MovieChat Forums > Joker (2019) Discussion > Phoenix is good, the film not so much

Phoenix is good, the film not so much

posted 4 years ago by jasonmovieguy (182)
29 replies | jump to latest

JOKER (2019) - Review

Joaquin Phoenix laughs a lot. Like a lot. He also bangs his head against walls, breaking glass, and then laughs again. It’s borderline camp. He definitely has great moments, but this isn’t his best work and I still actually think Heath Ledger and Jack Nicholson were superior playing this same role (we can forget Jared Leto ever existed).

I think we live in a “more is more” realm of thinking, and this is why loud performances tend to make it in over those that are more introverted. The cinematography and production design is exceptional, and I appreciated the lighting effects. But nothing much happens in the two hour journey, and what does is pretty predictable. I felt Phoenix borrowed a lot from Robin Williams in One Hour Photo (isolated weirdo who is socially awkward) and Anthony Perkins in Psycho. I guess as someone who finds superhero films tiresome, I should feel grateful this one is drenched in reality. However, it’s a grim, lonely movie and the screenplay offers nothing we haven’t seen before in terms of plot twists (who’s real, who’s imaginary). I found it amusing Frances Conroy (Six Feet Under) plays his isolated, mousy mother.

Back to Phoenix. The laughing stuff just got redundant. We get it- you’re psychotic. You have a condition. You pass out cards explaining why you laugh. But did this have to be shown multiple times? Joaquin still masterfully plays other scenes well, especially his time with his social worker, and of course his showdown with Robert De Niro. I predict he’s the frontrunner still, but I think there are superior male performances and I wouldn’t be surprised if Adam Driver in Marriage Story, defeats him. Still, Phoenix has a BIG performance. Probably too big to ignore despite the film's flaws.

For Joker, I predict it makes the Oscar shortlist for:

Best Picture
Best Actor
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Cinematography
Best Sound Mixing
Best Original Score
Best Makeup

Outside shots-

Best Director
Best Production Design
Best Sound Editing
Best Film Editing
Best Costumes

I am probably low balling it with only 7 nominations, but for production design (something I think Joker deserves), I have a tight roster that includes Parasite, JoJo Rabbit, 1917, The Irishman, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. I found nothing special about the editing or even direction, and therefore predict no gos. I do think it will make the Adapted Screenplay roster but I personally can’t mark it down because I found it uneventful and not especially unique compared to the other scripts in contention.

UPDATED!

I predicted it for the 7; didn't expect costumes! It deserved Production design over that.

My rankings for likelihood of winning the Oscar

1. Phoenix
2. Driver
3. Banderas
———-
4. DiCaprio
5. Pryce

PS- If Phoenix gives another controversial speech at the SAGs like he did at the Globes, he will jeopardize his Oscar chances. In fact, many voters will probably pick Adam Driver in Marriage Story because unlike Phoenix, Driver is in a movie with more acting nominations and it more centered on acting exercises in general. There's ALWAYS an alternative in the acting races.

FINAL GRADE: C+

[–] Windsaar (323) 4 years ago

I'm hoping he wins what, in my opinion anyway, would be a well deserved Oscar. It's nice when the recognition goes towards something actually worthy of being recognized.

The subtlety in his performance was where he knocked it out of the park. Yes, he laughed uncontrollably for a few scenes, but it wasn't the entire duration of the movie like you seem to think it was. He did the majority of his acting with his eyes and subtle mannerisms.

The actors also don't write or direct the film, not this one anyway. So Joachim basically does what the people in charge tell him to to. It's just on him whether he does it well/convincingly or not.

I'm also assuming he borrowed a lot of inspiration from other films. It's so common to do, it's basically the norm in ANY production.

The "what's real and what's imaginary" isn't so much a plot-twist as it is a form of narration. It's called the "unreliable narrator" and has been used in fiction literature since the dawn of fiction literature.

There aren't many films (or books, TV shows or even music for that matter) that offers something purely original and strictly what hasn't been seen before. Everything is inspired by something.

You made some very decent points, but where your arguments started to slip was where you had to resort to depicting the people who don't share your opinion/sentiments (and your pretentiousness, of course) as children ("13 year old gamers", "nerds"...etc.) and that everyone who disagrees with you is somehow defective.

I don't agree with you, so by your logic I'm obviously a child who has never seen a non-superhero movie and wouldn't know good acting if it slapped me.
This, of course, is a two-way street. Since by default you also disagree with me, which defect do you have?

You think we live in a "more-is-more realm of thinking" while it's obvious we live in a "my opinion = concrete fact" way of thought, as evidenced by many, many (too many to count) posts/debates here on MovieChat...including your OP here.

Edit: I also noticed that you mentioned, in the same post I might add, you hadn't actually seen "Uncut Gems" yet AND that Sandler should/might win the Oscar for "a far superior and layered performance".

Was just curious as to how one comes to a conclusion like that without having seen the performance.

[–] MichelleDessler (419) 4 years ago

Well said!!!!

