|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jun 12, 2022 20:43:51 GMT
Not sure what you’re getting at. Bohemian Rhapsody won twice as many Oscars. not sure what bohemian rhapsody has to do with anything so back to the topic at hand: you don't think a film nominated for best cinematography ( and 10 other catergories ) "stood out" at cinematography ( and 10 other catergories ) My point was that a movie getting Oscar nominations doesn’t mean everyone has to agree that it’s a great movie.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Jun 12, 2022 20:46:02 GMT
not sure what bohemian rhapsody has to do with anything so back to the topic at hand: you don't think a film nominated for best cinematography ( and 10 other catergories ) "stood out" at cinematography ( and 10 other catergories ) My point was that a movie getting Oscar nominations doesn’t mean everyone has to agree that it’s a great movie. you are of course entitled to your opinion just be aware that thousands of academy voters and millions of moviegoers disagree with you
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 12, 2022 20:52:52 GMT
Not sure what you’re getting at. Bohemian Rhapsody won twice as many Oscars. not sure what bohemian rhapsody has to do with anything so back to the topic at hand: you don't think a film nominated for best cinematography ( and 10 other catergories ) "stood out" at cinematography ( and 10 other catergories ) I've seen even the most ardent haters concede the score and Phoenix were good. The funny thing about Joker haters is that they simultaneously think the movie didn't feel enough like a Batman story, while also saying it should have distanced itself further. Did the two or so shots of the Waynes getting killed break the movie? And if TDKR is too "obvious" a source of inspiration, I guess that puts Phillips in the same company as Nolan and Snyder.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jun 12, 2022 21:07:40 GMT
not sure what bohemian rhapsody has to do with anything so back to the topic at hand: you don't think a film nominated for best cinematography ( and 10 other catergories ) "stood out" at cinematography ( and 10 other catergories ) I've seen even the most ardent haters concede the score and Phoenix were good. The funny thing about Joker haters is that they simultaneously think the movie didn't feel enough like a Batman story, while also saying it should have distanced itself further. Did the two or so shots of the Waynes getting killed break the movie? And if TDKR is too "obvious" a source of inspiration, I guess Phillips can join the poser ranks with Nolan and Snyder. I’m not really a ‘hater.’ I was actually one of those people who defended the movie back in the day. I’ve just come to the opinion upon re-evaluation that it’s nothing special. If it weren’t for Phoenix’s performance, I think the movie would be fairly forgettable. It’s not terrible, but I think The Batman does a better job in terms of handling the dark and gritty material and having something to say. I just don’t see why it needs a sequel. What more is there to do with Todd Phillips’ take on Gotham city? The last thing we need is three cinematic Batmen simultaneously. And no, showing the Death of the Waynes doesn’t break the movie, but why did it need to be there? It’s been done to death.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 12, 2022 21:41:56 GMT
I've seen even the most ardent haters concede the score and Phoenix were good. The funny thing about Joker haters is that they simultaneously think the movie didn't feel enough like a Batman story, while also saying it should have distanced itself further. Did the two or so shots of the Waynes getting killed break the movie? And if TDKR is too "obvious" a source of inspiration, I guess Phillips can join the poser ranks with Nolan and Snyder. I’m not really a ‘hater.’ I was actually one of those people who defended the movie back in the day. I’ve just come to the opinion upon re-evaluation that it’s nothing special. If it weren’t for Phoenix’s performance, I think the movie would be fairly forgettable. It’s not terrible, but I think The Batman does a better job in terms of handling the dark and gritty material and having something to say. I just don’t see why it needs a sequel. What more is there to do with Todd Phillips’ take on Gotham city? The last thing we need is three cinematic Batmen simultaneously. And no, showing the Death of the Waynes doesn’t break the movie, but why did it need to be there? It’s been done to death. The movie is about poverty and mental illness leading to people lashing out against the rich and powerful, and Thomas Wayne is the quintessential DC martyr for that. I've said before that I think the movie is turning Batman mythos on their head. Batman often gets reduced to a reactionary story about a powerful billionaire beating up criminals with little consideration for crime's root causes, and this film takes the reverse approach to that by showing the events leading up to the Wayne's dying and creation of Batman, only from the criminals' point of view. I don't know how intentional a lot of that is (I'd be surprised if I'm way off, since Phillips goes so far as to position Joker and Batman as possible brothers shaped by opposing lifestyles), but if nothing else I think Phillips wanted the movie to be open to interpretation. I didn't think a sequel was all that warranted, but now that we're getting one it may as well go further into Batman lore. Others have mentioned pooling in other Rogues Gallery characters, which could be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jun 12, 2022 21:55:15 GMT
