I think it comes down to the fact that people didn't want to see Arthur "redeem" himself (reject the Joker). They wanted to see how a fully committed Joker could captivate Harley and sow chaos across Gotham. While Phillips wanted Arthur to continue his internal struggle and come out rejecting his demons. The ending is very fitting for that kind of Joker and is good in that regard. But it just wasn't what people were hoping for.
You can't redeem Arthur without forgetting the first movie, which is what the sequel does. Besides, there's nothing fun in seeing a protagonist get abused throughout the whole movie and then getting killed.
@@PieroMinayaRojasBecause it's not supposed to be fun, it's supposed to be fucking tragic and nihilistic. The "fun" elements of both films are distorted when in reality, they are tragic. Maybe watch the first film again since you clearly didn't understand it past the surface level
Arthur has nothing to redeem to. The people who he killed were all abusers or bullies. Arthur wasn't killed by the psychopath because he killed those assholes but because he betrayed his true self, the Joker. He betrayed the cause.
Yeah, most people didn't want to watch a movie about Gotham City and how people like Arthur Fleck are being treated there. Although this depiction of a mean city is pretty DC canonical, they just don't like a realist approach to it from the point of view of a non-superskilled outsider. Most people want escapism, larger than life shit, demigods, clearcut villains, heroes, or antiheroes. The typical MCU stereotypes. Even pretty vanilla anti-villains such as Harley Quinn in Birds of Prey were hard to swallow for many, straying too far from the norm. I love DC/Warner for taking risks and going places that are more niche and controversial, somewhat experimental.
It wasn’t terrible, it’s just a letdown compared to the first one. The music could have been cut out and the ending should have been changed. I give it a 5/10.
Ngl one of the few times I disagree with you Colin, I felt Joker 2 was a complete misunderstanding of what made the first film so good in it's terms of quality, especially with that ending, which is poor writing for both the Joker movies standard of its Elseworlds grounded "realistic Joker" and the history of Joker altogether as a comic book character.
0:37 I do agree with this tho, the musicals especially were terrible, I'd say just the instrumentals for those songs mixed in with a semi rushed approach to the lyric singing is what imo makes them so bad but also the overusage of the songs too, I'm a musical fan but even then this just felt like a lazy musical with no substance
The movie was made to humiliate the character in as many ways they could and then offed him because Todd Philips or the higher-ups didn't intend for the audience that liked the first one to be their fanbase which is so insecure because nobody saw Arthur as an inspiration. They just felt bad for what happened to him. The first movie resonated with the wrong audience for them. They didn't want certain people agreeing and calling out the class warfare our government uses. That's it. So they assassinated the character in every way possible.
Hey man, glad you somewhat liked it, but it's a 4/10 for me brother and I'm one of the most benefit of the doubt guys I know. Like I've been able to defend Thor Love and Thunder even to an extent (which is still an objectively bad film, all I'm saying is I could come up with more to like in that hot mess, than in Joker 2), but Joker 2 is just a boring slog of a film with 0 rewatchability factor that pretty much retcons all of Arthur's mental arches from the first one. I even thought Gaga as Harley was a good choice, but literally all she did was act like a more subtle Joker and had little to no speaking lines all with no depth to what should make her interesting. Idk how you manage to have less depth than original Suicide Squad Harley, but here we are. One major compliment I can give it is the cinematography, atmosphere, and scale, but that's honestly it. I don't hate this film like many others do, I'm just more or less indifferent to it
They didn't regress on Arthurs mental state at all. And Harley's character does have depth that works completely fine with what they're doing in the movie. She's a mentally ill and delusional person, who makes up fantasies about the world to make herself feel validated, and her presence and feeding of Arthur's alternate "persona" is doing Arthur more harm than good to Arthur. How is that a bad character that doesn't work thematically or fill her role good in the movie?
@@akdreamer6497Colin got some attitude issues lately... ...I agreed with his videos on Synthetic Man, Hansen and more, which is why I subscribed but lately I've been finding him to be overly rude to people who disagree with him even if he doesn't want to come off that way.
What I come to realize is Arthur’s story is more Todd Phillip’s taxi driver style drama than a joker origin because even in the first movie I couldn’t really see him becoming the villain we know because he’s so different. He’s a sad lonely guy who was given a gun and had enough abuse. He’s not a supervillain or a criminal mastermind and Todd warned comic fans not to expect him to be. I don’t know I have mixed feelings about it.
100 percent agree. I think people keep saying "they misunderstood the first film" is incorrect. They did understand it, Arthur spells it out in the first film "you people would just walk right over me". The first film it is very much implied that he inspires the joker and is not the joker. Everybody cares about "Joker" not Arthur, which is why people don't like it. Which in turn is ironic on how the film ends. I do think that the film should've put more emphasis on how the Joker persona was beat out of him because the first film does very much have him walk out "free".
I'm shocked that people ever thought Arthur was the real Joker, I thought it was pretty clear in the first movie that he started a movement and a person with higher intelligence and more violent would become the real Joker. I think the final scene could've been better, but I had a strong feeling going in that Arthur would be killed by the Joker.
@@MasonGrant0704Okay, so the made a movie about the “joker” only to have the movie not be about the fucking joker? Your defense is that we all got pranked into believing the film that markets itself as the joker backstory isn’t about the joker?
I liked the ending of this film. Arthur becoming sane by taking accountability after seeing the negative impact he has on the society, only to be discarded by the society that sees no worth in sane people and then murdered by someone who becomes the New Joker is a very fitting end for a sequel if there had to be one. I didn't like much else about the film
@@chandlerburse It didn't but Warner Bros paid them a lot of money to do it. If you have to make a sequel to a movie that didn't need it, the ending could have been worse
Ok Colin, this is one of the few times I have to disagree. This movie is a terrible downgrade compared to the first movie. The de construction of the joker, the musicals that didn’t have to be there (although I will say weren’t bad) and the way they just re told the same story in the court room is just bad.
@@connor_is_k I know, but even then I really think it’s a bad movie. I give it a 3/10 but he’s making sound like it’s not a bad film. He gave it an 8/10. I on the other hand thought it was terrible compared to the first movie.
@@C0LIN.he’s not going to put a whole paragraph in a comment section. He’s just pointing out what he disagrees with on small scale. You should invite him to disagreement day if you want to hear every criticism he has.😊
I recommend watching Transformers One. The movie has positive reviews from audiences and critics on Rotten Tomatoes, and I've watched the movie myself with my brother, and it was great that the film has darker scenes and a compelling plot. You should get tickets to watch Transformers One on the big screen instead of Joker 2
@robkardashianburner while that’s often true for many movies, its not the case for the new Transformers movie. just go watch the movie & see it for yourself.
What people dont seem to realize is that the movie was never about THE Joker. It was about Arthur, who unfortunately got turned into A Joker by society. I think the ending to the 2nd one sucks, but it's only because I wanted to see more of Arthur, lol. He genuinely had character development because he realized that he had to take accountability for his actions and face the consequences. That to me shows character growth. The reason why most people don't like the film, is because they wanted Arthur to grow into more of a villain, and I think that's kind of the point of the film. The people cheered him on when he was "Joker" but whenever he's Arthur, nobody is there backing him up. It's sad because I like scenes with Arthur more than I do Joker in the first film. Even in the first film, he was only Joker for the last 20 minutes. It just goes to show that when people don't get what they want out of someone or something, they're quick to judge or quick to flip flop their stance. Both films are really masterpieces in picking out the flaws within society.
I took the ending as a nod to the 3 Joker comic book where the dude that kills arthur is the criminal, arthur is the comedian and the dude that helped him escape was the clown. But thats just me 🙃
Man Colin you have some awful takes. I haven’t seen the movie but I have seen the ending and the ending is absolute dogshit, I won’t comment on the whole movie but I will comment on the ending, the point of the first joker movie was to show Arthur’s slow descent into madness and him becoming the clown prince of crime but having Arthur DIE and get replaced as the joker by a guy we know next to nothing about makes the first movie completely and utterly pointless. I love your channel Colin and I do agree with a lot of your takes, spider man 2, invisible season 2, Lego Batman movie, etc, but your takes on Loki season 2, far from home and the ending of this movie I completely disagree with. Also I would love to show up on disagreement day but I don’t have a discord so sorry but I won’t be showing up… but still it’s your opinion and I respect it, I just completely disagree.
It doesn't detract at all from the point of the first movie, if anything it literally uplifts and supports it... How are you going to say the ending is bad when you literally don't even have the proper context to make that judgement.
@@C0LIN. I just think that having Arthur die and not become joker is ridiculous, he is supposed to go completely insane and become THE joker of the this universe, just get killed off and replaced… but you do have a point that I haven’t seen the movie to fully judge this so I’ll give it a little bit of a chance, I just think that Arthur should’ve became the joker of this universe since that’s what the first movie did.
@@DallasReimer The movie explores why he doesn’t become “Joker” and it’s not just like every other Joker adaptation that just has him go insane for the rest of his life. That doesn’t make it bad, it’s actually really interesting why he develops as a character.
From what I understand from what i gathered from seeing some people opinion of the movie, Joker being depressed didn't make sense because of what happened at the end of the first film. At the end of the first film, he feels relief and willfully killed without a hint of regret and is fully aware of what he did. I'll probably go watch the movie and see if this is true.
Has someone who is actually diagnosed with depression, you don't just have one triumphant moment and suddenly everything that's ever happend to you doesn't matter anymore.
@farquarwion4324 For clarification, what i typed isn't my opinion. It's the opinions of people who didn't enjoy how the joker was portrayed after the first movie. Also, correct me if I'm wrong. The Joker is one of the biggest villains in DC because of his descent into insanity, so why does his depression Arc need to continue after what we've seen from the first film? Also, I never argued that depression doesn't matter anymore after you get past it. So I don't understand why you felt the need to bring that up.
@KallaTheYapper347 okay first off, reading this to me comes off as you thought I was coming at you, if you thought I dis I apologize. Also this isn't comic joker, so that comparison is irrelevant to what the movie showed, jokers name was never Arthur fleck and he never was a clown before becoming joker. He also never fought batman to become the joker anyways, so again this joker is far far removed from source material. Secondly I was only commenting on the fact you said (or other people you're quoting) the joker wouldn't be back to being depressed and my answer to you was basically he never did. Everything else you said idk where you got any of that becuase I was not commenting on it.
