. Tragic Arthur Fleck, whom no one loved or wanted, The Joker on the other hand, thr alter ego, admired by many..
It’s funny me and my husband both saw it during previews and we loved it. We knew it would be divisive but we were shocked at how many people hated it. I remember a little movie that was critically panned on release too: The Empire Strikes Back. Time heals all wounds.
Really?! Was it divisive when it was first released? I didn’t know that…
It was REALLY about ensuring that the "wrong kind" of people who heavily identified with the first movie, were fully alienated and forced to watch their everyman anti-hero reduced to nothing.
No, not really, but keep clinging to that narrative. Arthur isn't an antihero by the way. He's a mentally ill murderer.
which is imo pretty cringe. just because people tend to identify with villains doesn't mean they "identify too much" with them. 99,99 % know he is the villain.
Alien 1979 for me is just incredible masterpiece, I placed Joker 1 and 2 right in the same box
Absolytely brilliant analysis. Greetings from Athens, Greece.
the whole story proves the rage joker has against the system not only in the first movie but in the dc universe, as the joker he is a god, a role model for the revolution, the people's person.
and as arthur he is nobody, a random guy w severe mental problems who killed six people and no one truly cares about him, not even his alter ego, joker, or the fans who failed to understand the depth of it all.
THANK YOU for giving this Film the praise it deserves. I feel we live in a society (oh jeah, I really did that!) that just wants to see the world burn. All the critics are in it. THEY are the people that killed Arthur Fleck (TP metaphor). I just thought it was a fantastic (yet forced) sequel. Amazingly done! Thank you.
This film is shining a spotlight on who actually paid attention to the first movie and who didnt. Its also fascinating that they are reacting exactly the way Todd Phillips had the Joker supporters act in the film. It really does show that people legitimately did not get the first film and damn sure dont get this one.
It isnt as good as the first movie but this film is fucking with a lot of dumbass people that im just enjoying the chaos of it all.
This....true art brings out the truth....
The movie was piss poor. But oh well, you tell yourself whatever helps you sleep at night.
What kind of dumb business is that?
So the movie is pretty much a middle finger to anyone who liked the first one.
Todd Phillips really believes that we “idolized” joker? No we fucking didn’t. Everyone knew that what Arthur did in the first movie is WRONG. But we understood him because of how society just casts aside people with mental illness.
THAT was the deeper meaning of the first movie. It’s a fucking character study. We care about Arthur, but the second movie literally just takes a shit on anyone who slightly cared about Arthur.
I hate this movie. And I hate Todd Phillips. Pretentious wannabe film.
"Yeah?? Well, you know, that's just like uh, your opinion, man."
great analysis and review. thank you for sharing
It is a movie about Arthur Fleck, a sad Clown who for some reason is called Joker, names of DC characters appear but it is Arthur's movie, as shown in the movie, there is no Joker and no Batman in this Universe it was just Arthur trying to be the fantasy that people expected of him
Finaly youtube feed threw me one... just one decent review of these two masterpieces. A lot more could be said... but good work sir👏
Unnecessary sequel but I felt it was a logical conclusion to Arthur Fleck's sad and tragic life. I like the film's themes about sensationalism. People wanted a Joker movie but got an Arthur Fleck movie and I think that was the point. Great video and great comments.
You're the guiding light in a sea of close minded infinity world movie analysts. Love that your style uses inner wisdom guided by compassion. Incredible work on this video. Your mind is ahead of this time
I just saw _Joker: Folie à Deux_ last night. I get why many people hate it, but the joke's on them (pun intended): THEY are the Joker's followers in the film. They read only the shallowest aspect of the first film and embraced it, completely oblivious to its deeper meanings. All they saw was the Joker; their fantasy villain coming to life from the pages of their beloved comic books. They didn't see Arthur. A quick survey of the RUclips, anti-work commentariat shows that - like those followers in the film - they reject Arthur and want to kill him. The film is probably going to bomb, and they will dance on its grave, not comprehending that it was a devastating critique of them all along.
To be fair, I did see one video that seemed to grasp this. Its conclusion was that the second film is a contradiction, that it doesn't understand its audience and hates it. But what the maker didn't get is that both films understood their audience perfectly - it's THEY who don't get it.
It's a brilliant film, not without its faults, but beautifully made.