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

"The "what's real and what's imaginary" isn't so much a plot-twist as it is a form of narration. It's called the "unreliable narrator" and has been used in fiction literature since the dawn of fiction literature. "

Thank you, this op is a delusional moron. JohnMcCock thinks that anyone who says that Adam Sandler deserves an Oscar should have their heads checked.

"You made some very decent points, but where your arguments started to slip was where you had to resort to depicting the people who don't share your opinion/sentiments (and your pretentiousness, of course) as children ("13 year old gamers", "nerds"...etc.) and that everyone who disagrees with you is somehow defective."

Yes, this attitude is typical of morons who know that their opinion is not so valid and need to resort to insults to make their point. It's obvious and despicable.

"You think we live in a "more-is-more realm of thinking" while it's obvious we live in a "my opinion = concrete fact" way of thought, as evidenced by many, many (too many to count) posts/debates here on MovieChat...including your OP here."

Damn, you just became JohnMcCock's hero.

"Edit: I also noticed that you mentioned, in the same post I might add, you hadn't actually seen "Uncut Gems" yet AND that Sandler should/might win the Oscar for "a far superior and layered performance".

Was just curious as to how one comes to a conclusion like that without having seen the performance."

By being a Sandler's fanboy. How do you think he still gets te right to make his shitty movies?

[–] Windsaar (323) 4 years ago

Why thank you.

To be perfectly honest, I was kind of expecting backlash over my post. Certainly wasn't expecting anyone to agree with me.

When I saw there were two replies here, I was bracing myself for something along the lines of: "You're just a fanboy, go watch another superhero movie you immature moron" ect.

Side note:
It made me chuckle to see you refer to yourself in the 3rd person. Made me think of the old "Duke Nukem" days.

I'd know all about Duke Nukem' considering I must be some kind of 13-year old gamer (probably a virgin as well. OP forgot to mention that lol) for thinking Joaquin Phoenix performed very well in this movie.

Agreed about Sandler though, I was a big fan when I was like 10. However, he just started banging out horrible movie after horrible movie for the last 20 years. (In my opinion, of course. I know better than to believe my opinion = fact)

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

nice, but you are forgetting one thing... oscars does not mean shit anymore, remember the moonlight scandal, it's all about who knows who and diversity + political statements.

oscar ratings are way down, as well..... everyone know hollywood is full of it

fuck the oscars, if you like a movie don't worry about awards and critics.

after they panned "passengers" from 2016, because they did not like the plot, and the "rapevibe" i have stopped caring about awards and critics

[–] Windsaar (323) 4 years ago

The Oscars may mean nothing anymore (as if they did in the first place) to people like you, or myself for that matter. Has there ever been a time where Hollywood wasn't full of itself?

Most actors strive for it though. It's always nice to be recognized by your peers for your hard work and dedication though.

I don't feel strong enough about an arbitrary award ceremony to curse it out, tbh.

I'm not worried about it, though. I was just pointing out flaws I noticed in the OPs argument.

I've never seen "Moonlight", so I can't give an opinion. I was unaware there was a scandal, though. Other than the wrong card being read during the ceremony and that some people thought "LaLa Land" was more deserving but I can't think of a single Best Picture award given with 100% unanimity.

Passenger, on the other hand, was kind of "rapey" and weird.

*spoilers*

Buddy wakes up 90 years too early and gets lonely after a year or so. Notices a woman he finds attractive, peeps through her files and weighs the consequences in prematurely waking her up as well.

If he does she will die, basically by his hand. If he doesn't, he'll have no one to talk to or sleep with.
So he goes ahead and does it.
Then obviously hides it.

Once the ploy is discovered, she's well into some space-age Stockholm syndrome type thing and forgives him and they live happily ever after.

It's a strange story all around.

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

He deserved a nod for his work in "The Master".

[–] Windsaar (323) 4 years ago

I've never seen "The Master", but will definitely look into it. Thanks for the recommendation.

[–] BuckSwope (3511) 4 years ago

I love all of P.T. Anderson's work.

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

Adam Sandler will NOT fucking be nominated!!! Never, ever.. fucking get used to the idea. -.-

There is just as much chance that Sandler gets EVER nominated to an Oscar than Steven Seagal.

[–] KD637 (488) 4 years ago

So you're saying there's a chance?

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

JohnMcCock is saying that Sandler is barely a better actor than Arnold Schwarzenegger or Steven Seagal..

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

Aaawwwwww guesse who's not nominated? Nah, you know. ^^

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

"Sandler actually might get an Oscar nomination for a far superior and layered performance. "

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA well now THAT'S a good fucking laugh. Take your medication pal, you obviously have a problem with your head if you say that Sandler is even remotely close from being as good as Phoenix in Joker.. let alone better. His possible Oscar nomination is a product of your imagination.

[–] jasonmovieguy (182) 4 years ago

Keep laughing.

Adam Sandler won the National Board of Review for Best Actor, the first major critics group of the season that also awarded Renee Zellweger this year in Judy (who's winning best actress).