I’m not really a ‘hater.’ I was actually one of those people who defended the movie back in the day. I’ve just come to the opinion upon re-evaluation that it’s nothing special. If it weren’t for Phoenix’s performance, I think the movie would be fairly forgettable. It’s not terrible, but I think The Batman does a better job in terms of handling the dark and gritty material and having something to say. I just don’t see why it needs a sequel. What more is there to do with Todd Phillips’ take on Gotham city? The last thing we need is three cinematic Batmen simultaneously. And no, showing the Death of the Waynes doesn’t break the movie, but why did it need to be there? It’s been done to death. The movie is about poverty and mental illness leading to people lashing out against the rich and powerful, and Thomas Wayne is the quintessential DC martyr for that. I've said before that I think the movie is turning Batman mythos on their head. Batman often gets reduced to a reactionary story about a powerful billionaire beating up criminals with little consideration for crime's root causes, and this film takes the reverse approach to that by showing the events leading up to the Wayne's dying and creation of Batman, only from the criminals' point of view. I don't know how intentional a lot of that is (I'd be surprised if I'm way off, since Phillips goes so far as to position Joker and Batman as possible brothers shaped by opposing lifestyles), but if nothing else I think Phillips wanted the movie to be open to interpretation. I didn't think a sequel was all that warranted, but now that we're getting one it may as well go further into Batman lore. Others have mentioned pooling in other Rogues Gallery characters, which could be interesting. The movie pays lip service to things like class struggles and inequality, but as I said, I think The Batman handles that stuff better. Maybe I’m just being cynical, but I get the impression that Todd Phillips only really included that stuff so people could say the movie is about something. The movie is vague enough about its message that people of pretty much any political orientation can take away what they want from it. I’ll probably still watch the sequel, but I wish it wasn’t being made. I would’ve had more appreciation for what Todd Phillips was trying to do with the first movie if he actually committed to keeping it a standalone entry. As it stands, this just feels like Batman overload.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 12, 2022 22:16:25 GMT
The movie is about poverty and mental illness leading to people lashing out against the rich and powerful, and Thomas Wayne is the quintessential DC martyr for that. I've said before that I think the movie is turning Batman mythos on their head. Batman often gets reduced to a reactionary story about a powerful billionaire beating up criminals with little consideration for crime's root causes, and this film takes the reverse approach to that by showing the events leading up to the Wayne's dying and creation of Batman, only from the criminals' point of view. I don't know how intentional a lot of that is (I'd be surprised if I'm way off, since Phillips goes so far as to position Joker and Batman as possible brothers shaped by opposing lifestyles), but if nothing else I think Phillips wanted the movie to be open to interpretation. I didn't think a sequel was all that warranted, but now that we're getting one it may as well go further into Batman lore. Others have mentioned pooling in other Rogues Gallery characters, which could be interesting. The movie pays lip service to things like class struggles and inequality, but as I said, I think The Batman handles that stuff better. Maybe I’m just being cynical, but I get the impression that Todd Phillips only really included that stuff so people could say the movie is about something. The movie is vague enough about its message that people of pretty much any political orientation can take away what they want from it. I’ll probably still watch the sequel, but I wish it wasn’t being made. I would’ve had more appreciation for what Todd Phillips was trying to do with the first movie if he actually committed to keeping it a standalone entry. As it stands, this just feels like Batman overload. I don't know about that - we're told Riddler had it rough but we're shown it firsthand with Arthur. And with it that late in the game and Riddler being such a strange enigma (wink wink), we're invited to have only so much sympathy for the guy vs Batman. Then class discrepancy is such a big theme in Joker, down to something as simple as a bunch of rich people sitting around laughing at Modern Times while the poor and working class protest outside. But yes, you do come off rather cynical of Phillips.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jun 12, 2022 22:25:00 GMT
The movie pays lip service to things like class struggles and inequality, but as I said, I think The Batman handles that stuff better. Maybe I’m just being cynical, but I get the impression that Todd Phillips only really included that stuff so people could say the movie is about something. The movie is vague enough about its message that people of pretty much any political orientation can take away what they want from it. I’ll probably still watch the sequel, but I wish it wasn’t being made. I would’ve had more appreciation for what Todd Phillips was trying to do with the first movie if he actually committed to keeping it a standalone entry. As it stands, this just feels like Batman overload. I don't know about that - we're told Riddler had it rough but we're shown it firsthand with Arthur. And with it that late in the game and Riddler being such a strange enigma (wink wink), we're invited to have only so much sympathy for the guy vs Batman. Then class discrepancy is such a big theme in Joker, down to something as simple as a bunch of rich people sitting around laughing at Modern Times while the poor and working class protest outside. But yes, you do come off rather cynical of Phillips. The Batman makes a point of calling out Bruce Wayne for his negligence towards actually helping the poor and underprivileged in Gotham. Characters like Alfred, Bella Real and Catwoman point this out. We see other people in the movie besides the Riddler express disdain for the 1% of Gotham, and Batman has an entire ending monologue about how he needs to do more for the city than just beating people up. The movie makes its message clear enough that people like Ben Shapiro accused the movie of hating Batman. As for Phillips. I don’t know. The guy’s background is rooted in dumb edgy comedies. If I recall (feel free to tell me if I’m wrong on this), he even said that he thinks political correctness ruined comedy. I just don’t buy that he’s someone who particularly cares about this stuff.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 12, 2022 23:03:13 GMT