You know, I watch these creators, the ones who bemoan the state of _Star Wars_ and Marvel, and I agree with them a good deal of the time. LucasFIlm and Marvel have been cranking out garbage of late - mostly because of plain old terrible writing, but also because they treat these properties like vehicles for social propoganda.
But the _Joker_ films are different. They're not polemics (for either the Left or the Right). Rather, they are a masterful critique of our age, of the hollow posturing and hyperbolic rhetoric of both sides in the American culture wars. The haters would do well to shut up and listen, for once.
The box office doesn't lie.
YES!! YES!! YES!! I thought I was the only one who got and understood these movies!! Bravo good sir!! It's not 'Arthur Fleck' on trial in the 2nd movie, it's the 1st movie itself! I'm willing to bet Todd Phillips is the first filmmaker ever to make a movie that grossed over 1 billion dollars and actually be pissed off about it, because it actually proved him right and made all that money for all the wrong reasons.
Also, Phillips already knew how this movie would be received, as that too was predicted in the movie. Rejected by the 'fans', represented by Lee (who also speaks for all the 'Joker' followers in the movie) and killed by 'toxic fandom', represented by the inmate with Arthur at the end of the film. The parting shot is basically telling those 'fans', "I tried to say something to you twice, you didn't understand and you reacted just as predicted. Now f**k off and go watch Heath Ledger!"
These two movies are absolute masterpieces!!
Well said! Thank goodness, someone who actually has the ability to understand serious and intelligent critical thinking and the ability to recognise nuance and subtlety - actually GETS it.....there is so much DAMN shallowness out there. Don’t drink the Koolaide......don’t be a follower. Please - start taking responsibility for your own actions and the very real consequences. This comment has redeemed my faith in the intelligence of the audience....well the critical thinking audience! I salute you! The Koolaide followers ARE Harley Quinn - rejecting the movie/ Arthur due to their own shallowness and inability to take responsibility for being a real human with real feelings. This is not cookie cutter Superhero movie, it’s a deep exploration of human suffering and the fight for authenticity
Stop drinking pal.
@@mandyclark6602 Here's something I think you'll really appreciate:
'Arthur Fleck' -- 'Fleck sounds a lot like 'flick'. 'Art' is short for 'Arthur'....'Art flick'. 🤫😀
Arthur Fleck/'Art Flick' is masquerading as a comic book character/movie for the purpose of getting attention. 🤨
I love your video, its not the usual rant to the movie but provides more context about it, great job!
My head cannon is that death of Joker was methaporical or was his psyche killing the victim personality of Arthur the "psychopath" is the real Arthur and I believe that he was SA'd by the guards that night when they beat him in the washroom them assault him took away his individuality the real him because before this he is developing and expressing the Joker as him even when faced with encounting his sexual trauma again he jokes to the guard if he will buy him a drink but after they sa him he regress into his dual personality Arthur- The Victim in order to keep him sane in a way the Arthur personality is like his inner child as we were told in the court room he was SA'd as a child so him going through the trauma again at Arkham made him put on the persona of Arthur to feel safe. See it like this if he's damned when being the Joker (his real self) then his self defense mechanism is Arthur. I more theories like the last scene of Harley wasn't real and perhaps even after the court was bombed that could have been his actual death bc he was the closest to the explosion and after the dust cleared was seemingly the only one in the court room. The guy he met with Joker make up on outside was the persona of Joker trying to keep him alive but Arthur ran to Harley to his old apartment which he confessed to her he hated his defense mechanism made him attach to Harley bc if his real self The Joker hated that apartment nothing even Harley could bring him to return I also theorize that the Harkey we see in he last scene is actually dead and committed suicide in the apartment when Arthur declared the Joker was all an act (which isn't true, the goal of the self defense mechanism personality, Arthur Fleck- The Victim, is to keep himself in line with society my evidence is when The Victim 'died' he didn't fight psychopath like how when faced with SA from the guards he at least retaliated and punch one this the victim didn't fight the psychopath but accept the role society placed on him by still trying to walk to the guards even after being stabbed, Mury's last words to Joker was essentially if your are downtrodden or victim run to cops notify them and Arthur Fleck is the one that idolize Mury while Joker is the one that pulled the trigger as he knew Mury made him weak)- I say this to