• Xenforo is upgrading us to version 2.3.7 on Tuesday Aug 19, 2025 at 01:00 AM BST (date has been pushed). This upgrade includes several security fixes among other improvements. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Movies JOKER v.3 (Dragonlord's Review)

If you have seen JOKER, how would you rate it?

  • Total voters
    345
Fox by the Sea said:
right, must be some gay black jewish woman to win the oscar for best male actor.
you gtfo snowflake
Click to expand...
lmaooooo bro i don’t really care who wins but if that ridiculous performance gets best actor i will cry from laughter
 
mommas homeboy said:
Hey friend. Just wanted to tell you you’re a fuckin’ idiot and your opinion of movies and acting in general is utter dog shit.
Click to expand...
ya ok u pretentious fuck. go watch joaquin phoenix do a 2 hour jim carrey impression over dark brooding music.
 
I really wish they would do these by ticket sales numbers or at least adjust for inflation.

Movie ticket prices have soared compared to where some greats are on the list.

It’s also telling the newer movies are higher on the lists, especially when movies are not as popular as they were in earlier Era’s.

Skews the data imo.
 
90 50 said:
And r rated movies adjusted joker gets curb stomped.

https://www.businessinsider.com/highest-grossing-r-rated-films-of-all-time-2016-7
Click to expand...

Completely get what you're saying, but it also would pose an issue of salience (namely, modern audience wouldn't see the relevance) to focus on older films that absolutely trounce newer ones in pure viewership because they are from fifty plus years ago. I mean, Gone with the Wind and Ten Commandments absolutely decimate a lot of modern blockbusters if we are looking at tickets sold as a metric. But telling someone that Avengers Endgame is this many tickets shy of The Ten Commandments would have much of the current population who looks at such numbers going, "huh?"

I mean there's no going back. Movies today are so much more expensive than they were in the 50s and 60s that there's virtually no way that even the most popular films will rival Gone with the Wind in tickets sold. Prices rise, sales decrease. Factor in that there are so many more options for entertainment- streaming, tv, dvds of older films, etc- that it is tough to make those comparisons.
 
For those who've watched Taxi Driver recently, any comments on the characterization of Bickle vs. that of Fleck. Having just re-watched the film for the first time in many years, I'm curious to hear some thoughts on that.
 
chickenluver said:
Some great movies on that list.

Why are you saying Joker is curb stomped though? According to that link it's no. 2 all time even after adjusting for inflation. And will probably get to no. 1.
Click to expand...

Back in the 70's I imagine movies cost like .50 cents to get into

Nowadays they cost 15 bucks

Yet these older movies still have pretty amazing boxoffice results
 
ufcfan4 said:
Completely get what you're saying, but it also would pose an issue of salience (namely, modern audience wouldn't see the relevance) to focus on older films that absolutely trounce newer ones in pure viewership because they are from fifty plus years ago. I mean, Gone with the Wind and Ten Commandments absolutely decimate a lot of modern blockbusters if we are looking at tickets sold as a metric. But telling someone that Avengers Endgame is this many tickets shy of The Ten Commandments would have much of the current population who looks at such numbers going, "huh?"

I mean there's no going back. Movies today are so much more expensive than they were in the 50s and 60s that there's virtually no way that even the most popular films will rival Gone with the Wind in tickets sold. Prices rise, sales decrease. Factor in that there are so many more options for entertainment- streaming, tv, dvds of older films, etc- that it is tough to make those comparisons.
Click to expand...
I understand that, but at the same time the metric they use, makes it sound like more people went to see the joker in theaters, when in reality it just isn’t true.

Movies just cost way more now.

Ticket numbers, and adjusted for inflation metrics show a much better picture of how “popular “ a movie was at the time it was in thesters
 
TheRuthlessOne said:
Back in the 70's I imagine movies cost like .50 cents to get into

Nowadays they cost 15 bucks

Yet these older movies still have pretty amazing boxoffice results
Click to expand...
That’s because WAY MORE people went to see them.
 
ufcfan4 said:
For those who've watched Taxi Driver recently, any comments on the characterization of Bickle vs. that of Fleck. Having just re-watched the film for the first time in many years, I'm curious to hear some thoughts on that.
Click to expand...
far better character development overall for deniro in taxi driver. you get to see him actually try to be a regular person. you see him try to make things work romantically with cybill shepherd and fail. you see his empathy for jodie foster’s character.

bickle genuinely comes across as a regular guy who’s down on his luck and misunderstood/wronged by the world which almost gets you on his side. the climax of the movie is almost surely meant to be cathartic for the viewer or at least pushing the boundaries of an anti-hero.

joaquin as arthur genuinely (not trying to be edgy here) comes across as mentally retarded or at least cripplingly autistic and an absolute burden on everyone he comes in contact with. no one he meets behaves even somewhat realistically besides maybe murray or sophie (post realization)

tl;dr arthur sucked in every imaginable way, travis bickle genuinely came across as a good person shaped into a monster by the world around him, something bryan cranston would do just as well as deniro when he played walter white.
 
