MovieChat Forums > JokerĀ (2019) Discussion > This film would be flop no one intereste...

This film would be flop no one interested a joker film without batman


This film is a rip off of taxi driver 1982 film hope this film would be disaster and hamada would be fired by wb and wb would stop making elseworld shit and will focus to make man of steel 2 and the solo batman film (Firing hack reeves ) from film

reply

I have seen 5 year olds write better than that. Get yourself an education son.

reply

Taxi driver ? Why is it a rip off of taxi driver?

reply

Go and see taxi driver movie lol

reply

I have seen Taxi Driver, and would still llike you to explain why it is a rip off.

reply

Ive seen Taxi Driver numerous times, great film may i add, this is a film about an Vietnam war vet who gets a job as a Taxi Driver to cope with his depression, instanity, insomnia and becomes besotted with a prositute and plots to assainate a a presdential candidate, so , please tell me how on earth Joker is a rip off of Taxi Driver ? Have you actually seen Taxi Driver ? Do you know the plot for Joker ?

reply

vietnam war vet :-Joker aka arthur fleck
Prostitute :-Zazie beetz character
Presidential candidate :- Thomas wayne lol can't you figure it out

reply

Thomas Wayne is a Presidential candidate...? Exactly where are you getting these plot details from? Got any links?

reply

It's not a rip-off but it's said to be influenced by Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy.

reply

it's bruce wayne, idiot

reply

nope

reply

excuse me, that's not an answer

reply

He didnt get it wrong. He wasnt mistakenly referring to bruce as Thomas. He was explaining the parallel to Taxi Driver. Thomas Wayne is correct. Thomas Wayne is to Joker as Pallantine is to Taxi Driver. Nothing to do with Bruce.

reply

bruce created the joker so i think it's got everything to do with him IMHO

reply

But that isnt the context to which he was referring. It has nothing to do with Bruce when you're describing aspects in common with another film that influenced this one. He didnt misfire. You did with your name-calling comment. What you say now about the Joker's creation is irrelevant to the parallels between the two films.

reply

i don't have time to argue the history of gotham city with you this morning,
goodbye

reply

it's bruce wayne, idiot


No argument was ever needed. The reply above is clearly wrong. It isnt Bruce Wayne. One of the key parallels to Taxi Driver is the Thomas Wayne role to the Pallantine role, just like the poster said. The history of Gotham, like Bruce Wayne, is irrelevant. You should've bothered to read the full context instead of reflexive name calling. Your hasty 'gotcha' attempt missed badly. Another poster below did the same right after you did -- but quickly deleted the post after realizing the error.

reply

i stick to my guns,
it's been an admirable trait (as pointed out by others to an almost annoying degree),
i have to loose some respect for this so-called "poster" who deleted their opinion after being bullied by others, & internet bullying? that's a bigger discussion i won't engage in on this "movie fun" board

reply

Bullying? From you who called another an idiot?

No one replied to the other poster. I watched it appear then quickly disappear. eYeDEF realized the error and deleted the post. So stick to your guns all you want. It's just a stubborn lack of admission to being wrong. eYeDEF knew the goof and fixed it without any prompting from anyone. So you're wrong about that too.

But keep pretending this is about Gotham history and Bruce -- when it's only about comparable roles in another movie that influenced this one -- if it makes you feel better. But quadrupling down on wrong doesnt make it right -- and certainly not admirable. Admirable would be admitting that you misfired.

reply

[deleted]

I highly disagree. The joker is a very intriguing character. The only reason I enjoyed The Dark Knight was because of his character. It certainly wasn't because of Batman. Just sayin...

reply

I just think you're fundamentally wrong. I'm looking forward to watching this, I don't care about Batman.

With apologies to the late Heath Ledger, I believe Joaquin was born to play this role. He has such a great presence playing sinister and diabolical characters. His Commodus in Gladiator was a role for the ages.

reply

Ledger was terrible as Joker.

He played the character more like a pervert and his voice and mannerisms was from a western that is slipping my mind. It was a 70s western with a perverted character. It was like the same exact character.

The Joker is insane having the characteristics of extreme mania. The opposite of logical Batman. Also, Joker is a "Joker" which is 1940s slang for a kind "douchebag" who finds miserable things, human folly, violence, etc to be funny. He would kill people and watch them die in pain because to him that's "slapstick" comedy.

