No spoilers please.
I keep hearing about Joaquin Phoenix's performance but not much about the movie itself. Would this movie still be great if he wasn't the one playing the Joker or is his performance the thing that makes it so great?
He's in just about every frame so a lot of it depends on his performance.
And I liked it but I don't think it's a "great" film. The writing holds it back a little for me.
Do you think if it was an average actor, the goodness of the film would go down considerably? I'm asking this because I know the film is about much and it's really a character study.
shareHmmm... I didn't like the totality of his performance as much as most but I can't think of many actors who would've worked out better -- but who knows? People forget the negative reaction to finding out that Heath Ledger was going to play The Joker in the TDK -- but it worked out well. But yes, a mediocre performance would've been a gut punch to what they were doing here. It has JP's performance, great cinematography, and a message -- but getting from here to there with a well-told story is the weakness.
shareThat's what I figured. It just seemed like the movie is about nothing. It just looks like a great performance with nice cinematography.
shareThematically, it's definitely about something -- but the story itself could've been crafted better. Also, it suffers from something that really isn't its fault. By now we know too many things, we've seen the movies that influence it -- so we kinda anticipate what's coming. It didn't have the emotional gut-punch that it might've had otherwise. It's hard to pull that off today. We're too savvy -- so it's hard to slip daylight past the rooster at this point.
shareI liked the story in general because there are aspects I can relate to. Unlike most superhero type movies. But I think Phoenix’s performance is what really drives the film.
shareHis performance is a big part of why the film is great. The screenplay, direction, score, and cinematography are good too. It would likely still be good with someone else, but not as good.
shareOn the surface you can think it probably wouldn't be.
However then again you could say nor would The Dark Knight without Heath Ledger's Joker and that was on the back of a ton of people thinking Ledger was a terrible choice when that casting was first announced, so really who knows someone else may have brought just as much to the role.
Right, because it's not like Christopher Nolan or Christian Bale had anything to do with it. Or Gary Oldman, or Michael Caine, or Aaron Eckhardt, or Morgan Freeman, or Maggie Gyllenhaal, or Cillian Murphy.
It was all just Heath Ledger, right.
So you think that someone else other than Heath Ledger could have pulled off the role of Joker in the The Dark Knight and made it work just as good.
shareYes, Willem Dafoe.
There are probably several others who could. I am sure Sean Penn would have done a bang up job if he was interested, or Michael Fassbender.
So I will repeat my last sentence then as it applies equally to both: so really who knows someone else may have brought just as much to the role.
shareYeah, but my point was it was a great movie regardless - the entire trilogy was.
Nor was the quality of the movie in that case as dependent on specifically the performance of the Joker, although I think the Todd Phillips movie is good in its own right as well.
Yeah I think both films are great in there own right and why I brought up Ledger as you have to remember how many people shit on him being selected to play Joker before it was released. So it is an example of how you just never can tell and just because one does a great job doesn't mean another couldn't in most cases.
For instance for one I think in Joker Crispin Glover would have brought just as much to the role. Sure they can get casting wrong at times however I think in both instances whoever they selected would work because they had a certain vision. For instance in my mind casting Johnny Depp in either film would have been tragic however you never really know such is the way it goes, at the point of John Travolta being in Pulp Fiction not many thought he'd be capable of that type of role...yet he was and his career was resurrected.
you have to remember how many people shit on him being selected to play Joker before it was released
Yep exactly won't know until it's out and it's all because of Twilight 7-9 years ago, interestingly he's going to be in Christopher Nolan's new film Tenet as well.
sharePhoenix's performance is the cherry on top of a otherwise fantastic film. That it isn't a easy watch, that it's thought provoking and leaves more questions then answers for it's audience. That it plays with it's audience. That it doesn't rely on the usual comic book type tropes. Shows their is a place not to play it safe in this genre. Shows with it's box office results so far their is a audience for this type of film.
shareTo be fair a lot of things wouldn't be as good as they are without good performers. The writing of Breaking Bad is solid for Instance, but if they would've cast Pauly Shore instead of Bryan Cranston for Walter White, the show never would've got off the ground.
A great performance elevates anything even if the writing is awful. That being said, Phoenix wouldn't be getting so much positive attention if Phoenix was the only good thing about it.
Really, he IS the movie. Without a strong performance, this movie wouldn’t be worth watching. It needed someone who could do the material justice, and in Joaquin’s case, elevate it.
share