- Joined
- Apr 3, 2015
- Messages
- 10,912
- Reaction score
- 16,943
The Joker isn't supposed to be an anti-hero, though. He's supposed to be crazy but still a total and complete villain. He's evil, evil, evil.
Yeah I saw it. Outside of Phoenix giving a great performance, the lazy writing dragged it down. Still a perfectly watchable movie. The Joker, though, is not and should not be any kind of a sympathetic character. He's evil. "I'm going to kill people because i'm not happy and they deserve it" is lame.Have you seen the movie? That is the take away I got from this particular version of him. Besides Bruce is not exactly the hero of the story either. Billionaire industrialist maintaining the status quo by extra legal action. Harvey Bullock the only one I route for in that series.
*baby carrotMatching banana hammocks LOOM
_divorce_
Not very original or deep either."I'm going to kill people because i'm not happy and they deserve it" is lame.
@Prokofievian is it wrong that I want to get a Grezlyck sweater just because his name matches the team he's on so well?
"I'm going to kill people because i'm not happy and they deserve it" is lame.
I really don't know if this is a joke song or not the MEOOWWW cracks me up everytime
Not very original or deep either.
Discussion post.. I enjoyed the Joker and thought he made a good anti-hero. This appears to be his point. Wayne Enterprises and a handful of other companies own virtually all the means of production in Gotham. Is it hypocritical of Thomas Wayne to argue people should just work harder when most people are born into a economically disadvantaged position to himself and in all likelihood even the three bankers the Joker killed. His position is essentially he has more merit and because of that he is better off than those with more than him. If he truly believe that were the case his son Bruce would not be literally growing up on the other side of a gate from working class Gotham and would be in the same public schools as the working class people Thomas Wayne insults. Since Wayne Enterprises owns the means of production and through that the means of upwards mobility the rioting seen at the end of the film is the only means of rebelling against that system. Assuming that is the case how is the Joker and his fellows act any less legitimate than the government agents that use violence to maintain the status quo as shown repeatedly throughout the film? Finally accepting the film as prologue. Isn't the feud between the Joker and Batman decades later really a continuation of this fight? With Batman trying to maintain a system that keeps him a few other people in charge of the (in Wayne Enterprises case literally) the means of production through extra legal physical violence by fighting the extra legal actions of the Joker, Poison Ivy (fighting the environment) Doctor Freeze (let's remember all he was doing was raise money to save his wife from an illness). Painted in that light how does Batman have the moral high ground over any of the three aforementioned?
Yeah I saw it. Outside of Phoenix giving a great performance, the lazy writing dragged it down. Still a perfectly watchable movie. The Joker, though, is not and should not be any kind of a sympathetic character. He's evil. "I'm going to kill people because i'm not happy and they deserve it" is lame.