So far, the closest to that kind of crazy what Nicholson's Joker but that's it. Ledger's joker reminded me of a pedo and he had a rational philosophy called Nihilism that life is pointless. Meanwhile, the Joker ought to be a horror movie level character that brings chaos to the story and is very difficult for Batman to figure out.

So far the character hasn't really been done well.

reply

How was Ledger's Joker a pervert? He wasn't a sexual deviant at all. Just a nihilist who wanted to poison and corrupt everything 'good.'

reply

I meant his demeanor.

I think the actor stole that voice and character from a 70s western that is escaping my mind. The character was like a weirdo deviant hillbilly type.

My point was that his acting had nothing to do with the character nor did his motivations. So it was bad acting and writing.

I have worked in psych for a long time and with criminals for a long time. There are actually people like Joker who can't stop laughing and things like people thrashing around dying is funny. Making a Joker character NOT LIKE THAT IS WEIRD and stupid.

Also, the Joker has no logical motive for doing things, which is very important to the character.

reply

This seems to be a really forced way of hating on Ledger's portrayal of the character. But to each his own.

reply

Why forced?

It's the opposite.

I'm clearly explaining.

He never appears manic, rather he is a subdued talking to himself mumbler, like a pervert stereotype. He doesn't act "clownish". He never ever loses it and starts laughing, which would have been a nice touch. He is completely right in many ways and isn't insane, he's just cynical.

The writing and directing were HORRIBLE and that's not the actor's fault, but goddamn, research the character if you're going to play him!

About this movie: I thought it was going to suck, but it was actually very good. It was fairly on point regarding how he developed psychologically.

I don't like that he wears makeup though. I like the disfigured face from the comics and Jack Nicholson's version.

reply

Never appears maniac? How about killing X amount of people, blowing up buildings, trying to turn society into a jungle? Just because some of what he says about people is sensible doesn't mean his way of trying to prove his point isn't crazy

He does act clownish, just not cartoonishly so. He dressed like one, for one thing. He wears a few gadgets on him (including blades manufactured into his shoes.) He laughs plenty and giggles in a rather whimsical way at times. Has a dark sense of humor. Showed enough traits of a clown to pass for a realistic take of The Joker.

reply

You don't know what "manic" means.

You should look it up.

I told you, I have literally seen people like Joker in real life.

It is BIZARRE to be dressed like a clown and not act clowning, I mean come on! It's part of his identity. Batman is a Bat-Ninja and he acts like it. He's does a voice and everything. Meanwhile, Joker, in full clown makeup and purple suit acts like some rational gangster.

It was terrible.

If his face was chemically disfigured and he was forced to look like a clown, but didn't act like it, okay. But, this guy DRESSES LIKE A CLOWN but acts like a clever gangster/psychopath.

It was a good movie, but terrible writing for this character.

They got very messed up by the whole "realism" in these movies. The Batmobile turns its light out on the highway and cops in a helicopter can't see it. That was super stupid and it's because they couldn't make a "science fiction" Batmobile because it's not real. Well, a car defeating a helicopter isn't real, at all!

Same with Joker. They thought he wasn't real enough and I have said he most certainly is. I mean the basic form of crazy criminal behavior.

Someone needs to make a real Batman movie! Iron Man is much like Batman and the character in the movie is a genius inventor, and so is Batman and he has advanced science fiction devices, just like Iron Man, and those movies were quite a big hit.

reply

How was Joker not a manic? He fit the very meaning of the word!

And I listed a number of different ways that he acted like a clown.

And I don't see how behaving rationally means he's acting out of character either. Joker among other things is still a very intelligent character; he doesn't just always go off and spontaneously do shit without planning anything. TDK Joker was even partially based off the original Joker of the first couple issues

reply

Mania is literally a mental health diagnosis and so look it up.

reply

You just butchered the English language.

reply

Taxi Driver was released in 1976.

On a side note, I think this looks pretty good. I like the darker films that DC has turned against recently. This looks dark.

reply

He just mashed it with King of Comedy from 1982

reply

Batman *was* in it.

But, he didn't know he was Batman...yet.

;-)

reply

To be honest, I find the Joker to be far, far, far, far, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAAAAAARRRRR MORE INTERESTING than Batman.

reply