@@KallaTheYapper347 you even said in your reply, why would jokers depression arc continue. It wouldn't make sense for his depression arc to be done after killing 1 guy.
Here’s what I don’t understand about the negative press at all. The first Joker was praised all around for an incredibly grounded, realistic portrayal of how a man descends into Todd Howard’s vision of Joker. It was also heavily praised for its realistic portrayal of mental health and unfair systems impacting those suffering from it. Joker 2 then seems to be getting criticism for being a realistic and grounded sequel to the events of the first movie with a continuing insight into Arthur’s mental state. I can’t wrap my head around what people would have actually wanted from this movie. Was Joker to be flanderised as simply “crazy now,” and was he to suffer no backlash for his actions and just boringly run around with henchmen and Harley the whole movie? I really don’t get it.
The difference is that the first movie wasn't what many people had seen before during the MCU and DCEU craze and was at a time when social media and cyber bullying was growing that it latched onto many people that had some sort of connection. By 2024, comic book movies have already changed since 2019, and Joker has become larger than life to many. The most iconic villain in comic book history and probably resonated with casuals more with the first movie which was just exactly what fans wanted, what they expect with the sequel without really understanding that both films were ever supposed to be like The Joker. Both movies are exaggerated caricatures of the character eith the only difference being that one was embraced by people and other isn't. The first movie is a story that didn't need a sequel but the execution is very apparent, the less restrictive control from the studio involved, shifting tone of being a bombastic musical versus the slowly burn character study horror film the original was, and the failed promise of expanding Joker as a criminal mastermind and instead made Arthur being embarrassed of being Joker. As if Todd Phillips, the director who was clearly embarrassed of the genre, became a victim of his own success. And it's probably the reason why he's said he will never make another DC movie after Joker 2. I guess the sequel was so hated, now people are looking back on the first one and realizing it's not as good as they remembered and are noticing the movie's flaws, the story, the depiction of Joker, how the director was embarrassed of the genre and comics, the forced setups, the side characters' performances, the blatantly obvious references to Martin Scorsese, and the not-so-subtle writing.
I recognize I’m probably the biggest outlier here, but I thought it was a masterpiece. I just feel like most people didn’t really get it. The musical numbers weren’t at all annoying to me, especially considering that they were all trying to say something in some way. I’d even say they’re a very powerful addition to the movie, they made for some very entertaining scenes. Narratively I’d say it’s also very thought-provoking and complex. With his story concluded, Joaquin’s joker remains as the best one we’ve ever had. My movie of the year, 10/10
Same here man so glad you truly believe it’s a 10/10. I went in with zero expectations what so ever and of course I didn’t listen to any critics or any of those masters of every art form and I was so suprised and shocked! I can’t believe I’m actually saying this but I loved this movie more than Joker 1. Maybe people don’t love this movie as much because it’s darker more tragic and a the end movie realistic and bleak
@@korruptor9777 i explained in my comment why i thought it was so good. also i love doom eternal too bro we dont gotta be enemies cus we disagree on this one thing, k? though i would like to hear a genuine argument for this movie having bad writing or "going nowhere" cus i haven't heard one yet
THANK YOU. This is what i’ve been saying. Todd Phillips is a genius and the people to hate this movie because he "destroyed" Joker are proving the point the movie was tried to make. I definitely feel like this film will get more recognition in the future.
Loved the film as well. That's not to say it's flawless (Imo they could've removed two specific songs, I didn't like some of the flashback clips and Harvey Dent didn't impress me), but I think it's one of those sort of arthouse type films where people have to watch it and make their own judgement rather than just getting on the hate train. Divisive but I think that kind of risk taking is good for an industry where it's all about playing it safe.
*SPOILERS* I heard some reactions to the film that describe a scene where the Guards *SA* Arthur to “Get the Joker” out of him is that true? Because I don’t wanna see that at all and it’s stopping me from seeing it atm.
Charlie only said it’s implied so it’s not established if that happened or not. Considering it’s an R rated movie I’m not suprised they would put SA in the movie.
@@attilahun2no it's very obvious it happens. One of the guards says "take his rags off" while Arthur is pinned to the floor by 2 other guards and he screams no a few times then it cuts to them dragging Arthur lifeless and without pants on.
I expected it to suck, but I ended up enjoying it all the way through. I don't get why people hate it so much, unless they hate the music scenes, or the fact that it mostly takes place in a prison or a courtroom or because Arthur gets killed at the end. I really don't get it. To me it seems that people are just repeating the points they've heard from reviews. And I don't see how this is supposedly an anti-incel movie or that it supposedly tries to piss off the fans of the old movie. Lot of people seem to be confused because they're expecting a movie to tell them how to feel and Joker 2 doesn't do that. Who are the good guys and and the bad guys in this movie? The guards are definitely not the good guys, or the prosecutor Harvey Dent. The "innocent" victims that Arthur killed in the first movie weren't the good guys either. Maybe a couple of them didn't deserve to be outright killed but the rest of them did. My sympathies are strongly on Arthur's/Joker's side. I don't know what the director wanted to say, put personally I like the character Joker even more. I love the ending because that's when the heritage of Arthur Fleck truly gets immortalized. His death was a necessary sacrifice. Joker is not only a one guy but symbolizes untamed creativity, freedom and the rebellion against the oppressors.
The movie committed a sin in the opening act by regressing all of the jokers character development from the first film. Only to have him recover that development by the end of the second act and then take it away in the third. Why would the writers choose to invalidate a key part of the first movies success? They could’ve made another billion dollars if this movie was about the Joker we saw at the end of the last movie
I think its definitely overhated as a lot of things are due to mob mentality, but its no masterpiece by any stretch. Biggest issue was it was boring. The worst crime any movie can ever possibly commit is to be boring. I did like the scene where his supporters dump him when he finally disavowed Joker though.
guys i hate when they say transformers one is a flop and transformers is dead although it is in line to be in the oscars altough mutant mayhem had the same box office 25 million and the budget and its getting a sequel worse case cenario they lower the budget for a sequel
idk bro, this is not Joker, it's regressing his character arc from the first movie. And the plot is just reminding you "oh first movie shit indeed happened", it's boring and dumb. I already know what happened and understand that he is indeed a fucked up guy, and Arthur character basically loop back to the start, just a sad mf with mental illness. All the character build up for the Joker completely gets shit on by the writer or the director. Really seems like Todd hate what he created and wants to shit on it in for 2 hours straight. There's literally no reason for this movie to exist, and the random guy that stab him feels force and out of nowhere. And if the movie is about Arthur being bad so he had to face his consequences, Then wtf, the police have no consequence. Not a single thing comes their way after ruthlessly insult, beat, and a implied rape on Arthur.
It's a terrible sequel that doesn't build or add anything to the universe. Maybe on it's own merit it could be better, but even then I still don't really think so. The plot goes nowhere, the singing gets annoying (and a lot of the song picks I actually liked separate from the movie). I see what they were going for, but it just doesn't work, like, at all.
@@Yakonsupremacy He feels depressed in the beginning for the same reason he takes accountability by the end of the movie, that I explained in the video
He was beaten and battered by the system that once neglected him, and that put him in the position he was in in the first move to begin with. Of course he was going to be fucking depressed.
@@C0LIN. if you want Arthur to feel regret or to be sympathetic you need to develop that, you cant just have him be a maniac who dosnt give a shit at the end of the first movie and suddenly have him be the complete opposite in the second one. I dont mind him realising his mistakes thats an interesting route, the problem is it dosnt align with his character from the first movie, so you cant just have that in the beginning
@@YakonsupremacyHow does it not align with his character from the first movie… In the first movie his “development” was him finally just going insane and snapping on society. Just because he starts off the movie depressed and it foreshadows the regret for his actions that will be fleshed out later in the movie, doesn’t mean he’s out of character… Depression doesn’t just go away.
@@C0LIN. exactly, he has snapped, im not saying his depression should just go away, im saying that its dumb for arthurs character to change that much, over no development, the entire point of the joker is that it takes one bad day, one bad moment to snap and turn insane, joker just suddenly unsnapping and realising his mistakes with nothing going on is idiotic, he was also depressed in the end of the first movie, yet he acted way different. And in a narrative sense its dumb, since we’d expect to see the same person we ended of the last movie with, if not the first movie feels pointless. If no of the development the joker made through the movie mattered at all, and hes just back to the beginning then what was the point of the first movie
I don't understand why people hate the ending so much, I get the complaints about the rest of the film but not that ending. I feel like it was pretty obvious in the first film that Arthur wasn't THE Joker, like it definitely felt like they were doing the Gotham thing of having Joker start out as a movement caused by the actions of one person that would eventually lead to the definitive Joker. I'm pretty sure it was also a pretty popular fan theory at the time that Arthur wasn't THE Joker. I don't understand how now that they were proven right that people suddenly think it's a terrible decision.
SPOILERS Considering that it’s revealed that he didn’t kill the counselor in the first movie, I’m hoping it’s revealed that the guy who killed Arthur was actually Arthur embracing himself as an agent of chaos and committing pseudocide (i.e. making it seem like he killed himself but not actually). Edit: Alternatively, they could’ve revealed it in the ending of this movie that Arthur was the psychopath who “killed himself”, so that we wouldn’t have to wait another 5 years for the above reveal I suggested.
I feel like if they wanted to leave it open ended like that they coulda had it be like a blurry version of the fan that got him in the car. Using an actor that doesn't look like joaquin doesn't help validate the theory. But it would be awesome tho.
Nobody who watched the first movie wanted to see him get killed by random prisoner nor have cops assault him This movie was made as a response to those who liked athur's character in the first flim
@@C0LIN.Eh idk, how does Arthur being killed by a new Joker or even thematically "the REAL" Joker fit with the narrative of the first film? I could be wrong and would love to be corrected but it makes no sense narratively, the whole perspective of Joker to me at least was that he supposedly became the REAL Joker but in a different adapted way where he was a social reject vs being someone who was a agent of chaos like comic Joker. This ending takes away the idea that he ever was the Joker...
