Why does the left hate the new Joker?

7437 said:
I've seen alot more whining about critics of this movie than people actually criticizing this movie. Personally I have only heard good things about it. With the one exception that it's basically Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy smashed together.

Wonder if someone is gonna shoot Reagan over it lol.
Click to expand...

Then you haven't read the reviews. Go read some of the rotten reviews on rotten tomatoes.
 
There was a fifth Rambo flick made?!

<JagsKiddingMe>
 
Jack Reacheround said:
I think maybe some people are more cautious now, given recent events, and may find it in bad taste to make such a character the protagonist in a movie. Or maybe the movie is not that good. Idk, I haven’t seen it yet. Idk if they’ve taken steps to mitigate the manipulation of ratings systems that rely on what is essentially internet polling, but if they haven’t, then I could see a small group of people on the fringe left trying to manipulate the ratings. If that’s what you mean by “machine at work”, then yeah, I guess. But the right is far more monolithic when it comes to these types of things. That’s how they continually win political victories despite being a minority of voters. Yet the right are usually the ones to jump all over anything that runs contrary to their beliefs, such as people not liking the Joker, and attribute it to a leftist conspiracy.

And didn’t the movie just come out? As more people see it, more people will rate it, and it’s rating will then truly reflect the opinion of the population at large. Not everything is a conspiracy. Some things are though.
Click to expand...
Nothing to do with a leftist conspiracy, movie critics, Hollywood and most media have always traditionally been leftist and reflective of that sides point of view. The issue is when political bias affects ratings. Which is why any movie about a political hot topic will always get 10/10 critic reviews (slaves, blacks going through hardship) no matter how disconnected that is from the audience's perspective. I find it cowardly and dishonest on their behalf.

spin said:
You didn't bother to look readily available opinions "the left" has put out there,

So either you need things spoon fed to you, or you just wanted to post your question where you'd get the hugs and support you need.
Click to expand...
I posted the question because I was genuinely curious. I dont typically align myself with their viewpoints but I am always open to discussion. No-one from the left posted anything else but insults, and I've gotten the answers I wanted from everyone else.
 
@NoDak

The last paragraph of the WSJ review...

"The most obvious question that “Joker” raises concerns gun violence. At a time when the nation seems helpless to stop mass shootings, do we need another movie, however fanciful, in which a lunatic shooter kills innocent people at random? Of course not, but no one knows enough about causal links between violence on and off screen to say that such films shouldn’t be made or seen. A more manageable question is how much we need movies, however stylish and stunningly performed, that make us feel next to nothing. “Joker” is one of them, and the answer is not at all."

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Isn't it funny how dozens and dozens of movie reviews in established publications are all mentioning this fabricated issue?

How many reviews of Deadpool 2, John Wick 3, or any recent horror movie warned of the gore and violence inspiring mass murder?
 
Lando said:
Nothing to do with a leftist conspiracy, movie critics, Hollywood and most media have always traditionally been leftist and reflective of that sides point of view. The issue is when political bias affects ratings. Which is why any movie about a political hot topic will always get 10/10 critic reviews (slaves, blacks going through hardship) no matter how disconnected that is from the audience's perspective. I find it cowardly and dishonest on their behalf.


I posted the question because I was genuinely curious. I dont typically align myself with their viewpoints but I am always open to discussion. No-one from the left posted anything else but insults, and I've gotten the answers I wanted from everyone else.
Click to expand...

you could have looked it up at any time.

try the victim card bullshit with someone else.
 
Lando said:
Nothing to do with a leftist conspiracy, movie critics, Hollywood and most media have always traditionally been leftist and reflective of that sides point of view. The issue is when political bias affects ratings. Which is why any movie about a political hot topic will always get 10/10 critic reviews (slaves, blacks going through hardship) no matter how disconnected that is from the audience's perspective. I find it cowardly and dishonest on their behalf.
Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely. I could see implicit bias playing a role. Still, I have to see the movie. I mean, maybe it just isn’t very good. Idk.

However, I believe you first meant to imply it was some kind of leftist conspiracy. That’s what you meant by “machine at work”. Machine, when used as a metaphor for a collection of people working for a particular common interest, has always implied a deliberate attempt at some end goal.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
The editorial half of the Journal is.

Editorials include movie reviews.
Click to expand...
GearSolidMetal said:
@NoDak

The last paragraph of the WSJ review...

"The most obvious question that “Joker” raises concerns gun violence. At a time when the nation seems helpless to stop mass shootings, do we need another movie, however fanciful, in which a lunatic shooter kills innocent people at random? Of course not, but no one knows enough about causal links between violence on and off screen to say that such films shouldn’t be made or seen. A more manageable question is how much we need movies, however stylish and stunningly performed, that make us feel next to nothing. “Joker” is one of them, and the answer is not at all."

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Isn't it funny how dozens and dozens of movie reviews in established publications are all mentioning this fabricated issue?

