ResilientBanana
Member
Time kicked him in the nuts in their review. The movie looks very interesting however. From the time it was announced I never thought it could be done.
Time kicked him in the nuts in their review. The movie looks very interesting however. From the time it was announced I never thought it could be done.
And corpse bride was only good because he was ripping off his own nightmare before Christmas.Sorry to say but Time Burton seems to be a bit of a shit director these days. I haven't seen Big Eyes yet but apart from that, his last good film was Corpse Bride back in 2005.
Does he end up actually looking like "The Joker" in the movie rather than just a generic clown?
Just curious.
Sorry to say but Time Burton seems to be a bit of a shit director these days. I haven't seen Big Eyes yet but apart from that, his last good film was Corpse Bride back in 2005.
How does he look like a generic clown? And what defines "The Joker"? Is it the scars? Or the constant smile?
![]()
His design is quite specific, and very clever, its similar to the infamous killer John Wayne Gacy, and theres quite a good reason to have this facepaint design, rather than any other, clowns stopped using designs with sharp edges, as most people would find those sharp edges (like the diamond shape on his eyes) very disturbing. Also, his design, most of the time, is quite asymmetrical, which is in direct contrast to our standards of beauty, and further explores his mental state.
If you had showed me that picture before I knew anything about this movie would never have guessed that's The Joker.
Batman confirmed???capeshit
I think he looks generic because of the red nose, the eyebrows and the eye make up. The Joker generally doesn't have these.
If you had showed me that picture before I knew anything about this movie would never have guessed that's The Joker.
Personally I don't like the look, but it won't stop me seeing the movie. Maybe it'll change my mind.
That's the intent I believe.If you had showed me that picture before I knew anything about this movie would never have guessed that's The Joker.
To fight back woke reviews from Rottentomatoes, Joker movie use their outrage to mock them. Hilarious.
![]()
Joker Using Negative Reviews to Promote the DC Comics Movie
Just a few weeks ahead of its release in theaters, Todd Phillips’ Joker is already quite the divisive movie on social media. Now, the marketing team at Warner Brothers has decided to squeeze a little lemonade out of the lemons dealt by using pull quotes from some of the “bad” reviews in the...comicbook.com
It's at 70 on Metacritic and 75 on Rottentomatoes. Masterpiece indeed.
That David Enrich reviewer sounds like a complete tosser. Says the film is aimed at incels, calls the director a glorified edgelord, mentions Marvel critics and calls the people who will like the film DC fanboys.
Jesus.
David Enrich said:“Joker” is the human-sized and adult-oriented comic book movie that Marvel critics have been clamoring for — there’s no action, no spandex, no obvious visual effects, and the whole thing is so gritty and serious that DCEU fanboys will feel as if they’ve died and seen the Snyder Cut — but it’s also the worst-case scenario for the rest of the film world, as it points towards a grim future in which the inmates have taken over the asylum, and even the most repulsive of mid-budget character studies can be massive hits (and Oscar contenders) so long as they’re at least tangentially related to some popular intellectual property. The next “Lost in Translation” will be about Black Widow and Howard Stark spending a weekend together at a Sokovia hotel; the next “Carol” will be an achingly beautiful period drama about young Valkyrie falling in love with a blonde woman she meets in an Asgardian department store.
David Enrich said:While “Joker” often plays like a beat-for-beat remake of “The King of Comedy,” that movie was about a talentless man who was convinced that he was special; this movie, by contrast, is about a talented man who swallows the red pill and becomes convinced that nobody is.
David Enrich said:But Phillips, stuck between reinventing the superhero movie from the ground up and throwing a cheap disguise on the same dumb origin story we’ve already seen 1,000 times, needs his Joker to be both the light and the dark, the yin and yang, the only sane man in a world gone mad.
That's what I'm worried about. That it's a character study about a mentally I'll man and it doesn't actually touch on any of Jokers actual origins. Basically the films name could literally be anything, but they called it Joker for brand recognition.
Even if it's a great film, I'll still be conflicted if this happens.
nice to see they are finally making my biopic
This is how I felt about IT: chapter 2 for similar reasons. muschietti dips his toes in the waters of the source material, but then completely goes his own way by ignoring what makes pennywise unique.
If getting a 90 or above on RT means making safe tripe sign me up for movies under 80% from now on.
I haven't read the book so didn't know this. I haven't read a novel in general for a long time actually. I have heard opinions say that the novel would be hard to translate faithfully to the screen.
This is simply untrue, there are many unsafe films throughout the years that have had critical acclaim.
Does it matter? Joker will easily be better than cartoon disney superhero movie for children #213i'll admit when the teaser came out i was like WTF is WB/DC its like they're bungling an opportunity to have a cohesive DC universe. This Joker doesn't really fit in anywhere.
but maybe its just that WB/DC are simply incapable of following marvel's blueprint due to higher ups being so incompetent but despite that creatives are still fully capable of creating a film own. so maybe the lesson is WB/DC is just better off having disjointed films.
i'll admit when the teaser came out i was like WTF is WB/DC its like they're bungling an opportunity to have a cohesive DC universe. This Joker doesn't really fit in anywhere.
but maybe its just that WB/DC are simply incapable of following marvel's blueprint due to higher ups being so incompetent but despite that creatives are still fully capable of creating a film own. so maybe the lesson is WB/DC is just better off having disjointed films.
i'll admit when the teaser came out i was like WTF is WB/DC its like they're bungling an opportunity to have a cohesive DC universe. This Joker doesn't really fit in anywhere.
but maybe its just that WB/DC are simply incapable of following marvel's blueprint due to higher ups being so incompetent but despite that creatives are still fully capable of creating a film own. so maybe the lesson is WB/DC is just better off having disjointed films.
Imagine unironically believing hampering the creativity of your writers/directors to fit into a bigger universe is a good thing.
They made a press release stating they have no interested in an interconnected universe any more, they said all films can pretty much do as they please, this includes sequels to films not needing to care what happened last time. Look at Chris Pine being alive in Wonder Woman 84
The Chris Pine being “alive”, is actually a nod to the old Wonder Women tv show. The first season of that show, takes place during WW2 and Steve Trevor is helping Wonder Women. The second season of that show, takes place in modern times and again, the same actor playing Steve Trevor is helping Wonder Women except he’s not the same guy - he’s a relative who just looks exactly his ancestor.
I could be wrong, but I think that’s what WB is doing with WW 84’.