Because the point of “Joker” was that society and the world around someone can turn anyone into “Joker”. And as for the rest I explained it in this video.
@@C0LIN. Fair enough good explanation, but Joker 2 really doesn't reinforce that, if anything it teaches a different lesson on "how anyone can have the Joker in themselves stripped away" I mean that is essentially what happens to Arthur,, especially in the ending
From what I heard, the movie doesn't go anywhere, other than trying to degrade the joker himself multiple times. That kind of defeats the character in general, like Joker is supposed to be this irredeemable guy who commits crimes for the fuck of it, because he can. He is a sociopath. Also I highly doubt this movie is a 8/10, there are MUCH better movies that are 8/10. Yeah sure he has mental problems, but the joker embraces those problems and runs with it. Also from what I heard, Harley had the most potential in the movie but ultimately didn't get fully fleshed out. From this, I give the movie a 4/10 maximum. They could've went to the route on having this joking fulling becoming the joker, "killing off" Arthur, would who seem like to be a dead weight to the joker. idk man, but I know an 8/10 is an outrageous rating.
your first mistake was still going with the notion this was a comic accurate Joker, even after the first film. Let those thoughts go and accept he isn't.
@@MilleniumKage yeah no shit sherlock, when has any superhero been comic accurate? But the point of the term "comic accurate" is to take the source of the original character and makes a fun twist out of it, having it's own representation, but ultimately have some relation to the original source. Not only is this movie not even close to what the Joker is related to, but it is actively trying to kill the character entirely. just trying to shut him off by being a "persona". It's a stupid take that doesn't go anywhere other than killing the joker. my point still stands.
@@alonsovenegas4444have you consider the cinematography and the color grading? I get it you give it a 4/10 but don't forgot about other aspect. the music scoring is really good (not the musical one). the cinematography and the color gradingare really excellent. Phoenix is still good same as the last movie and gaga acting is also good. It just that the story is lacking and this movie is just recapping the first movie. Doesn't mean the movie is bad but it still good on any other aspect. it is not at 4/10 maximum because if it is, then any other aspect of the film is bad.
@@alonsovenegas4444 yeah like I said, you made the mistake of still expecting it to be more in-line with Joker of the comics when it’s damn obvious from the first film and Todd Phillips’ interviews that it isn’t the case. So instead of crying in the comment section of “muh comics” and still trying to tie it back to supposedly it “getting the joker wrong” acknowledge the first point of it not being an adaption of the character truly, because your points of it are pointless
I think there is artistic merit to the film but because a sequel was never planned it's struggling uphill, because the first movie didn't really need a sequel. The first song Arthur sings is actually really captivating, also the one where he starts embracing the joker was my favourite moment. But I think there is a little bit too many songs that kill the momentum a bit. I think there could have been just one big song at one point in the movie, rather than having loads of little songs. Phoenix was amazing as anticipated, I honestly found myself more caring about Arthur Fleck than the Joker, thing is though I don't really want to watch Arthur get emotionally and physically tortured and then brutally murdered at the end of the film. I think ultimately that's why people are unhappy. The first movie gets you to empathise with Arthur, the second one just makes you watch him get his heartbroken and abused. It's like "okay... thanks for showing me that?" I think that's the main reason people won't like this movie.
What's crazy is if Todd Phillips actually did care about the fans and how he got in the position he's at via fans that pay for his films... He could have made a really good movie here. I did actually enjoy everything that was displayed, minus all of the musicals that happened abruptly, which destroyed any tension that was in the previous scene. He could have made a very good "love" story/courtroom drama, character driven film!!
I didn't think it was dogshit it was just kinda meh the people calling it dogshit are exaggerating You wanna see REAL dogshit go watch the strangers chapter 1 or borderlands
Think about it - if people are going out of their way to tell you something is good, but especially bad, they'll warn you so others don't suffer similar consequences. The fact that all these fanboys went especting something coop and left disappointed is telling. Then i saw it last night and holy cow is it bad. I am so mad still.
I think the film was brilliantly filmed and written. All the people upset about this film are the exact reason the film was made this way in the first place. People didn’t give a shit about Arther before he was the joker and this film shows that they still didn’t give a shit about him when he became the joker either. People wanted to see the joker not Arther and that misses the entire theme of the first film that everyone is praising. People should not want Arther to become some maniac who kills people. They should want him to get the help he needs and live a good life, but they would rather see him become this symbol of evil that the Joker is meant to be and the ending perfectly symbolizes what the audiences turned these films into because even when joker was a household name Arther was still suffering in silence.
I feel like fans thought it was gonna be the joker not Arthur gaining his sense of morality, you have to admit most jokers don’t care about their ally’s or even Harley but this Joker does, to me it was very interesting that Harley was being the manipulative one and Arthur was being the hopeless romantic, it’s sort of a switch from most Joker and Harley dynamics not to mention that while watching this, I read the Three Jokers comic and it suddenly hit me that Joker said it himself there’s no true joker, anyone can be the joker no matter if your a comedian, a clown, or a criminal, joker will never have a true identity and the thing is Arthur was no comedian nor clown nor criminal, in this case he’s a bleeding heart, caring for the people who support him, yet ruined it and lost everything this is the only Joker that cared about his audience
I just saw it, didn’t think it was bad at all. It was artsy. It was sad, disturbing, and heart breaking just like the first one. It was also disjointed because the first one was & that’s because we’re learning from a real narrator & Author a guy with serious mental illness!!!
No..... Its like fight club. He says he is not the joker. She leaves him. He has a visitor (her) he kills the version of himself she didn't want. He cuts himself and creates the version of joker we all know.
I genuinely think the film is a solid 6/10 or a 7. As someone who wants to be a future film director- I can understand what Todd Phillips was trying to do and what he DID do. Regardless this Arthur/Joker WAS gonna die. He was faced with the DEATH penalty. This is a more realistic joker. He isn't gonna be put into Arkham asylum to break out OVER AND OVER again. And i genuinely like the film. People are missing the true meaning and the point of the film. Is it an amazing film? HELLL NO. is it a BAD film? No. It's an ok movie that has a decent amount of good or ok qualities
Elites hated that the first movie inspired people to fight the system. So the second one is a humiliation of the audience through Arthur to say "you can't beat the system, this is what will happen".
Sometimes some films don't need sequels, this thing happened before, and it's mostly the same old story, well in this case it is. In a sense I feel like the idea of this film would've been better with someone with a good idea on how to execute it, on paper it sounds like something Tim Burton would've done. And if not Tim, I think the concept of its plot needs a different villain than the joker. While yes, Joker is a very unpredictable character and anyone other than Arthur could play the role, every plot of Joker has that factor and at one point it even has Batman in the driving seat. Split personality and accountability isn't something you would see with his stories, it's mostly about madness and how madness takes over on this rollercoaster of ups and downs till the mind breaks. I firmly believe, that if you're gonna go, with a split psyche, one that is struggling with inner darkness. The main go-to character is Harvey Dent, or Two-Face. A struggle between a face of justice and a deranged criminal bent on ruling with fear and tyranny as opposed to order. It's kinda funny tho that, in a meta sense, the film itself is a joke. Because it seems to be a mockery of crossing the line when the act is already over and the audiences are still looking for the punchline. AKA this movie's entire existence. It's a joke, probably not just as an insult, but that's really the punchline it has.
I just watched it in theaters tonight on Halloween in an empty theater and I can say the first 85% of the movie is actually so so so good especially at the later parts but then after a certain scene the whole movie falls off and joker decides not to be joker anymore
If the Movie was not about Joker then likely it would have done better. The problem is though the character is meant to become Joker and well certain expectations are tied to that name. Did not help that the director was being a donkey to fans online.
Bad writing YES, he should not have regressed. First off, there shouldn't have even been a sequel. Said from the moment it was announced till the day I die, just glad to see even the mainstream so overwhelming agree so I can't be mad with this video because for once I'm overwhelmingly on the winning side. I mean on other shit to, but this is a big on. But yeah, Artur should be REVELING in being the Joker, not have regressed back. That's modern day bad writing where characters cycle back to problems they overcame already and that's seen as "progression." No, he should've been joker the WHOLE film.
I heard so many downers of the film that made me jump into spoilers. But now hearing your take in some light, it got me thinking it could have been something different that could further the Joker mythos and maybe give it a break. Joker doesn’t have a definitive origin and that’s what he prefers with the ironic consistency of have a bad day and let his past be ambiguous. The first film reminds me of his Killing Joke story of his failing comedy act who later lose his optimistic loved one from a tragedy when they were living a struggle life, according to Joker’s life of multiple choices. But with the ending of a random patient taking his place reminds of the Red Hood persona, for whoever get their hands on the mask or any form becomes a leader of their gang which is implied to happened to other criminals including to the man who became the Clown Prince of Crime. Not saying it’s a missed opportunity, but I figure that if they were to EVER plan for a trilogy they could have gone to the Cornetto route; stand alone trilogy with some connection but doesn’t rely on continuity. Keep the Arthur Fleck as his own, a Red Hood story but keep the person a secret until his eventual turn, and the court part be a segment for the criminal life of Jack Napier like we see with Burton’s Batman or Mask of the Phantasm. I dunno I’m just throwing some ideas that gonna be overlooked anyway.
I feel like if this movie wasn't a musical but instead like the first movie than the pacing could've been better in some ways or another. Other than that, I think the OST is pretty good as well, not musical good but pretty good either way
It felt like I watched Arthur tormented for 2 hours and then murdered. The world of Gotham is fucked, filled with corrupt government, evil politicians and guardsmen and I am supposed to see the Joker as the bad guy? Like yeah he wasnt good but no one who lived through what he did would have been any better.
Joker 2 was a lot darker than the first one, the bigger musical numbers were visually stunning and Gaga is now my favourite harley quinn. this movie was not horrible at all
@@chandlerburse Okay, then you rip a torrent something. You dont have to pay to watch this movie. You're not that bright in your head if you critique a movie without ever seeing it.