say that Arthur meeting Harley again was him confront his loss of her and the Arkham "death" was the innocent part of Joker, the victim Arthur, being let go or dying by his true personality The Joker. My main evidence beside the crowd being abscence in the court is also after he confront Harley again on the stairwell the cops seemingly not only knows where he is but that he returned to the apartment, the cops wouldn't know where Arthur fled to for multiple reason including the fact there was assumed doppelgangers of Joker around Gotham dressing and wearing his make up anyone of them could have been accused they wouldnt be able to find Arthur plus Harley rented his apartment if there's a new tenant why would he go back there so the cops behind him in that scene aren't real is The Victim incarcerating himself by accepting not only was society sees him as but also what he believes what "he fucking deserves" I believe the psychopath that killed him was his true personality freeing Arthur from his slavery to the system and grief of Lossing Harley. I would if there is a third movie for us to see Arthur or in this case the fully developed Joker to have the scars on his face that he carved. And for those who this the psychopath is Ledger's Joker it's not the Gotham city in the Dark Knight is based in Chicago while the one in The Joker is said in the movie to be in New York also Thomas Wayne in the Joker looks nothing and acts nothing like the Thomas in the Nolan films unless it can be interpreted that Bruce had an idolized view of his father in the Nolan verse but that too much theory bc why would the directors of Joker 2 think that far. To conclude I believe that the psychopath that "killed" Arthur is Arthur and weither or not he died in the court bombing or is still alive Arthur Fleck- The Victim is dead.
Ps. Thanks for listening to my Ted-Talk🤡
Thank you for this fascinating review 👏
Thank you for this review!
Everyone should like or dislike any film at their leisure, it is just entertainment after all. I just really dislike the new rhetoric of: this is boring, rather than: I found it boring.
To me this sequel is maybe not "the" but at least "a" logical conclusion to the first one; and I usually dislike musical films.
As someone in the comments pointed out: Angry fans wanted a movie about the Joker and got a movie about Arthur Fleck instead.
Right it wasn't the " worst film ever " like people said. It's just DC/Joker fan's wanted a film of Joker running around Gotham with Harley commiting crimes.
This film will be reassessed soon, like Babylon and a ton others. Great work on this!
Awesome review. Both movies were so intensely deep. I loved your perspective.
Excellent.analysis.! I thought Joker Folie A Deux is a masterpiece. I
Only true film lovers can understand joker 2 , it was great and it takes time to get it.
Im still gonna wait to see it on streaming. I appreciate your points and I respect the movie telling Uber fans to f themselves, but I felt it could’ve been done better.
I like the end idea that Arthur’s death inspired a more dangerous Joker. One who enjoys the chaos and misery…because it’s funny. Not like Arthur’s which was out of pain and retribution.
Go see it in the theater, if you want to see it!
I, personally ,find "waiting for streaming" really disrespectful to the creator.
Your statement is confusing. You haven’t seen the movie but you feel like it could have been done better ?
I think your evaluation the first positive one I’ve seen
I feel you saw the deeper meanings
Directors often don’t tell the story the way the audience wants or expects
Haven’t seen it yet but am going in open minded I liked how dark and complex the first film was
IT IS A GOOD MOVIE. GOOD ACTING. WELL DONE. THE NEGATIVE STUFF IS UNTRUE.SEE FOR YOURSELF.
Excellent analysis. Thank goodness some people are able to think beyond the predictable, shallow, cut-and-paste, instantly-forgettable disposable fluff that makes up most Hollywood output these days. It seems lots of people wanted the fluff and were disappointed when they got something much deeper and more creative. ✌️🤡
Finally a review of the movie that doesn't just hate on it. I liked both Joker and Joker 2. I mean we didn't need another boring standard comic book movie sequel to the first one, I think this was much more interesting. I personally saw this movie as the story of two mentally ill people having a relationship from their point of view (and mostly Artur's point of view from his fantasies inside of his head) in an off-kilter point of way, which is much more interesting than a standard comic book movie.
I shall well miss Joaquin Phoenix as Arthur Fleck. His performances in both movies were absolutely brilliant. My wish is that Todd Philips can somehow resurrect Arthur Fleck and make the Joker Films a trilogy. 🙏🏼🤔
I doubt it. And WB won't let him. Even if he does do a third, JP won't be in it. I think it'll be about his followers and the fallout from his death
I saw someone else complaining ‘what was all the building a mountain stuff’ and I think your views reflect my own.