You haven't seen Uncut Gems. It's clear. Come back when you've seen the film moron.

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

"Adam Sandler won the National Board of Review for Best Actor,"

Yup, this award has just a little bit more worth than a Teen Choice Award (where he is a favorite). You know at which awards he is also very popular? The Razzie Awards! Congrats to him!

Just a reminder: Sylvester fucking Stallone won at the National Board of Review for Creed. Tell me about their credibility..

[–] jasonmovieguy (182) 4 years ago

Until you've seen Uncut Gems, I can't take your rants and name calling seriously. You're bias because it's Adam Sandler. Watch the film and his performance. It's amazing.

Phoenix aside, he has competition with Taron Egerton in Rocketman. Driver won't be a factor.

Phoenix needs to work on his speeches. I blog for awards sites, and voters were turned off by his crass remarks and backstage tantrum. This shouldn't matter in regards to a performance, but it matters with the social media age.

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

Once again, Sly Stallone won this award so.. even though he is, at least, a better actor than Sandler. So, I give you that much.

Btw, Sandra Bullock might have won it the same year, but not for the same movie. So, indeed, it doesn't mean shit, but not for the reasons you believe.

[–] jasonmovieguy (182) 4 years ago

Also Sandra Bullock and Halle Berry won Razzie awards THE SAME year they won Oscars. It means nothing.

[–] Windsaar (323) 4 years ago

How come you tell people you can't take their opinions seriously because of name calling when in the OP you started name calling, and again in all of your subsequent replies (except for the one where you called out name calling.)

Did you actually get around to watching "Uncut Gems" yet, or are you still coming to baseless conclusions?
Just curious because in the OP you had an opinion regarding a performance you hadn't yet seen, BUT at the same time are telling someone that they need to have seen the movie for their opinion to be validated by you.

That's what's known as a "double standard" even a "logical fallacy".

As you said yourself though, an actors acceptance speech holds absolutely no bearing on the actors performance itself, so the point is moot.

The Oscars are voted on and determined by "the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences" while the Razzies are voted by "Golden Raspberry Award Organization".

Therefore, it's very possible for a movie to be praised by people in one group while at the same time disliked by another separate group.

Bullock and Barrie won Oscars for one movie and Razzies for another, it happens. Obviously the one set of performances were liked, and the others weren't. That's how that happened.

Speaking of the Razzies; Adam Sandler holds 9 "wins" and 26 nominations. I know Sly had "won" more than Sandler, and I could be wrong (crazy, right? Admitting that I may be incorrect. Absolutely unheard of in this day and age) but Sandler is basically tied for nominations (not wins).

Anyway, the fact of the matter is that out of the 8(ish) billion (with a "B") people on this Earth, there's bound to be some opinions that differ from yours.
Instead of name calling, mature people usually just suck it up and chalk it up as a way of life. Give being mature a shot sometime, yeah? You may find some sort of peace in it.

[–] jasonmovieguy (182) 4 years ago

I'm sorry- I wasn't trying to come across rude or a name caller. I have seen UnCut Gems and Sandler (and the script) are exceptional. That doesn't mean he'll get in. If you notice my rankings, I have him in eighth place and Phoenix still first for likelihood of a nomination. I still think there is an alternative that could beat him. That's all I meant.

[–] Windsaar (323) 4 years ago

I appreciate the apology and you clarifying your position.

It's just difficult to not come across as rude and a name caller when you toss around names and insults is all.

I'm all for discussions and debates, but can't stand when they devolve into simply insulting eachother because opinions differ.

Take care though.
I'll have to check out "Uncut Gems" when I get the chance.

[–] jasonmovieguy (182) 4 years ago

Let me know what you think, and I appreciate you getting back to me. I will watch my passion around here lol and try not to name call because you're right- the moment you do that it just discredits your whole argument.

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

"Speaking of the Razzies; Adam Sandler holds 9 "wins" and 26 nominations. I know Sly had "won" more than Sandler, and I could be wrong (crazy, right? Admitting that I may be incorrect. Absolutely unheard of in this day and age) but Sandler is basically tied for nominations (not wins). "

Sly is still a better actor than Sandler and, despite all the razzies, received 3 Oscar noms.

[–] MrMovie (845) 4 years ago

Complete moron, I know you’re some upset Marvel guy, but show some respect. You’re a no talent hack

[–] darkpast (8033) 4 years ago

🤔🤡🤡🤡🤡

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

Oooooowwwwwww guess who's not nominated? Without ANY surprise: Adam Sandler! :D

Meanwhile, Banderas just received his first Oscar nod. JohnMcCock can also see that you edited your post so people don't see that you were delusional enough to believe that Sandler had a shot. How cute....

[–] jasonmovieguy (182) 4 years ago

Oh shut up. My main predictions didn't have Sandler and I always said Phoenix was going to win. You live in your mother's basement still? How cute...

[–] JohnMcCock (136) 4 years ago

It's the best place to hide so JohnMcCock can fuck your mom without being caught .. :p