@@BonnelliFactoryDGGI mean they probably seen all the reviews and stuff and they didn’t really wanna watch the movie since they have better things to do and knew it wasn’t worth seeing the movie I mean let them do whatever they want don’t force them to watch a movie alright
joker 2 is a very very fine movie. The ending however is truly terrible, but for the first two acts i was really vibing with it, but man that last act. But yeah i really dont get why people either love it, or they hate it, when in reality for me at least, its in the middle.
It was absolutely miserable tf are you talkin man?! It was genuinely painful to watch and not in a way that would mean anything like in the first movie, specially those few scenes that were never brought up again and never got what deserved to happen
Yeah, man. I really enjoyed this movie too. I thought Arthur's story ended up being very tragic. He was beat down by nearly everyone in his life, and yes, he did commit evil acts. But I just feel for him. And Harley was kind of this manipulator character who served as being a good thing in Arthur's life, but ended up pulling the rug out from under him. IT'S INTERESTING.
Feels like they took the opportunity to hit us with Hollywood social commentary again. the first movie which was about an ignored, impotent, abused and tortured man finding strength in an alt personality. Who then inadvertently causes a movement for anarchy against the “system” that was uncaring and unwilling to bend to those in need of a voice. Who then decides to show that system that created him the same treatment, laughing while he did it and finding himself. Then the sequel decides to say that no every man who has ever felt that way is really just in need of a woman to show him attention and he will lose his will to be what he wanted to be and for go his new found strength for a basic idealized relationship and child , bcuz that’s all he ever really wanted and needed to be normal. Who then gets the joker and his violence raped out of him, then subsequently is rejected by said woman bcuz he’s now a neutered Arthur fleck again. Bcuz what woman could be with a broken man. Who is then murdered by the real joker who cuts the heath ledger into his face bcuz why come up with your own ending when you can connect your shit movie to a better version of the character. I actually liked the first one which is why the second one is such a kick in the nuts. It’s spitting in the face of the comic fans and “incells” who bought the tickets and got them their hefty paychecks. They forgo what made the first one almost special to bow to the assclowns who said the first one was indicative of the toxic masculinity of its audience. Then they gave of their indictment of “geek” culture with this toxic feminist shit show. Laughing while they do it … wow how joker like, a masterpiece you say? Those who don’t like it don’t understand it? What a well thought out argument. How funny do you think Todd Phillips will think it is when he’s directing Road Trip2 next with a million foot fetish scenes, I only hope Joaquin phoenix doesn’t engage in the debate of this movies “brilliance” bcuz he’s a good actor and deserves better. How can you defend this shit, it ruins two movie franchises with that ending , are there 2 Harvey Dents in the world that both got their face burned off? Are they father and son? Did all this bullshit revolution happen and everyone just forgot about it in the future ? Or do you just blame this all on the untrustworthy narrator? This was just a big F You to Christopher Nolan who would not let Warner Bros connect joker to his trilogy, they decided the second he was out the door they were gonna do it anyway ….unbelievable, defend it all you want , claim the haters can’t understand subtext and all of us knuckle draggers are to sexist and stupid to understand the complexities of lady Gaga’s miracle voice. To you I sy what Warner Bros message to Nolan was. Go F you self
Glad someone finally spoke up, there's a lot of undeserved hate for this movie. It's not good, but it's not the worst thing in the history of cinema. People really seem to be jumping on the hate wagon rather than coming up with honest criticisms, I've seen so many people hating on it that haven't even watched the film.
I liked it overall, not amazing but it was good and doesn't deserve the hate. People are latching on way to hard that this Harley isn't the Harley origin we saw in other versions EXACTLY. She doesn't just fall for him because he manipulates her but I think it's a much more interesting take of someone that would be becoming a psychologist, seeing somone that unhinged and becoming infatuated with the idea of Joker before even meeting him. The musical bits are alright, I somewhat enjoyed them but I can see why others wouldn't. It was more like story beats and him escaping into musical fantasy (the clip from the movie they watched kinda foreshadows that interpretation). And the ending I think was shocking but fine in that it is a genuine human reaction to what happened with the gaurds. The Joker is a character and he enjoyed the power but that broke him in making feel small and vulnerable and realise he isn't some super hero. The stabbing is ironic because he was buying into the insanity and the tragic irony is that someone so messed up WOULD buy into his narrative even those they are objectively a psycho unlike the people outside who just resonated with the feeling of being lesser.
I find it funny though that what snaps Arthur out of it and feel remorse for what he did is seeing his followers getting killed because any other joker would have the exact opposite reaction. They’d just laugh their ass off and move on.
I feel like Todd Philips tried to treat the audience like they were adults and unfortunately they're not not. There are some criticisms I can make of this film, some of which you touched on. Overall, I thought this was a well crafted movie and the ending was the most logical outcome for this story.
I thought the movie was great too! Maybe a little dependant on talking about what happened in the first movie, but I think there was lots to read into the movie to make it interesting. I didn’t find the music and singing a distraction from the pacing because this was clearly diving into Arthur’s emotional state and romanticizing becoming Joker again, brought about because of Lee and his association with her through music. The music is his numbing out the seriousness of his upcoming trail, and the utter depressing look of Gotham and his life as a whole.
A great movie, that certainly was not the movie a good part of it's audience expected. Understanding it's fiction, some Joker fans seems to like his supposedly symbolism of "freedom" and "anarchy", him challenging a sick society which produces monsters like him. And said people it seems misunderstood the first movie, thinking Arthur was depicted in the same way, being the product of a society that let him down. Well, "the joke is on them" as now we know, the movie was in reality a deep conversation on mental illness and it's sometimes brutal consequences, and not, by any means, apologetic of nonsensical and gratuitous violence. Moreover, the movie speaks to us, the audience, and how fucked up a part of our society is. Why, would many people think, that Arthur understanding the consequences of his actions, taking ownership of what he did, accepting who he is, even if that means been abandoned once more, now by his groupies, "is wrong" and "sucks"? Why would this movie needed being another validation of gratuitous violence like there are many: Pulp Fiction, The fighting club, and a large etc? Yes, this movie may not be the movie we expected, but I think is nonetheless the picture we needed, one that reminds us of how broken, fucked up, and wrong a character like the classical Joker and Harley are, something refreshing in a modern society in which characters than embody values like Superman are "boring" and characters like Joker, Deadpool and Harley are popular and even inspirational. I am not saying, and with this I rest my case, that every Joker fan is a nut job, but questioning why so many people think a movie that departures from the apologetic take on said character is crap
The movie was beautiful, acting immaculate, singing couldve done better if they let them reach full potential, ending wtf, the ending was a joke. But common Jacquin phenioux w with his acting
Being a contrarian is disagreeing with a popular opinion to just be a rebel. This guy is just saying he liked the movie well, because he liked the movie. Don’t see him trying to act clever about it
They're going to rip you a new ass on disagreement day
Only liptart brain will say Joker 2 is good or enjoyable. Actual liptart
Very eloquent
😭😭😭
They're a bunch of neckbeards who see themselves as Arthur.
I think it comes down to the fact that people didn't want to see Arthur "redeem" himself (reject the Joker). They wanted to see how a fully committed Joker could captivate Harley and sow chaos across Gotham. While Phillips wanted Arthur to continue his internal struggle and come out rejecting his demons. The ending is very fitting for that kind of Joker and is good in that regard. But it just wasn't what people were hoping for.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
You can't redeem Arthur without forgetting the first movie, which is what the sequel does. Besides, there's nothing fun in seeing a protagonist get abused throughout the whole movie and then getting killed.
@@PieroMinayaRojasBecause it's not supposed to be fun, it's supposed to be fucking tragic and nihilistic. The "fun" elements of both films are distorted when in reality, they are tragic.
Maybe watch the first film again since you clearly didn't understand it past the surface level
Arthur has nothing to redeem to. The people who he killed were all abusers or bullies. Arthur wasn't killed by the psychopath because he killed those assholes but because he betrayed his true self, the Joker. He betrayed the cause.
Yeah, most people didn't want to watch a movie about Gotham City and how people like Arthur Fleck are being treated there. Although this depiction of a mean city is pretty DC canonical, they just don't like a realist approach to it from the point of view of a non-superskilled outsider. Most people want escapism, larger than life shit, demigods, clearcut villains, heroes, or antiheroes. The typical MCU stereotypes. Even pretty vanilla anti-villains such as Harley Quinn in Birds of Prey were hard to swallow for many, straying too far from the norm. I love DC/Warner for taking risks and going places that are more niche and controversial, somewhat experimental.
I don’t think you are going to spoil a movie that people don’t really want and or care to see.
I love your profile
The ending was like a shitty plot leak you’d find on Reddit
The movie was a troll but the joke is on the studio
It was actually leaked (i dont remember if it was on reddit), so yeah
No it wss a fan theory when the first on came out@@mantraki
No, the joke is the audience for being duped
@@effurfeelings what are you on about im talking about the ending wasnt leaked it was a fan theory when the first one came out
@@Quartermp4 no
It wasn’t terrible, it’s just a letdown compared to the first one. The music could have been cut out and the ending should have been changed. I give it a 5/10.
@@spider-manunknown9193 nah
@@thegreatacolyt1277 *yah
@@spider-manunknown9193 so your saying it's mid? Because 5/10 sounds kinda bad rating wise
@@AmonRa_Stringeryou do know what mid is right?
@@AmonRa_Stringer 5/10 is mid.
Ngl one of the few times I disagree with you Colin, I felt Joker 2 was a complete misunderstanding of what made the first film so good in it's terms of quality, especially with that ending, which is poor writing for both the Joker movies standard of its Elseworlds grounded "realistic Joker" and the history of Joker altogether as a comic book character.
0:37 I do agree with this tho, the musicals especially were terrible, I'd say just the instrumentals for those songs mixed in with a semi rushed approach to the lyric singing is what imo makes them so bad but also the overusage of the songs too, I'm a musical fan but even then this just felt like a lazy musical with no substance
Good joke
The movie was made to humiliate the character in as many ways they could and then offed him because Todd Philips or the higher-ups didn't intend for the audience that liked the first one to be their fanbase which is so insecure because nobody saw Arthur as an inspiration. They just felt bad for what happened to him. The first movie resonated with the wrong audience for them. They didn't want certain people agreeing and calling out the class warfare our government uses. That's it. So they assassinated the character in every way possible.