I don't know about that - we're told Riddler had it rough but we're shown it firsthand with Arthur. And with it that late in the game and Riddler being such a strange enigma (wink wink), we're invited to have only so much sympathy for the guy vs Batman. Then class discrepancy is such a big theme in Joker, down to something as simple as a bunch of rich people sitting around laughing at Modern Times while the poor and working class protest outside. But yes, you do come off rather cynical of Phillips. The Batman makes a point of calling out Bruce Wayne for his negligence towards actually helping the poor and underprivileged in Gotham. Characters like Alfred, Bella Real and Catwoman point this out. We see other people in the movie besides the Riddler express disdain for the 1% of Gotham, and Batman has an entire ending monologue about how he needs to do more for the city than just beating people up. The movie makes its message clear enough that people like Ben Shapiro accused the movie of hating Batman. As for Phillips. I don’t know. The guy’s background is rooted in dumb edgy comedies. If I recall (feel free to tell me if I’m wrong on this), he even said that he thinks political correctness ruined comedy. I just don’t buy that he’s someone who particularly cares about this stuff. But what you're describing is the definition of lip service. That's people literally saying things. I did appreciate the things it was saying, and I reckon it will pay them off more in The Batman 2, but Joker goes out of its way to put you in Arthur's shoes. Phillips did say something like that, but I don't think caring about class division and laughing at inappropriate humor are mutually exclusive (and his comedies were mostly not PC in ways like giraffes being beheaded by highway overpasses, not generally in the Steven Crowder "laugh at hateful stereotypes" kind). The last two DNC primaries have especially shown a discrepancy between lefties who care more about improving economic conditions and those who care more about identity politics.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jun 13, 2022 0:44:33 GMT
The Batman makes a point of calling out Bruce Wayne for his negligence towards actually helping the poor and underprivileged in Gotham. Characters like Alfred, Bella Real and Catwoman point this out. We see other people in the movie besides the Riddler express disdain for the 1% of Gotham, and Batman has an entire ending monologue about how he needs to do more for the city than just beating people up. The movie makes its message clear enough that people like Ben Shapiro accused the movie of hating Batman. As for Phillips. I don’t know. The guy’s background is rooted in dumb edgy comedies. If I recall (feel free to tell me if I’m wrong on this), he even said that he thinks political correctness ruined comedy. I just don’t buy that he’s someone who particularly cares about this stuff. But what you're describing is the definition of lip service. That's people literally saying things. I did appreciate the things it was saying, and I reckon it will pay them off more in The Batman 2, but Joker goes out of its way to put you in Arthur's shoes. Phillips did say something like that, but I don't think caring about class division and laughing at inappropriate humor are mutually exclusive (and his comedies were mostly not PC in ways like giraffes being beheaded by highway overpasses, not generally in the Steven Crowder "laugh at hateful stereotypes" kind). The last two DNC primaries have especially shown a discrepancy between lefties who care more about improving economic conditions and those who care more about identity politics. Joker focuses primarily on how Arthur is mistreated by society, which causes him to snap. Not everyone who’s shown mistreating him is a rich person. Other people simply interpret him killing some Wall Street guys as him making a political statement, which we know isn’t the case, and which he bluntly denies. As for Todd Phillips’ brand of comedy, eh. There are definitely some not so PC jokes in the Hangover movies, like “paging Dr. F*g**t” and the transgender joke in the second one. I guess that doesn’t rule out the possibility that he’s someone who’s genuinely for improving the economic conditions of America, but he strikes me as one of those fratbro types.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jun 13, 2022 2:24:22 GMT
Personally, I didn't want a sequel to Joker, but since we're getting one...
I wouldn't mind them exploring Arkam and possibly even populating it with several of Batman's Rogue Gallery.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jun 14, 2022 0:15:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jun 14, 2022 0:21:37 GMT
It's apparently going to be a musical lmao
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Jun 14, 2022 0:31:22 GMT
ready for round two, can't wait for more tears from liberal critics
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Jun 14, 2022 1:07:06 GMT
It's apparently going to be a musical lmao There’s no way, right? I almost want them to actually do it. It’d be something.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 14, 2022 1:36:03 GMT
It's apparently going to be a musical lmao There’s no way, right? I almost want them to actually do it. It’d be something. Well she's got to have a musical number.
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Jun 14, 2022 2:19:40 GMT
There’s no way, right? I almost want them to actually do it. It’d be something. Well she's got to have a musical number. She could sing “Hold My Hand” from Top Gun Maverick with that signature Harley Quinn accent and I’m in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2022 3:30:38 GMT
It's apparently going to be a musical lmao
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2022 4:07:02 GMT
…Actually, now that I’ve thought about it this might be completely brilliant.
|
|
|
Post by thebayharborbutcher on Jun 14, 2022 4:18:47 GMT
|
|