The mountain is a system of Chaos that will envelop and tower over Gotham, the very thing that Heath’s Joker was trying to achieve in the Dark Knight however Arthur succeeded where Heath failed as his actually took root.
Harley envisioned her and Arthur standing atop the mountain as the Bonnie and Clyde that so many of the fan boys wanted but systems of chaos never work. They don’t lift people up, their foundation (Arthur) is the people they destroy.
At least Heath’s Joker understood Chaos by its very nature can’t be controlled and didn’t want to.
Arthur is the perfect symbol created by and destroyed by chaos.
Wow! The best analysis of this movie! I thought I was alone. Thank you.
Before watching it I heard only bad reactions and got ready for something awful. But I was so surprised by what I saw. For me Joker 2 wasn't boring. I understood the message and idea behind it. The more I think about the meaning, the more I'm fascinated by the movie. It's not perfect. It has flaws. But there are so many great, unique elements in it.
Some music numbers weren't necessary, but some were integral to the story. I loved the solo song by Lee, when she is applying the make up. It has a great transition. Arthur is beaten down, suffering in the prison cell and the next scene is Lee singing cheerfully, celebrating her success. For her it's a game, that she loves. It makes her feel alive. She doesn't care about Arthur, she cares only about being in the spotlight with The Joker.
There's a sense of threat coming from Lee. when she is singing to Arthur. She is like a deadly siren hypnotising him, enabling his delusion. It"s so apparent in the scene where Lee came to visit Arthur in prison.
I really hope, that more people will come around this movie. It's a cautionary tale. It's a realistic approach to a character of Arthur. We have two movies about him and not the Joker - the genius mastermind. Arthur is a weak and sick person, who no one cared about. He was unseen, until he put on clown make up and killed somebody on TV. People put Joker on a pedestal as their symbol of freedom, but even then no one saw the man behind the mask.
- Knock, knock.
- Who is there?
- Arthur Fleck.
- Who?
This is an amazing video essay, thank you!
Joker 2019 shows us how victims choose to be the villians. Thee is nothing any deeper then that. The joker 2 is about the day dreams of a psciopath. But of course "we dont get it" quoting a violent narcsist. Good take there.
THANK YOU!!! Finally someone else seems to get it... I have been championing this movie since watching it at the first showing of it's run and so far I have yet meet anyone else who see's it in the same light as I. Now I can point people to your breakdown, it's much more in depth of the same argument I have been making. Thank you for it.
By the way, I think the 2 movies are modern masterpieces in cinema.
How people loved the first one if they cannot love this?!😂😂
I feel imposter syndrome is a big undertone for Arthur, coming to terms with the persona of Joker
Persona? Joker?
Is this all one big persona 5 reference 🤔
I think imposter syndrome is what the director had here
I respect your deconstruction and assessment of the film, however, this depiction is not as consistent with original 2019 film as you give it credit for.
Arthur cannot completely disregard “Joker”, why would he go back to a state that makes him sick in the first place? It is his only escape and he makes a choice to embody that at the end of the first film.
“There is no Joker - because he cannot uphold the weight of his followers’ expectations” is such a weak shift that isn’t enough to justify a change of character on such a scale.
I think you're viewing the film through superhero movie logic. The Joker that people wanted Arthur to be isn't a realistic character, and he only became the Joker in the first place because it made people acknowledge his existence. He gives his reasoning for it in the first film. It isn't like he was reborn. He is still Arthur. Even when he's using the Joker persona on the Murray Franklin show he's doing so to advocate for Arthur. Arthur is and always has been a gentle person at bottom and what he wanted most of all was to be heard and understood. But he found that he couldn't do that as Joker because all they wanted to hear and understand was the media construct about shooting people in the face and burning everything down.
I enjoyed both Joker and Folie. Rather than just remake Joker bigger with more explosions they went in a new way, with occasional brutal violence. Yes the sequel could have done with a bit of cutting, but then so did The Batman. Its ending was, for me, the only way it could have.
a masterpiece. the first was awsome the second went even darker, deeper...one of the best movies I ever watched. one of the best analysis on youtube.
This was Arthur's story arc. There are more jokers. There was jack napier, jerome here it is Arthur.
We’re angry at the movie, just how in the film the people are angry at the Joker. Mental illnesses and disorders come in different colors and sizes. (-I miss you Luis-)❤
Please analyze "Beau is Afraid".
I feel like no one understood it (and neither do I).
Best on this I've read.