Hey man, glad you somewhat liked it, but it's a 4/10 for me brother and I'm one of the most benefit of the doubt guys I know. Like I've been able to defend Thor Love and Thunder even to an extent (which is still an objectively bad film, all I'm saying is I could come up with more to like in that hot mess, than in Joker 2), but Joker 2 is just a boring slog of a film with 0 rewatchability factor that pretty much retcons all of Arthur's mental arches from the first one. I even thought Gaga as Harley was a good choice, but literally all she did was act like a more subtle Joker and had little to no speaking lines all with no depth to what should make her interesting. Idk how you manage to have less depth than original Suicide Squad Harley, but here we are. One major compliment I can give it is the cinematography, atmosphere, and scale, but that's honestly it. I don't hate this film like many others do, I'm just more or less indifferent to it
They didn't regress on Arthurs mental state at all. And Harley's character does have depth that works completely fine with what they're doing in the movie. She's a mentally ill and delusional person, who makes up fantasies about the world to make herself feel validated, and her presence and feeding of Arthur's alternate "persona" is doing Arthur more harm than good to Arthur. How is that a bad character that doesn't work thematically or fill her role good in the movie?
@@C0LIN.Brother, Todd Phillips is not your dad.
@@akdreamer6497Colin got some attitude issues lately...
...I agreed with his videos on Synthetic Man, Hansen and more, which is why I subscribed but lately I've been finding him to be overly rude to people who disagree with him even if he doesn't want to come off that way.
@@StarwayBunnyHe's not being rude at all
@@rose.sinclair Not this time I agree.
What I come to realize is Arthur’s story is more Todd Phillip’s taxi driver style drama than a joker origin because even in the first movie I couldn’t really see him becoming the villain we know because he’s so different. He’s a sad lonely guy who was given a gun and had enough abuse. He’s not a supervillain or a criminal mastermind and Todd warned comic fans not to expect him to be. I don’t know I have mixed feelings about it.
Sounds like cope to me.
For once and probably the only time sk, I agree with you.
It Hollywood baby
Rachel zegler
@@DallasReimer no
@@s.k.4289 nah
It truly is, doesn’t help he’s trying to debunk moist critical
100 percent agree. I think people keep saying "they misunderstood the first film" is incorrect. They did understand it, Arthur spells it out in the first film "you people would just walk right over me". The first film it is very much implied that he inspires the joker and is not the joker. Everybody cares about "Joker" not Arthur, which is why people don't like it. Which in turn is ironic on how the film ends. I do think that the film should've put more emphasis on how the Joker persona was beat out of him because the first film does very much have him walk out "free".
I'm shocked that people ever thought Arthur was the real Joker, I thought it was pretty clear in the first movie that he started a movement and a person with higher intelligence and more violent would become the real Joker. I think the final scene could've been better, but I had a strong feeling going in that Arthur would be killed by the Joker.
I was honestly hoping we would see him change and grow into the clown prince of crime.
@@MasonGrant0704Okay, so the made a movie about the “joker” only to have the movie not be about the fucking joker? Your defense is that we all got pranked into believing the film that markets itself as the joker backstory isn’t about the joker?
I liked the ending of this film. Arthur becoming sane by taking accountability after seeing the negative impact he has on the society, only to be discarded by the society that sees no worth in sane people and then murdered by someone who becomes the New Joker is a very fitting end for a sequel if there had to be one.
I didn't like much else about the film
Bro that's the WORST part
That sounds like an awful cliche ending
This movie didnt need a sequel
@@chandlerbursethis movie is a sequel.
@@ShockwaveFPSStudios im talking about the first
@@chandlerburse It didn't but Warner Bros paid them a lot of money to do it. If you have to make a sequel to a movie that didn't need it, the ending could have been worse
Ok Colin, this is one of the few times I have to disagree. This movie is a terrible downgrade compared to the first movie. The de construction of the joker, the musicals that didn’t have to be there (although I will say weren’t bad) and the way they just re told the same story in the court room is just bad.
He agreed with half of what you said in the vid
@@connor_is_k I know, but even then I really think it’s a bad movie. I give it a 3/10 but he’s making sound like it’s not a bad film. He gave it an 8/10. I on the other hand thought it was terrible compared to the first movie.
@@RulerX. This isn't relevant to what to said before but it just kinda makes me sad when I think of what this movie could've been
U haven’t really elaborated on why any of the things u said are actually bad
@@C0LIN.he’s not going to put a whole paragraph in a comment section. He’s just pointing out what he disagrees with on small scale. You should invite him to disagreement day if you want to hear every criticism he has.😊
I recommend watching Transformers One. The movie has positive reviews from audiences and critics on Rotten Tomatoes, and I've watched the movie myself with my brother, and it was great that the film has darker scenes and a compelling plot.
You should get tickets to watch Transformers One on the big screen instead of Joker 2
I’ve watched Transformers One instead of Megalopolis and The Wild Robot three times… and I think it’s great.
@robkardashianburner you should at least give Transformers One a chance
@robkardashianburner while that’s often true for many movies, its not the case for the new Transformers movie. just go watch the movie & see it for yourself.
What people dont seem to realize is that the movie was never about THE Joker. It was about Arthur, who unfortunately got turned into A Joker by society. I think the ending to the 2nd one sucks, but it's only because I wanted to see more of Arthur, lol. He genuinely had character development because he realized that he had to take accountability for his actions and face the consequences. That to me shows character growth. The reason why most people don't like the film, is because they wanted Arthur to grow into more of a villain, and I think that's kind of the point of the film. The people cheered him on when he was "Joker" but whenever he's Arthur, nobody is there backing him up. It's sad because I like scenes with Arthur more than I do Joker in the first film. Even in the first film, he was only Joker for the last 20 minutes. It just goes to show that when people don't get what they want out of someone or something, they're quick to judge or quick to flip flop their stance. Both films are really masterpieces in picking out the flaws within society.
I took the ending as a nod to the 3 Joker comic book where the dude that kills arthur is the criminal, arthur is the comedian and the dude that helped him escape was the clown. But thats just me 🙃
interesting take
Man Colin you have some awful takes. I haven’t seen the movie but I have seen the ending and the ending is absolute dogshit, I won’t comment on the whole movie but I will comment on the ending, the point of the first joker movie was to show Arthur’s slow descent into madness and him becoming the clown prince of crime but having Arthur DIE and get replaced as the joker by a guy we know next to nothing about makes the first movie completely and utterly pointless. I love your channel Colin and I do agree with a lot of your takes, spider man 2, invisible season 2, Lego Batman movie, etc, but your takes on Loki season 2, far from home and the ending of this movie I completely disagree with. Also I would love to show up on disagreement day but I don’t have a discord so sorry but I won’t be showing up… but still it’s your opinion and I respect it, I just completely disagree.
It doesn't detract at all from the point of the first movie, if anything it literally uplifts and supports it... How are you going to say the ending is bad when you literally don't even have the proper context to make that judgement.
@@C0LIN. I just think that having Arthur die and not become joker is ridiculous, he is supposed to go completely insane and become THE joker of the this universe, just get killed off and replaced… but you do have a point that I haven’t seen the movie to fully judge this so I’ll give it a little bit of a chance, I just think that Arthur should’ve became the joker of this universe since that’s what the first movie did.
@@DallasReimer The movie explores why he doesn’t become “Joker” and it’s not just like every other Joker adaptation that just has him go insane for the rest of his life. That doesn’t make it bad, it’s actually really interesting why he develops as a character.
@@C0LIN. Remember it’s your opinion and it’s mine besides if I actually see the movie then my opinion might change.
@@DallasReimer See the movie, see the concext.
From what I understand from what i gathered from seeing some people opinion of the movie, Joker being depressed didn't make sense because of what happened at the end of the first film. At the end of the first film, he feels relief and willfully killed without a hint of regret and is fully aware of what he did.
I'll probably go watch the movie and see if this is true.
He feels depressed in the beginning for the same reason he takes accountability by the end of the movie, that I explained in the video
Has someone who is actually diagnosed with depression, you don't just have one triumphant moment and suddenly everything that's ever happend to you doesn't matter anymore.
@farquarwion4324
For clarification, what i typed isn't my opinion. It's the opinions of people who didn't enjoy how the joker was portrayed after the first movie.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong. The Joker is one of the biggest villains in DC because of his descent into insanity, so why does his depression Arc need to continue after what we've seen from the first film?
Also, I never argued that depression doesn't matter anymore after you get past it. So I don't understand why you felt the need to bring that up.
@KallaTheYapper347 okay first off, reading this to me comes off as you thought I was coming at you, if you thought I dis I apologize. Also this isn't comic joker, so that comparison is irrelevant to what the movie showed, jokers name was never Arthur fleck and he never was a clown before becoming joker. He also never fought batman to become the joker anyways, so again this joker is far far removed from source material. Secondly I was only commenting on the fact you said (or other people you're quoting) the joker wouldn't be back to being depressed and my answer to you was basically he never did. Everything else you said idk where you got any of that becuase I was not commenting on it.
@@KallaTheYapper347 you even said in your reply, why would jokers depression arc continue. It wouldn't make sense for his depression arc to be done after killing 1 guy.
Here’s what I don’t understand about the negative press at all.
The first Joker was praised all around for an incredibly grounded, realistic portrayal of how a man descends into Todd Howard’s vision of Joker. It was also heavily praised for its realistic portrayal of mental health and unfair systems impacting those suffering from it.
Joker 2 then seems to be getting criticism for being a realistic and grounded sequel to the events of the first movie with a continuing insight into Arthur’s mental state.
I can’t wrap my head around what people would have actually wanted from this movie. Was Joker to be flanderised as simply “crazy now,” and was he to suffer no backlash for his actions and just boringly run around with henchmen and Harley the whole movie?
I really don’t get it.