How many reviews of Deadpool 2, John Wick 3, or any recent horror movie warned of the gore and violence inspiring mass murder?
Click to expand...

Yeah dude, I was going to leave that alone but I really don't believe the WSJ is left-wing. Not even the damn editorial board, it doesn't warrant being mentioned alongside Slate or The Guardian. That review is silly though, point taken there.

The Journal's editorial pages and columns, run separately from the news pages, have a conservative bent and are highly influential in American conservative circles. As editors of the editorial page, Vermont C. Royster (served 1958–1971) and Robert L. Bartley (served 1972–2000) were especially influential in providing a conservative interpretation of the news on a daily basis. Some of the Journal's former reporters claim that the paper has adopted an even more conservative tone since Rupert Murdoch's purchase.[59][60][61]

The Journal's editorial page has been seen as critical of many aspects of Barack Obama's presidency. In particular, it has been a prominent critic of the Affordable Care Act legislation passed in 2010, and has featured many opinion columns attacking various aspects of the bill. The Journal's editorial page has also criticized the Obama administration's energy policies and foreign policy.[63][64][65][66]

On October 25, 2017, the editorial board called for Special Counsel Robert Mueller to resign from the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and accused Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign of colluding with Russia. In December 2017, the editorial board repeated its calls for Mueller's resignation. The editorials by the editorial board caused fractures within the Wall Street Journal, as reporters say that the editorials undermine the paper's credibility.[67][68][69][70]

The editorial board of The Wall Street Journal rejects the scientific consensus on climate change. The Journal disputes that it poses a major threat to human existence and can be prevented through public policy. The Journal has published articles disputing that global warming is occurring at all. The Journal is regarded as a forum for climate change skeptics, publishing articles by individuals skeptical of the consensus position on climate change in its op-ed section.[71][72][73][74][75]
 
MicroBrew said:
And by "left" you mean 2 or 3 individuals out there writing silly articles.
Click to expand...
I've done battle with a lot of sheeple that agree with those marching ord... articles.

Like one from NYT...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/09/movies/joker-movie-controversy.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur

Facebook comment section was lit up with people calling anyone that disagreed with the article a racist.

Or that if someone didnt understand the article, was probably because they're racist.

I hope its trolls. I hope these people dont actually exist.
 
HereticBD said:
He said, while whining ambiguously about the group he complains about whining too much...

It actually bothers you that this movie is doing so well, doesn't it? Ever wonder why that is?

Also, "alot" is not a word. It's "a lot". The more you know...
Click to expand...
I have no problems with the movie, also I haven't seen it. But on sherdog we see 1000 posts complaining about the left, and a few links to film critics as "the left"
 
Cunningham said:
Then you haven't read the reviews. Go read some of the rotten reviews on rotten tomatoes.
Click to expand...

..... why? I trust a traditional movie review about as much as a traditional game review. IE, none.
 
Jack Reacheround said:
Yes, absolutely. I could see implicit bias playing a role. Still, I have to see the movie. I mean, maybe it just isn’t very good. Idk.

However, I believe you first meant to imply it was some kind of leftist conspiracy. That’s what you meant by “machine at work”. Machine, when used as a metaphor for a collection of people working for a particular common interest, has always implied a deliberate attempt at some end goal.
Click to expand...
That was someone else that said that, but in regards to "the machine", for trying to sabotage opposing political campaigns sure, but not on a smaller scale like movie reviews. I'm was just talking about giving a movie bad reviews based on political bias rather than the watchability of the movie

ToxicShocker said:
I have no problems with the movie, also I haven't seen it. But on sherdog we see 1000 posts complaining about the left, and a few links to film critics as "the left"
Click to expand...
By " a few links", do you mean the literal average review score from every critic combined on that website?
 
Because Black Panther sucked and they’re insecure about it.
 
I lean more left socially and I loved the movie! Joaquin's version of the Joker was brilliant. Not sure if he passes Ledger's but it's close and I'll have to watch them both again to decide.
 
Meanwhile with Batwaman
LbbJYgt.png

VemjIrR.png
 
They dont like anything. They are bunch of weirdos suffering in their own sorrow. These motherfuckers need to exercise and eat some steak. Those soy latte ain't good for ya
 
Lando said:
images
Click to expand...

whIe8pS.png


So film critics have a particular job. They have to 1) give you their opinion about a movie, and 2) make money from you reading their opinion. In a world full of degenerative clickbait I'm assuming the first reviewers were making particularly hot takes on the issues of gun violence, incel, mass murderers whatever. And it worked, it drummed up hype for their articles, and got people talking about the movie.

As time goes on and the movie sits in the theaters you begin to see real averaged scores. People don't need to hype it or slam it for their piece.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,101
Messages
55,467,687
Members
174,786
Latest member
plasterby

Share this page

Back
Top