I loved it. Finally a good review
The most important line was when he said “I don’t want to sing anymore.” All relationships are based on fantasy and they only work if the fantasy isn’t broken. Some people literally sing and some people ride higher when everything feels right. When you quit “singing” the relationship is dead. The joker was gutted by Harley so he wasn’t going to sing anymore and that’s why he was stabbed and replaced. If you ain’t singing someone else will.
While I think it's silly people exaggerated how bad the film was I still understand why they hated it. It's advertised as a DC/Joker film but they really showed none of that in the movie.
I am suprised that a possible redemption isnt mentioned. He confesses his sins, regrets them, and as he is dying sings a christian song. He gives a sort of prayer. To me, if no other movies are made, I think it could imply a salvation at the end.
Oh wow that's an amazing point which I totally should have mentioned! Not sure if that's what Todd Phillips was intending to convey, as he loves the ambiguity and I've heard quite a few people involved say that the ending is about the making of a new Joker. But I think this is really interesting point. I might do a follow up video. Thanks for your comment!
people don't mention it because they didn't get it in the first place,
I mention this under another video, and I got replies like "what are you on about" it's like they only watched every other minute of the movie
Great movie.
I loved this film and believe it is an underrated masterpiece. I think one day it will be appreciated, but I think it went over the heads of a lot of people.
I don't think the ending is as conclusive and straightforward as people think it is. There are so many inconsistencies about it that it leaves you thinking.
One idea is that Arthur is not the "real Joker" and only inspires someone else to become the Joker.
Another is that it's still just a fantasy in his head and he's in an insane asylum somewhere.
Another that popped into my head was that Arthur isn't even dead.
Is Arthur's killer even real or is he yet another fabrication in his mind?
What happened to the seventh victim at the end of the first movie? No one in the court even mentioned her nor did Arthur even acknowledge her, which leads me to believe that it hasn't happened yet.
Who was the visitor waiting for Arthur?
My personal viewpoint is that Arthur killed his own ego in order to fully immerse himself into his shadow The Joker. Arthur Fleck was a man who killed out of necessity, but still retained a sense of empathy which is what allowed him to release someone like Puddles. We're left to believe that someone who let Puddles go would just kill and innocent social worker at the end? It makes no sense, only a vicious psychopath devoid of empathy would kill an innocent human being.
At the end of this film, Arthur has been so degraded that he is devoid of all empathy. After being brutalized by the guards and abandoned by Leigh (likely also a fantasy) he decided to go ahead and kill Arthur Fleck entirely and succumb to his own shadow.
The ending of the first movie is, in fact, the ending of the second movie. The visitor is the social worker and he kills her at the end.
Remember that Joker exists entirely in a world of fantasy and cannot exist as long as Arthur Fleck is around.
Honestly that wasnt even the problem it was the fact they made the most notorious comic books villains movie a musical that was somehow boring. Which is honestly impressive with the amount of talent the cast and director has
That patient that killed Authur, killed The Wayne’s at the end of the first movie. The true Joker
Is this true? That's actually a really cool detail 👍
@upland77 it's implied and I think so as well
That’s a beautiful interpretation, but I’ll say this: it is more beautiful than the movie I saw. What I saw was an epic fail in terms of narratology; there were problems everywhere, a slow pacing, underdeveloped characters, a lack of focus, musical numbers that did not help to put forward the story, and so on. I prefer your interpretation, very much focused, than the movie.
Great film,👍🏻🃏
Saddest movie 😢
the so called 'audience' who are mad at joker 2, don't even know what the original joker, the dc joker, is actually like. they think 'ohh he must have had such a hard time, that he developed mulitple personality disorder', ' oh he must have had a really troublesome past' , 'oh the joker was always right the wholetime, the society is actually screwed '.......... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
this is what generation by generation people have gotten wrong about that og character, and this what LITERALLY every 'joker' movie ( cesar romero, heath ledger, jack nicholson, you name it ) has been always trying to remind them about....... only in their own various flavours...... He is an agent of CHAOS, he DOES NOT NEED any reason whatsoever to be bad or evil, he's just evil for the sake of being evil, the well-nurtured tussy-cushy asses of general audience who claim to be a ' fan ' of the og joker " JUST WON'T GET IT " ,that has been the point of EVERY JOKER MOVIE OR COMIC.... as said in the nolan's ' the dark knight ' - " some people just can't be reasoned with, they JUST wanna watch the world burn " ( once again NO UNDERSTANDABLE/LOGICAL reason for that whatsoever ).