The difference is that the first movie wasn't what many people had seen before during the MCU and DCEU craze and was at a time when social media and cyber bullying was growing that it latched onto many people that had some sort of connection. By 2024, comic book movies have already changed since 2019, and Joker has become larger than life to many. The most iconic villain in comic book history and probably resonated with casuals more with the first movie which was just exactly what fans wanted, what they expect with the sequel without really understanding that both films were ever supposed to be like The Joker. Both movies are exaggerated caricatures of the character eith the only difference being that one was embraced by people and other isn't. The first movie is a story that didn't need a sequel but the execution is very apparent, the less restrictive control from the studio involved, shifting tone of being a bombastic musical versus the slowly burn character study horror film the original was, and the failed promise of expanding Joker as a criminal mastermind and instead made Arthur being embarrassed of being Joker. As if Todd Phillips, the director who was clearly embarrassed of the genre, became a victim of his own success. And it's probably the reason why he's said he will never make another DC movie after Joker 2.
I guess the sequel was so hated, now people are looking back on the first one and realizing it's not as good as they remembered and are noticing the movie's flaws, the story, the depiction of Joker, how the director was embarrassed of the genre and comics, the forced setups, the side characters' performances, the blatantly obvious references to Martin Scorsese, and the not-so-subtle writing.
I recognize I’m probably the biggest outlier here, but I thought it was a masterpiece. I just feel like most people didn’t really get it. The musical numbers weren’t at all annoying to me, especially considering that they were all trying to say something in some way. I’d even say they’re a very powerful addition to the movie, they made for some very entertaining scenes. Narratively I’d say it’s also very thought-provoking and complex. With his story concluded, Joaquin’s joker remains as the best one we’ve ever had.
My movie of the year, 10/10
Same here man so glad you truly believe it’s a 10/10. I went in with zero expectations what so ever and of course I didn’t listen to any critics or any of those masters of every art form and I was so suprised and shocked! I can’t believe I’m actually saying this but I loved this movie more than Joker 1. Maybe people don’t love this movie as much because it’s darker more tragic and a the end movie realistic and bleak
How is it a masterpiece?
@@korruptor9777 i explained in my comment why i thought it was so good. also i love doom eternal too bro we dont gotta be enemies cus we disagree on this one thing, k? though i would like to hear a genuine argument for this movie having bad writing or "going nowhere" cus i haven't heard one yet
THANK YOU. This is what i’ve been saying. Todd Phillips is a genius and the people to hate this movie because he "destroyed" Joker are proving the point the movie was tried to make. I definitely feel like this film will get more recognition in the future.
Loved the film as well. That's not to say it's flawless (Imo they could've removed two specific songs, I didn't like some of the flashback clips and Harvey Dent didn't impress me), but I think it's one of those sort of arthouse type films where people have to watch it and make their own judgement rather than just getting on the hate train. Divisive but I think that kind of risk taking is good for an industry where it's all about playing it safe.
*SPOILERS*
I heard some reactions to the film that describe a scene where the Guards *SA* Arthur to “Get the Joker” out of him is that true? Because I don’t wanna see that at all and it’s stopping me from seeing it atm.
aw hell nah 😭 what??
@@blubrrybeaniethat’s what I’m saying 😭 I’m not trying to pay 30 bucks for a movie ticket to see that ☠️☠️
Charlie only said it’s implied so it’s not established if that happened or not. Considering it’s an R rated movie I’m not suprised they would put SA in the movie.
@@attilahun2no it's very obvious it happens. One of the guards says "take his rags off" while Arthur is pinned to the floor by 2 other guards and he screams no a few times then it cuts to them dragging Arthur lifeless and without pants on.
The least surprising thing I've heard about that film
I expected it to suck, but I ended up enjoying it all the way through. I don't get why people hate it so much, unless they hate the music scenes, or the fact that it mostly takes place in a prison or a courtroom or because Arthur gets killed at the end. I really don't get it. To me it seems that people are just repeating the points they've heard from reviews. And I don't see how this is supposedly an anti-incel movie or that it supposedly tries to piss off the fans of the old movie. Lot of people seem to be confused because they're expecting a movie to tell them how to feel and Joker 2 doesn't do that. Who are the good guys and and the bad guys in this movie? The guards are definitely not the good guys, or the prosecutor Harvey Dent. The "innocent" victims that Arthur killed in the first movie weren't the good guys either. Maybe a couple of them didn't deserve to be outright killed but the rest of them did. My sympathies are strongly on Arthur's/Joker's side. I don't know what the director wanted to say, put personally I like the character Joker even more. I love the ending because that's when the heritage of Arthur Fleck truly gets immortalized. His death was a necessary sacrifice. Joker is not only a one guy but symbolizes untamed creativity, freedom and the rebellion against the oppressors.
The movie committed a sin in the opening act by regressing all of the jokers character development from the first film. Only to have him recover that development by the end of the second act and then take it away in the third. Why would the writers choose to invalidate a key part of the first movies success? They could’ve made another billion dollars if this movie was about the Joker we saw at the end of the last movie
Because it's character assassination
I think its definitely overhated as a lot of things are due to mob mentality, but its no masterpiece by any stretch. Biggest issue was it was boring. The worst crime any movie can ever possibly commit is to be boring. I did like the scene where his supporters dump him when he finally disavowed Joker though.
guys i hate when they say transformers one is a flop and transformers is dead although it is in line to be in the oscars altough mutant mayhem had the same box office 25 million and the budget and its getting a sequel worse case cenario they lower the budget for a sequel
#SaveTFOne. Sign here, sign here.
@@ShockwaveFPSStudios mutant mayhem went trough the same openning oit will make 150 million at least
idk bro, this is not Joker, it's regressing his character arc from the first movie. And the plot is just reminding you "oh first movie shit indeed happened", it's boring and dumb. I already know what happened and understand that he is indeed a fucked up guy, and Arthur character basically loop back to the start, just a sad mf with mental illness. All the character build up for the Joker completely gets shit on by the writer or the director. Really seems like Todd hate what he created and wants to shit on it in for 2 hours straight. There's literally no reason for this movie to exist, and the random guy that stab him feels force and out of nowhere. And if the movie is about Arthur being bad so he had to face his consequences, Then wtf, the police have no consequence. Not a single thing comes their way after ruthlessly insult, beat, and a implied rape on Arthur.
Feels like The Last of Us 2 again. They made a sequel just to disrespect the first one. Fcking leftist mindset
You gave the movie an 8/10 your the real joker😂
Lord forbid a man have an opinion!
Can’t have those, especially nowadays!
No sir!
You can’t like what I hate and hate what I like!
It's a terrible sequel that doesn't build or add anything to the universe. Maybe on it's own merit it could be better, but even then I still don't really think so. The plot goes nowhere, the singing gets annoying (and a lot of the song picks I actually liked separate from the movie). I see what they were going for, but it just doesn't work, like, at all.
The fact that arthur was depressed to begin with is idiotic it takes his character back. They act like his character didnt have development.
@@Yakonsupremacy He feels depressed in the beginning for the same reason he takes accountability by the end of the movie, that I explained in the video
He was beaten and battered by the system that once neglected him, and that put him in the position he was in in the first move to begin with. Of course he was going to be fucking depressed.
@@C0LIN. if you want Arthur to feel regret or to be sympathetic you need to develop that, you cant just have him be a maniac who dosnt give a shit at the end of the first movie and suddenly have him be the complete opposite in the second one. I dont mind him realising his mistakes thats an interesting route, the problem is it dosnt align with his character from the first movie, so you cant just have that in the beginning
@@YakonsupremacyHow does it not align with his character from the first movie… In the first movie his “development” was him finally just going insane and snapping on society. Just because he starts off the movie depressed and it foreshadows the regret for his actions that will be fleshed out later in the movie, doesn’t mean he’s out of character… Depression doesn’t just go away.
@@C0LIN. exactly, he has snapped, im not saying his depression should just go away, im saying that its dumb for arthurs character to change that much, over no development, the entire point of the joker is that it takes one bad day, one bad moment to snap and turn insane, joker just suddenly unsnapping and realising his mistakes with nothing going on is idiotic, he was also depressed in the end of the first movie, yet he acted way different. And in a narrative sense its dumb, since we’d expect to see the same person we ended of the last movie with, if not the first movie feels pointless. If no of the development the joker made through the movie mattered at all, and hes just back to the beginning then what was the point of the first movie
I don't understand why people hate the ending so much, I get the complaints about the rest of the film but not that ending. I feel like it was pretty obvious in the first film that Arthur wasn't THE Joker, like it definitely felt like they were doing the Gotham thing of having Joker start out as a movement caused by the actions of one person that would eventually lead to the definitive Joker. I'm pretty sure it was also a pretty popular fan theory at the time that Arthur wasn't THE Joker. I don't understand how now that they were proven right that people suddenly think it's a terrible decision.
SPOILERS
Considering that it’s revealed that he didn’t kill the counselor in the first movie, I’m hoping it’s revealed that the guy who killed Arthur was actually Arthur embracing himself as an agent of chaos and committing pseudocide (i.e. making it seem like he killed himself but not actually).
Edit: Alternatively, they could’ve revealed it in the ending of this movie that Arthur was the psychopath who “killed himself”, so that we wouldn’t have to wait another 5 years for the above reveal I suggested.
Right? That would make the whole movie good imo
I feel like if they wanted to leave it open ended like that they coulda had it be like a blurry version of the fan that got him in the car.
Using an actor that doesn't look like joaquin doesn't help validate the theory.
But it would be awesome tho.
Jeez, what happened? Did you hit your quota on having good takes and felt you had to have a garbage one to balance things out?
Nobody who watched the first movie wanted to see him get killed by random prisoner nor have cops assault him
This movie was made as a response to those who liked athur's character in the first flim
The ending is what really broke the movie into a million pieces.
(I mean that negatively)
No it didn't, it makes sense thematically for both this movie and the first movie
@@C0LIN.Eh idk, how does Arthur being killed by a new Joker or even thematically "the REAL" Joker fit with the narrative of the first film? I could be wrong and would love to be corrected but it makes no sense narratively, the whole perspective of Joker to me at least was that he supposedly became the REAL Joker but in a different adapted way where he was a social reject vs being someone who was a agent of chaos like comic Joker.