KAZSoliloquy said:
far better character development overall for deniro in taxi driver. you get to see him actually try to be a regular person. you see him try to make things work romantically with cybill shepherd and fail. you see his empathy for jodie doster’s character.

bickle genuinely comes across as a regular guy who’s down on his luck and misunderstood/wronged by the world which almost gets you on his side. the climax of the movie is almost surely meant to be cathartic for the viewer or at least pushing the boundaries of an anti-hero.

joaquin as arthur genuinely (not trying to be edgy here) comes across as mentally retarded or at least cripplingly autistic and an absolute burden on everyone he comes in contact with. no one he meets behaves even somewhat realistically besides maybe deniro as murray or sophie (post realization)

tl;dr arthur sucked in every imaginable way, travis bickle genuinely came across as a good person shaped into a monster by the world around him, something bryan cranston would do just as well as deniro when he played walter white.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It was confirmed by Scorsese himself that Bickle was a US Marine and served with a Special Ops unit in Vietnam. He was a combat veteran, something Fleck could never have done given his various physical and mental conditions.

Furthermore, Fleck flat out states he doesn't believe in anything, and his actions are entirely selfish. He kills out of rage and resentment against a society he believes(with some justification)either treats him with contempt or ignores him completely. His only redeeming moments are not murdering Randall the midget and leaving Sophie unharmed, if no doubt terrified. By contrast, while Travis shares some of Arthur's mental health problems, including almost certainly PTSD from his Vietnam service, he is still capable of empathy. His violence is motivated as much by concern for Iris and a desire to help her escape her life as a 13 year old prostitute as frustration at his own lot in life.
 
KnightTemplar said:
Agreed. It was confirmed by Scorsese himself that Bickle was a US Marine and served with a Special Ops unit in Vietnam. He was a combat veteran, something Fleck could never have done given his various physical and mental conditions.

Furthermore, Fleck flat out states he doesn't believe in anything, and his actions are entirely selfish. He kills out of rage and resentment against a society he believes(with some justification)either treats him with contempt or ignores him completely. His only redeeming moments are not murdering the midget and leaving Sophie unharmed, if no doubt terrified. By contrast, while Travis shares some of Arthur's mental health problems, including almost certainly PTSD from his Vietnam service, he is still capable of empathy. His violence is motivated as much by concern for Iris and a desire to help her escape her life as a 13 year old prostitute as frustration at his own lot in life.
Click to expand...
i agree 100%

i also think about the ironic “villain becomes the hero” endings. the public’s misunderstanding of the massacre at the end of taxi driver and travis’ return to his life without prosecution is unrealistic but it’s at least coherent, seems possible and makes sense as a plot point.

in joker, we’re supposed to believe that because three guys were shot on a train by a guy in clown makeup, millions of people in clown masks are suddenly rising up against the government and the rich and hailing this man as a vigilante hero. ludicrous.
 
KAZSoliloquy said:
ya ok u pretentious fuck. go watch joaquin phoenix do a 2 hour jim carrey impression over dark brooding music.
Click to expand...

Man you are coming across as the pretentious one, spewing shit like mainstream movies suck etc etc you sound like a full blown hipster douche.
 
elreece said:
Man you are coming across as the pretentious one, spewing shit like mainstream movies suck etc etc you sound like a full blown hipster douche.
Click to expand...
all that matters in a movie is good acting, good storytelling, good cinematography. this movie has none of those.

too many idiots getting behind this garbage because they think they have to. the director comes out against pc culture & unfuckable basement-dwelling autistic /b/-tards with sub-100 iq’s crown joaquin “best actor” because they’re the only special kind of unbearable that can relate to his performance.

this shit is a 3/10 tops. deniro as murray franklin was cool and a couple stand-ups got some gigs out of it. that’s it.
 
KAZSoliloquy said:
all that matters in a movie is good acting, good storytelling, good cinematography. this movie has none of those.

too many idiots getting behind this garbage because they think they have to. the director comes out against pc culture & unfuckable basement-dwelling autistic /b/-tards with sub-100 iq’s crown joaquin “best actor” because they’re the only special kind of unbearable that can relate to his performance.

this shit is a 3/10 tops. deniro as murray franklin was cool and a couple stand-ups got some gigs out of it. that’s it.
Click to expand...

Im not rating it as high as other posters but 3/10 is getting into hater territory.

Whats a few movies you do rate high?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,270,970
Messages
57,693,210
Members
175,809
Latest member
lawfulgood

Share this page

Back
Top