infact this is the reason that there IS NO ORIGIN story of the joker in the first place, he can come from literally anywhere , that's the whole point, you can NEVER point towards a particular category of upbringing/work-environment/form-of-government/society/etc and say that there can't be any evil in these conditions, evil lies in the very human nature, for no reason at all, at some or other point of time every human being will get a kick by breaking the rules, all the wrongs/bads happening to anybody is just an excuse(the people who have it all have also been seen as a criminal, and even those who had nothing). The only difference is that in reality people have the opposite side of evil too, its always a spectrum . and this is why the joker hates batman, cuz according to joker bad stuff happen to everybody and since everyone is evil inherently , to varying degrees, they can be manipulated to bring anarchy/disorder/chaos in the world, but batman refuses to be evil even when many bad things happen to him..... and so did everyone on the ship in the last scene in the nolan's dark knight, proving nolan's ( or any director's) point that joker doesn't cares about what happened to you or not, how much good you have done or what crimes you have done, to him evryone could be manipulated to the verge or the point of absolute madness and chaos, but only joker thinks that way not evryone.....in reality everybody has sympathy too.........
and in todd philip's joker duology he used that very quality of sympathy of the audience against them, and showed them that if there actually could have been a dc joker in real life (i highly doubt its biologically possible since either the person would be just a zombie, or would have some sort of sympathy i.e. A PAST OR A REASON for doing that stuff........ they may not admit it, but they will have, once again if they aren't completely deranged else in that case they won't be having the super manipulative powers of joker....... ) then how much would it be easy for him to manipulate you into thinking that he is the good guy, and ANARCHY/CHAOS etc is the greater good......
the very last scene of joker 2 proves this point, 'you get what you fuckin deserve', by the one who is supposedly and allegedly the real joker - you think the world is full of candies and nuts, wanna be the guy with the big heart, here i hope you have a big gut too...... stab-stab-stab....... 'to joker everyone's evil' else he will show to them that evil does exists..... (except in the last scene of nolan's dark knight, a perfect ending too, not everyone's evil, and you can't do shit to prove elsewise either), that inmate was the real joker, he didn't needed a sobby , sad, " ahh! the corruption", "ahh! the people " kind of backstory to stab arthur, unlike arthur, the inmate is just a complete maniac, who is evil just for the sake of it....
and that's why joker 2 is exactly on point, here the real og joker is the audience itself , exactly - nothing funny about it, " how won't arthur become the joker, why does the movie undoes the 1st movie, you know what - the joker 2 gets what it fuckin deserve, wanna be the guy with the big heart hope you got big wallet tooo since this is definitely gonna be a flop/disaster "
the joker is the characterization of that very evil that is inherent in every single being, its just exagerrated to the point where its shown to become absolutely chaotic (thus can't exist in real life).......
This could be one of the greatest sequels ever made
Without a doubt the greatest complete with an incredible musical rendition. Looks like Oscar is knocking on the door.
No shit
What are you smoking? Look at the box office...
Genuinely loved the film
@@Xisk77box office doesn’t define greatness
Thank you for this, great way of explaining this film. I’m one of the few that actually enjoyed this movie
I loved it
I thought the first one was definitely better. But people overlook the deeper theme of you reap what you sow.
As the phrase goes: when fighting monsters do not become a monster.
Finally!! I’ve been thinking it this whole time, the wast majority of the audience completely missed the point. The people who call this movie a miss, boring and bad are having the same reaction as the people in the movie who were idolising Joker and didn’t care about or see Arthur Fleck. In the end Arthur dies by the hands of his own once fan, and in such a pitiful way, to drive home the point and wrap up the theme of his life. It’s so beautifully and tragically poetic, this is a perfect sequel and ending of the story, and an outstanding movie through and through!!🫡
I like how you connect themes of movies to The Bible in some sense. Great dissection, I had the same thought after I saw Joker 2 as well, the ending yet controversial to most I found it very justifiable in a sense. It kinda felt like a massive intention by Todd Phillips to just connect the movie to the audience watching it and really exposing two different crowds who enjoyed the first Joker for opposite reasons.
Bravo sir....a incredible erudite interpretation of two masterpieces of celluloid.....
Ah too kind, thanks!