This ending takes away the idea that he ever was the Joker...
Because the point of “Joker” was that society and the world around someone can turn anyone into “Joker”. And as for the rest I explained it in this video.
@@C0LIN. Fair enough good explanation, but Joker 2 really doesn't reinforce that, if anything it teaches a different lesson on "how anyone can have the Joker in themselves stripped away" I mean that is essentially what happens to Arthur,, especially in the ending
From what I heard, the movie doesn't go anywhere, other than trying to degrade the joker himself multiple times. That kind of defeats the character in general, like Joker is supposed to be this irredeemable guy who commits crimes for the fuck of it, because he can. He is a sociopath. Also I highly doubt this movie is a 8/10, there are MUCH better movies that are 8/10.
Yeah sure he has mental problems, but the joker embraces those problems and runs with it. Also from what I heard, Harley had the most potential in the movie but ultimately didn't get fully fleshed out. From this, I give the movie a 4/10 maximum. They could've went to the route on having this joking fulling becoming the joker, "killing off" Arthur, would who seem like to be a dead weight to the joker. idk man, but I know an 8/10 is an outrageous rating.
your first mistake was still going with the notion this was a comic accurate Joker, even after the first film. Let those thoughts go and accept he isn't.
@@MilleniumKage yeah no shit sherlock, when has any superhero been comic accurate? But the point of the term "comic accurate" is to take the source of the original character and makes a fun twist out of it, having it's own representation, but ultimately have some relation to the original source.
Not only is this movie not even close to what the Joker is related to, but it is actively trying to kill the character entirely. just trying to shut him off by being a "persona". It's a stupid take that doesn't go anywhere other than killing the joker. my point still stands.
@@alonsovenegas4444have you consider the cinematography and the color grading? I get it you give it a 4/10 but don't forgot about other aspect. the music scoring is really good (not the musical one). the cinematography and the color gradingare really excellent. Phoenix is still good same as the last movie and gaga acting is also good. It just that the story is lacking and this movie is just recapping the first movie. Doesn't mean the movie is bad but it still good on any other aspect. it is not at 4/10 maximum because if it is, then any other aspect of the film is bad.
@@alonsovenegas4444 yeah like I said, you made the mistake of still expecting it to be more in-line with Joker of the comics when it’s damn obvious from the first film and Todd Phillips’ interviews that it isn’t the case.
So instead of crying in the comment section of “muh comics” and still trying to tie it back to supposedly it “getting the joker wrong” acknowledge the first point of it not being an adaption of the character truly, because your points of it are pointless
@@alonsovenegas4444 and you haven’t even watched the film, so your opinion or whatever is invalid 😂
I just am sick of the realistic depictions of comic characters I want a more fantastical and lore accurate setting
Colin: you can't elaborate, thus I win.
Soup in prison shower: enjoy it while you can. It won't last.
Never knew a dude could cope so hard.
I think there is artistic merit to the film but because a sequel was never planned it's struggling uphill, because the first movie didn't really need a sequel.
The first song Arthur sings is actually really captivating, also the one where he starts embracing the joker was my favourite moment. But I think there is a little bit too many songs that kill the momentum a bit. I think there could have been just one big song at one point in the movie, rather than having loads of little songs.
Phoenix was amazing as anticipated, I honestly found myself more caring about Arthur Fleck than the Joker, thing is though I don't really want to watch Arthur get emotionally and physically tortured and then brutally murdered at the end of the film. I think ultimately that's why people are unhappy. The first movie gets you to empathise with Arthur, the second one just makes you watch him get his heartbroken and abused. It's like "okay... thanks for showing me that?" I think that's the main reason people won't like this movie.
Of course the guy having pointless beef with somebody he’s mad at on Twitter is defending the sequel to the incel Joker movie 💀
The movie was good. It was just not what people expected, 7/10
His morality by the end of the movie regresses everything the first movie built towards
Dude says joker 2 is good but venom 3 is bad?
Yea. Ikr?
That ending though.... man.
Completely fine ending that makes sense thematically
@@C0LIN.Trash ending
What's crazy is if Todd Phillips actually did care about the fans and how he got in the position he's at via fans that pay for his films...
He could have made a really good movie here.
I did actually enjoy everything that was displayed, minus all of the musicals that happened abruptly, which destroyed any tension that was in the previous scene.
He could have made a very good "love" story/courtroom drama, character driven film!!
I didn't think it was dogshit it was just kinda meh the people calling it dogshit are exaggerating
You wanna see REAL dogshit go watch the strangers chapter 1 or borderlands
Think about it - if people are going out of their way to tell you something is good, but especially bad, they'll warn you so others don't suffer similar consequences. The fact that all these fanboys went especting something coop and left disappointed is telling. Then i saw it last night and holy cow is it bad. I am so mad still.
I think the film was brilliantly filmed and written. All the people upset about this film are the exact reason the film was made this way in the first place. People didn’t give a shit about Arther before he was the joker and this film shows that they still didn’t give a shit about him when he became the joker either. People wanted to see the joker not Arther and that misses the entire theme of the first film that everyone is praising. People should not want Arther to become some maniac who kills people. They should want him to get the help he needs and live a good life, but they would rather see him become this symbol of evil that the Joker is meant to be and the ending perfectly symbolizes what the audiences turned these films into because even when joker was a household name Arther was still suffering in silence.
That'd be great if it was about a real person and not the fictional capeslop that people knew it was the whole time.
Its not that deep. Seems the joke is on you too.
I feel like fans thought it was gonna be the joker not Arthur gaining his sense of morality, you have to admit most jokers don’t care about their ally’s or even Harley but this Joker does, to me it was very interesting that Harley was being the manipulative one and Arthur was being the hopeless romantic, it’s sort of a switch from most Joker and Harley dynamics not to mention that while watching this, I read the Three Jokers comic and it suddenly hit me that Joker said it himself there’s no true joker, anyone can be the joker no matter if your a comedian, a clown, or a criminal, joker will never have a true identity and the thing is Arthur was no comedian nor clown nor criminal, in this case he’s a bleeding heart, caring for the people who support him, yet ruined it and lost everything this is the only Joker that cared about his audience
Bro did not cook w this one
My entire family hated what they seen
what did u think of Transformers One?
Great
@@C0LIN.
that's the consensus! It made me love transformers again!
everyone know a dude named Colin who's just like this
I just saw it, didn’t think it was bad at all. It was artsy. It was sad, disturbing, and heart breaking just like the first one. It was also disjointed because the first one was & that’s because we’re learning from a real narrator & Author a guy with serious mental illness!!!
No..... Its like fight club.
He says he is not the joker. She leaves him. He has a visitor (her) he kills the version of himself she didn't want. He cuts himself and creates the version of joker we all know.
I genuinely think the film is a solid 6/10 or a 7. As someone who wants to be a future film director- I can understand what Todd Phillips was trying to do and what he DID do. Regardless this Arthur/Joker WAS gonna die. He was faced with the DEATH penalty. This is a more realistic joker. He isn't gonna be put into Arkham asylum to break out OVER AND OVER again. And i genuinely like the film. People are missing the true meaning and the point of the film. Is it an amazing film? HELLL NO. is it a BAD film? No. It's an ok movie that has a decent amount of good or ok qualities
Elites hated that the first movie inspired people to fight the system.
So the second one is a humiliation of the audience through Arthur to say "you can't beat the system, this is what will happen".
i have a feeling its not gonna be nearly as bad, i think people just dont like musicals
Sometimes some films don't need sequels, this thing happened before, and it's mostly the same old story, well in this case it is. In a sense I feel like the idea of this film would've been better with someone with a good idea on how to execute it, on paper it sounds like something Tim Burton would've done. And if not Tim, I think the concept of its plot needs a different villain than the joker.
While yes, Joker is a very unpredictable character and anyone other than Arthur could play the role, every plot of Joker has that factor and at one point it even has Batman in the driving seat. Split personality and accountability isn't something you would see with his stories, it's mostly about madness and how madness takes over on this rollercoaster of ups and downs till the mind breaks.
I firmly believe, that if you're gonna go, with a split psyche, one that is struggling with inner darkness. The main go-to character is Harvey Dent, or Two-Face. A struggle between a face of justice and a deranged criminal bent on ruling with fear and tyranny as opposed to order.
It's kinda funny tho that, in a meta sense, the film itself is a joke. Because it seems to be a mockery of crossing the line when the act is already over and the audiences are still looking for the punchline. AKA this movie's entire existence. It's a joke, probably not just as an insult, but that's really the punchline it has.
i almost entirely agree, and i appreciate you wording an opinion similar to mine much better than i ever could
I just watched it in theaters tonight on Halloween in an empty theater and I can say the first 85% of the movie is actually so so so good especially at the later parts but then after a certain scene the whole movie falls off and joker decides not to be joker anymore
Why do you look like you're about to shove me into the locker because I didn't do your homework
lmfao
If the Movie was not about Joker then likely it would have done better. The problem is though the character is meant to become Joker and well certain expectations are tied to that name.
Did not help that the director was being a donkey to fans online.
Bad writing YES, he should not have regressed. First off, there shouldn't have even been a sequel. Said from the moment it was announced till the day I die, just glad to see even the mainstream so overwhelming agree so I can't be mad with this video because for once I'm overwhelmingly on the winning side. I mean on other shit to, but this is a big on. But yeah, Artur should be REVELING in being the Joker, not have regressed back. That's modern day bad writing where characters cycle back to problems they overcame already and that's seen as "progression." No, he should've been joker the WHOLE film.
I heard so many downers of the film that made me jump into spoilers. But now hearing your take in some light, it got me thinking it could have been something different that could further the Joker mythos and maybe give it a break. Joker doesn’t have a definitive origin and that’s what he prefers with the ironic consistency of have a bad day and let his past be ambiguous. The first film reminds me of his Killing Joke story of his failing comedy act who later lose his optimistic loved one from a tragedy when they were living a struggle life, according to Joker’s life of multiple choices. But with the ending of a random patient taking his place reminds of the Red Hood persona, for whoever get their hands on the mask or any form becomes a leader of their gang which is implied to happened to other criminals including to the man who became the Clown Prince of Crime.
