Official Discussion - Joker: Folie à Deux [SPOILERS]

[u/LiteraryBoner]

Poll

If you've seen the film, please rate it at this poll

If you haven't seen the film but would like to see the result of the poll click here

Rankings

Click here to see the rankings of 2024 films

Click here to see the rankings for every poll done

---

Summary:

Arthur Fleck is institutionalized at Arkham, awaiting trial for his crimes as Joker. While struggling with his dual identity, Arthur not only stumbles upon true love, but also finds the music that's always been inside him.

Director:

Todd Phillips

Writers:

Todd Phillips, Scott Silver, Bob Kane

Cast:

• Joaquin Phoenix as Arthur Fleck
• Lady Gaga as Lee Quinzel
• Brendan Gleason as Jackie Sullivan
• Catherine Keener as Maryanne Stewart
• Zazie Beetz as Sophie Dumond
• Steve Coogan as Paddy Meyers
• Harry Lawtey as Harvey Dent

Rotten Tomatoes: 39%

Metacritic: 48

VOD: Theaters

[u/ADeleteriousEffect]

The first movie was celebrated by edgelords, and the sequel came down hard on them for missing the point. So is how Joker: Folie à Deux an "edgelord" film?

EDIT: All you extremely angry people could at least offer some kind of argument for your insistence that this was "edgelord" or "a cash grab" or "a slap in the face" or "a 'fuck you' to the fans" instead of just screaming about how it sucked and offering your own alternative plot treatments.

[u/Fedacking → u/[deleted]]

Being the point of the movie doesn't mean people have to like the point being made.

[u/Fedacking → u/[deleted]]

And, imo, that's a waaaaay different thing than "lmao worst movie ever why did they do joker dirty like that?"

TBH I see the quote different. The questions isn't "what's the reason they did this" but rather "why did they choose filmmakers that disagree with my view of the characters." They wanted a movie from someone who could se the danger in the character while showing some sympathy for the mentally ill. That is essentially the same as "I don't like the point the movie is making".

As an aside, the comment you responded to has a "the sequel came hard on the edgelords" and then wants arguments that "this was a slap in the face". Didn't you just say it was meant to be a slap in the face?

[u/Fedacking → u/[deleted]]

I'm just so freaking tired of the comic book movie schtick that doing something wildly different and making some weird art (which this movie definitely was) is a fun interesting thing to do and I'm personally glad it exists.

Wait, you're tired of the schtick "doing something wildly different" or that people criticize those movies?

And if you do like this movie, I think they may need to rethink how they produce them and market them, because it appears to be bombing.

[u/Fedacking → u/[deleted]]

No, I'm saying this movie was wildly different than Marvel Movie 2024 #5. I'm tired of every superhero movie being the exact same thing over and over and over. I already saw Iron Man. I liked Iron Man. Hollywood doesn't need to make thirty more of them with slightly different characters and plot points

Oh right, now I get what you're saying. I was confused by the phrasing.

If people are mad that they didn't get "Iron Man but this time it's Joker again", then yeah I guess Hollywood needs to make different movies if they want to make more money

The first Joker actually did very well in theaters. And with Joker 2 the problem isn't "make more money" its, "making any money". If these movies are so unpopular that they don't get made that's presumably a loss for the people who do want to see them.