Evil IS self-destructive. Some would say, all.
This movie reminded me of Neitzche's Birth of a tragedy
The joker is a MKULTRA project. ( Funded by Wayne industries). Arthur was groomed to potentially become "the joker"... Arthur wasn't up for the task so they found another candidate (fake Heath) to take up that joker role... Lee (wealthy family) is Arthur's HANDLER. Brought in to active that joker inside Arthur's trauma. Music cues are triggers. ... She dangled love in front of Arthur if only he becomes this agent of chaos... Choosing Arthur as candidate #1 is a total failure... Not even bombing the courthouse and allowing him to escape works. (Who bombed the court house?) Random joker fans ? Or professional contractors. (Wayne industries contractors?) Arthur to far gone into the incel world so they chose a rrun of the mill psychopath (fake Heath) ... I'm conclusion: joker is a MKULTRA program. Funded by Wayne industries and friends. Why? Destabilize Gotham. Private prison, private police contracts .... Eventually mr. Wayne becomes a victim to this program. (Program PAL).... IRONICALLY the same friends that worked on the joker program created the necce
Lol. Dude, take your meds!!!
Now this is a better story!
So Thomas Wayne is an anarcho-capitalist. Makes sense why his son goes around beating up the mentally insane instead of running for office and improving things. He has enough money to be completely independant.
You just made this turd sound far more interesting. Still ain't seeing it lol
@@nihilismistheonlyway4680 Still would've been a great story in the movie though
As someone with the same life, split personnality, the first movie hurt me and impacted me so much it gave me Arthur and Joker alters. I feel and still go through the same as him. For me, no matter the movie or else, Joker was always an alter. I see it, all the time. No matter the meaning of the end, cant.
No . . . I would agree with you on the meaning if Todd was actually interested in snapping the super fans out of their delusion, but he is only interested in making fun of them. There would be more of a divide than just a few people getting it and the rest hating it (it's ranking in the low 30s right now on the review sites.) One RUclips critic dug up an interview of Phillips for The Joker and he only made a Joker film because the studio wanted a Joker film and he wanted to make a movie about someone like Arthur Fleck, but couldn't sell it because Hollywood doesn't like to take chances on something that might not work at all. There was a way to do this that would have fleshed it out for people who needed to be sold on the argument that they shouldn't hero worship someone who isn't a hero. Fleck or Joker . . . both are and will always be villians. . . . and they wanted to be villians. Ok . . . BUT Phillips wrote the script for Joker in the traditional sense, Deux was put together in pieces. They would (Phoenix and Phillips) would write what they were going to shoot for the next few scenes, they would shoot it, and then they would work on the next part of the script- rinse, repeat. I'm sure your dive of the movie was intentional because you picked it up, but if you're going to let down an audience, be careful how you do it and what you're hoping for- you just might get it. I was okay with The Joker, and maybe if I watch Deux a couple of more times, maybe I'll be ok with it too. Right now, as someone who likes to write, I would never intentionally write an 'f*#% you' story for people just 'cause you know- 'f*#% you' (let's not deny it- that's how a lot of moviegoers felt like when watching this sequel.) I simply just wouldn't write a sequel to begin with.
I see both sides of the coin with J2. Some of the scenes were just plain annoying and unnecessary. I don't think there should have been as many musical elements in it. But if you can get past that, it's where a logical sequel would end. I found it very depressing at times (in a good way).
Don't think Harvey Dent needed to be in it tbh (unless he ends up having son called Harvey Dent Jr later on).
The ending is the fly in the ointment. If we are led to believe that Fleck's killer is Heath Ledger's Joker, then it doesn't explain how he's barely aged in the Dark Knight, baring in mind J2 took place in the early-mid 1980's.
Either way though, it clearly has created a division, with far more people hating it than liking it.
I don't like musical films (apart from Wizzard of Oz). So a fair few scenes were cringeworthy for me. JP was again the stand out performance but Gaga did OK too.
J1 was a better film overall. J2 felt like an unnecessary tragic gamble.
The Joker is a Dionysian figure while Batman is Apollonian. Jack Nicholson's Joker played Prince's Partyman while disfiguring paintings. The ending is an homage. It's not meant to be Heath Ledger's Joker. It can be viewed as meaning that the Joker persona is not tied to one person. Or it's an answer to people who said, "Arthur is 30 years older than Bruce, how are they going to fight?"