Not saying it’s a missed opportunity, but I figure that if they were to EVER plan for a trilogy they could have gone to the Cornetto route; stand alone trilogy with some connection but doesn’t rely on continuity. Keep the Arthur Fleck as his own, a Red Hood story but keep the person a secret until his eventual turn, and the court part be a segment for the criminal life of Jack Napier like we see with Burton’s Batman or Mask of the Phantasm. I dunno I’m just throwing some ideas that gonna be overlooked anyway.
Bro how do you complain about black panther 2 and yet defend this trash movie
Idk genius maybe because Black Panther 2 is bad and this movie is good
@@C0LIN.- lol what a great answer
@@C0LIN. Jesus Christ, dude. How did you go from your brilliant take on Deadpool & Wolverine and FFH to this garbage?
@@C0LIN.it’s not
@@C0LIN.Joker 2 is basically The Last of Us 2 tragedy. They made a sequel just to disrespect the first one
HiTop is really to glaze this film and say people don’t like it because it’s not a action mcu movie
I feel like if this movie wasn't a musical but instead like the first movie than the pacing could've been better in some ways or another. Other than that, I think the OST is pretty good as well, not musical good but pretty good either way
It felt like I watched Arthur tormented for 2 hours and then murdered. The world of Gotham is fucked, filled with corrupt government, evil politicians and guardsmen and I am supposed to see the Joker as the bad guy? Like yeah he wasnt good but no one who lived through what he did would have been any better.
Joker 2 was a lot darker than the first one, the bigger musical numbers were visually stunning and Gaga is now my favourite harley quinn. this movie was not horrible at all
So happy I'm not the only one thinking this, felt like I was going crazy to the point that I believe most haters didnt even watch the movie
They don’t want to waste their cash
@@chandlerburse Okay, then you rip a torrent something. You dont have to pay to watch this movie.
You're not that bright in your head if you critique a movie without ever seeing it.
@@BonnelliFactoryDGGI mean they probably seen all the reviews and stuff and they didn’t really wanna watch the movie since they have better things to do and knew it wasn’t worth seeing the movie I mean let them do whatever they want don’t force them to watch a movie alright
It was boring for me
joker 2 is a very very fine movie. The ending however is truly terrible, but for the first two acts i was really vibing with it, but man that last act.
But yeah i really dont get why people either love it, or they hate it, when in reality for me at least, its in the middle.
It was absolutely miserable tf are you talkin man?! It was genuinely painful to watch and not in a way that would mean anything like in the first movie, specially those few scenes that were never brought up again and never got what deserved to happen
I feel like they really tried to make a good movie first, then gave up half way
Yeah, man. I really enjoyed this movie too. I thought Arthur's story ended up being very tragic. He was beat down by nearly everyone in his life, and yes, he did commit evil acts. But I just feel for him. And Harley was kind of this manipulator character who served as being a good thing in Arthur's life, but ended up pulling the rug out from under him. IT'S INTERESTING.
Feels like they took the opportunity to hit us with Hollywood social commentary again. the first movie which was about an ignored, impotent, abused and tortured man finding strength in an alt personality. Who then inadvertently causes a movement for anarchy against the “system” that was uncaring and unwilling to bend to those in need of a voice. Who then decides to show that system that created him the same treatment, laughing while he did it and finding himself. Then the sequel decides to say that no every man who has ever felt that way is really just in need of a woman to show him attention and he will lose his will to be what he wanted to be and for go his new found strength for a basic idealized relationship and child , bcuz that’s all he ever really wanted and needed to be normal. Who then gets the joker and his violence raped out of him, then subsequently is rejected by said woman bcuz he’s now a neutered Arthur fleck again. Bcuz what woman could be with a broken man. Who is then murdered by the real joker who cuts the heath ledger into his face bcuz why come up with your own ending when you can connect your shit movie to a better version of the character. I actually liked the first one which is why the second one is such a kick in the nuts. It’s spitting in the face of the comic fans and “incells” who bought the tickets and got them their hefty paychecks. They forgo what made the first one almost special to bow to the assclowns who said the first one was indicative of the toxic masculinity of its audience. Then they gave of their indictment of “geek” culture with this toxic feminist shit show. Laughing while they do it … wow how joker like, a masterpiece you say? Those who don’t like it don’t understand it? What a well thought out argument. How funny do you think Todd Phillips will think it is when he’s directing Road Trip2 next with a million foot fetish scenes, I only hope Joaquin phoenix doesn’t engage in the debate of this movies “brilliance” bcuz he’s a good actor and deserves better. How can you defend this shit, it ruins two movie franchises with that ending , are there 2 Harvey Dents in the world that both got their face burned off? Are they father and son? Did all this bullshit revolution happen and everyone just forgot about it in the future ? Or do you just blame this all on the untrustworthy narrator? This was just a big F You to Christopher Nolan who would not let Warner Bros connect joker to his trilogy, they decided the second he was out the door they were gonna do it anyway ….unbelievable, defend it all you want , claim the haters can’t understand subtext and all of us knuckle draggers are to sexist and stupid to understand the complexities of lady Gaga’s miracle voice. To you I sy what Warner Bros message to Nolan was. Go F you self
Glad someone finally spoke up, there's a lot of undeserved hate for this movie. It's not good, but it's not the worst thing in the history of cinema. People really seem to be jumping on the hate wagon rather than coming up with honest criticisms, I've seen so many people hating on it that haven't even watched the film.
Oh god some of the takes on this channel I swear lol, at least it's consistent
I liked it overall, not amazing but it was good and doesn't deserve the hate. People are latching on way to hard that this Harley isn't the Harley origin we saw in other versions EXACTLY. She doesn't just fall for him because he manipulates her but I think it's a much more interesting take of someone that would be becoming a psychologist, seeing somone that unhinged and becoming infatuated with the idea of Joker before even meeting him. The musical bits are alright, I somewhat enjoyed them but I can see why others wouldn't. It was more like story beats and him escaping into musical fantasy (the clip from the movie they watched kinda foreshadows that interpretation). And the ending I think was shocking but fine in that it is a genuine human reaction to what happened with the gaurds. The Joker is a character and he enjoyed the power but that broke him in making feel small and vulnerable and realise he isn't some super hero. The stabbing is ironic because he was buying into the insanity and the tragic irony is that someone so messed up WOULD buy into his narrative even those they are objectively a psycho unlike the people outside who just resonated with the feeling of being lesser.
Can we all just agree that the movie didn’t need a sequel?
I haven't seen it, though I dislike the concept of it already.
I find it funny though that what snaps Arthur out of it and feel remorse for what he did is seeing his followers getting killed because any other joker would have the exact opposite reaction. They’d just laugh their ass off and move on.
I feel like Todd Philips tried to treat the audience like they were adults and unfortunately they're not not.
There are some criticisms I can make of this film, some of which you touched on. Overall, I thought this was a well crafted movie and the ending was the most logical outcome for this story.
I thought the movie was great too! Maybe a little dependant on talking about what happened in the first movie, but I think there was lots to read into the movie to make it interesting.
I didn’t find the music and singing a distraction from the pacing because this was clearly diving into Arthur’s emotional state and romanticizing becoming Joker again, brought about because of Lee and his association with her through music. The music is his numbing out the seriousness of his upcoming trail, and the utter depressing look of Gotham and his life as a whole.
Reaally? kinda surprised. I thought it was pretty horrendously written especially AS A SEQUEL
Joker 2 is personally my movie of the year
Same here 100% loved it and I don’t care what anybody else says
@@panagiotisnikolakopoulos732tell me how
This reminds me of another video where someone likes a movie that a lot of people hate.
Oh man Colin. They’re tear that ass up on disagreement day
A great movie, that certainly was not the movie a good part of it's audience expected.
Understanding it's fiction, some Joker fans seems to like his supposedly symbolism of "freedom" and "anarchy", him challenging a sick society which produces monsters like him.
And said people it seems misunderstood the first movie, thinking Arthur was depicted in the same way, being the product of a society that let him down.
Well, "the joke is on them" as now we know, the movie was in reality a deep conversation on mental illness and it's sometimes brutal consequences, and not, by any means, apologetic of nonsensical and gratuitous violence.
Moreover, the movie speaks to us, the audience, and how fucked up a part of our society is. Why, would many people think, that Arthur understanding the consequences of his actions, taking ownership of what he did, accepting who he is, even if that means been abandoned once more, now by his groupies, "is wrong" and "sucks"? Why would this movie needed being another validation of gratuitous violence like there are many: Pulp Fiction, The fighting club, and a large etc?
Yes, this movie may not be the movie we expected, but I think is nonetheless the picture we needed, one that reminds us of how broken, fucked up, and wrong a character like the classical Joker and Harley are, something refreshing in a modern society in which characters than embody values like Superman are "boring" and characters like Joker, Deadpool and Harley are popular and even inspirational.
I am not saying, and with this I rest my case, that every Joker fan is a nut job, but questioning why so many people think a movie that departures from the apologetic take on said character is crap
Sir, I ask for a burger and fries..
The movie was beautiful, acting immaculate, singing couldve done better if they let them reach full potential, ending wtf, the ending was a joke. But common Jacquin phenioux w with his acting
First Loki now this. Man do I not agree with you.
Being contrarian doesn't make you come off clever mate.
It was dogshit, there's no defending it.
Being a contrarian is disagreeing with a popular opinion to just be a rebel. This guy is just saying he liked the movie well, because he liked the movie. Don’t see him trying to act clever about it
It wasn’t awful. I enjoyed it, despite it’s many flaws. But trying to say anything positive about the movie online is insane currently.
I'm just not gonna watch it.
Late to the party I know but for real I want the earplugs and blindfold you watched the movie with.
I knew pretentious YTubers would do this. Congrats you have bad taste in movies. You ain’t deep
I do wish they actually wrote original songs for the musical segments
Okay Jerome
It shouldn't exist regardless