Maybe. But it’s hard to ignore the similarities Heath and the young man in the final scene shared, bearing in mind nearly everyone knows the Joker from dark knight. They could’ve hire any young male for the role. They could’ve scrapped the face cutting in the background and they could’ve told him to laugh differently. But they didn’t. So it kinda sh!ts on 2 films for the price of one in a lot of DC fan’s eyes. Not an avid DC fan myself but can understand any frustration of continuity such fans would have… and unfortunately people are now jumping on the hate bandwagon, which I don’t think the film deserves at all. I was more moved by J2 than I was J1. The mirror held up to society this time showed the consequences of such fantasies carried out in the first movie. Whether they are truly real world consequences remains debatable, as not all punishments are the same around the world. I would assume it’s feasible for a mentally ill person charged with multiple murders could be put on death row? (not the case in western Europe anymore).
J2 was a film about the tragic downfall of Arthur Fleck. That’s why it hurts. It’s why ultimately it’s a clever movie. It just needed a few tweaks to make it a perfect antidote to J1 though imo. Doesn’t deserve the amount of hate it’s getting tbh.
This is honestly one of the most genius sequels i’ve ever watched in a cinema. Love it
This is probably the most meta movie ever!!
In fact!
My issue is, it is a product meant to bring about a trilogy or so I thought, the director did not want to continue I get it, good movie, surprising shit, but, I did want to see this weird version grow into what would have been, connected to the penguin series and the batman, not a fan boy but, indeed wanted to get that, hearing that WB and the DC ppl want to go back to their Canon and this is not to be, well, big tease for us. But certainly very good performances, artistry, just disappointed a bit
Joker 1 and 2 is pretty much filmed the same way Kill Bill 1 and 2 were filmed.
The first film contains most of all the violence of the story while the second film has little to no death but instead a fleshing out of the story and its filmed in a completely different style.
Both films in both franchises feel like 2 totally different films and I think its the only way to appreciate these kinds of movies.
I’m glad I’m not alone at seeing the genius this Director made!! And at the same time same screw you WB I know this wasn’t you want you wanted i’m out hopefully u make some money!! But I’m out !! felt like a joke 🎉😂😂😂😂😂💙💙
These films are like GCSE Psychology. I can’t believe the furore on either side.
Excellent, poignant and summed up the movie well.
While many have written it off, perhaps down the line people can reappraise it and realize how much this film has to say about human nature.
Ah thank you!
The most shocking scene was the one when we were spoon fed the reality of mental illnesses. Anybody that knows, knows… how brilliantly horrible the differences between a psychopath and a sociopath are. The line: -stop singing… use words- just so to the point.
This is what will happen if you try to be Joker.
what about that opening cartoon, it encaspulates the whole thing, would love to hear your take.
Finally a good thorough analysis of these two movies. I haven't seen either of them. But I have seen tons of reviews claiming the first was great and the e second was a disaster. And then some thrashing of Robert de Niro thrown in as well.
What a cynical analysis. I don’t understand people that get off on tragedy. This is a movie about a pre established character and for the protagonist of the film to become an npc in his own movie is total and complete bullshit. Arthur has to accept the Joker persona or the whole thing falls flat. There’s no arc. It’s just 2 hours of a guy getting his ass kicked.
I’m gonna be honest I actually liked and thought it was a good movie. Tried not to listen to what other people thought but I still knew lots of people didn’t like the idea or how it was.
This is an impressive act of gaslighting! 👏
Describing the world is a thing even a child can do but to understand why the city is as described that’s a start of an intellect and a thinker I suggest and recommend you start on that journey
It is a surprising to see a quote from Mathew Pageau book. I’ve read the book and it was great
To be honest, I've always thought it was incredibly stupid when creators got upset because "the audience didn't understand their work the way they, the creators, THINK we, the audience, should understand it."
The truth is that every work of art, once exposed to the world, ceases to be the property of the creator, takes on a life of its own and receives interpretations from the audience that often differ from those of the creator of the work (something that is natural, since different people have different perspectives).
C'est la vie. Therefore, getting upset about this is whining and, in the case of people who want to indoctrinate the public, it also indicates a lack of character.
I don’t get the hate. I liked it.
It's because the average fan wanted a movie of Joker/Harley running around Gotham committing crimes and violence.
Yeah dude that's how the movie should have gone. Perfect answer to Joker.