JOKER - Joaquin Phoenix - October

[Paul MacLean]

I'd hate to see a repeat of how A Clockwork Orange inspired copycat crimes in England (which ultimately prompted Kubrick himself -- with Warner Bros. cooperation -- to get the film banned in the UK).

[AndyDursin]

Fascinating alternate view of the film. If I can get someone to go with me I may check it out.

https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment ... woketards/

Reviewer after reviewer after reviewer has attacked the movie as siding with Joker, as empathizing with “a white incel who picks up a gun and lashes out at society to solve his problems.” What movie did these idiots watch? Phillips doesn’t empathize with Joker. He reverse-engineers him. This character has been around for nearly eighty years, so we already know what he becomes. All Phillips does is take him apart, piece by piece, and give us a tour of his mind.

[andy b]

I'd hate to see a repeat of how A Clockwork Orange inspired copycat crimes in England (which ultimately prompted Kubrick himself -- with Warner Bros. cooperation -- to get the film banned in the UK).

Paul
Firstly, may I point out I enjoy your posts & comments and this is no way trying to contradict your post or find fault with what you have written.

Just wanted to point out that there was only in fact one incident with A Clock Work Orange & in fact the culprit dressed as a droog as indeed others have dressed in a fashion that follows pop stars & other such idols. The press at the time who were astounded at the level of increased screen violence that British Board of Film Censors (censors in those days not classifiers!) were allowing through jumped on the Kubrick film & the associated incident & really did blow it out of all proportion! As indeed the press so often do! It is legendary what they did to Natural Born Killers!! But that is for anther time!

What indeed caused the film to pulled from distribution was that Kubrick took it upon himself to have Warner’s pull the film as he felt it was too much that anything could have come from his film. He also received “threats” directly at his home, which of course could have disastrous consequences on his wife & daughters, so in my opinion did the only thing that was sensible to keep the film out of circulation. (Much of this is documented in the excellent Kubrick documentary in the WB Kubrick box set & the book The Stanley Kubrick Archives) I have no actual knowledge, but told by colleagues that whenever for the UK he was approached about the film over the years he was always against its re-issue, however after he passed away Warner Brothers put the film out both at the cinema and on Home Entertainment.

The film itself was never actually banned, just never distributed.

Of course such incidents are not unique to the UK or A Clock Work Orange, Paramount in the USA did the same with The Warriors that was playing to large crowds & quite a successful release, after the New York incident they to withdrew their film, that incident caused Warner Brothers in the USA to panic over The Wanderers and the USA release was pretty much destroyed for that film as well.
While I never had much to do with Orange, I did work on Full Metal Jacket & consider myself very lucky to have met Mr. Kubrick & benefit from his amazing mind of how a film should work & be released.

Only ever did a lousy re-issue of The Warriors & The Blues Brothers with almost no budget & drain a few pennies out of films already VHS hits. As for The Wanderers did a huge amount of work for GTO on that & we did make money! its last days were with The Choirboys in a double bill that also was very successful.

Regards
Andy b

[Paul MacLean]

Thanks for the clarification Andy!

[Monterey Jack]

RIVETING.

[AndyDursin]

Now the highest grossing R rated movie of all time...which Ryan Reynolds paid hilarious tribute to.

[AndyDursin]

5/10

Is it possible to make a “provocative movie” that’s really not very provocative? That’s the case with JOKER, Warner Bros.’ “audacious” attempt at telling a gritty, “realistic” origin story for Batman’s arch-nemesis. Set in the 1980s and giving off an intentional “King of Comedy”/”Taxi Driver” vibe – right down to a reprise of Saul Bass’ “W” Warner studio shield from the 1970s – “Joker” gives Joaquin Phoenix the showy role of troubled Arthur Fleck, a mentally disturbed man who works as a low-rent clown and has aspirations of becoming a stand-up comic. Unfortunately, he’s not funny at all – and is quite crazy – and his downward mental spiral is matched by Gotham City’s increasingly dangerous descent into urban decay.

Todd Phillips – he of the “Hangover” comedies – clearly set out to make an anti-Marvel film, and while the film is aesthetically interesting, it’s also repetitively structured with underlying themes that are only skin deep. Much of “Joker” is comprised of Phoenix acting nutty – laughing too hard at things that aren’t funny, scaring other Gotham residents, dreaming of success he’ll never have – while Phillips fails to deliver much else to support the performance. Quick fragments of comic book lore pop up here and there in an obligatory manner (young Bruce Wayne sliding down a pole), Robert DeNiro shows up as a Carson-esque late night TV host (a direct nod to his earlier collaborations with Scorsese), and the violent outbursts are grizzly -- yet also entirely expected.

The net effect, of course, is entirely predictable in a relentlessly one-note movie that gives the viewer nothing else to grasp onto. Arthur eventually finds killing to be a mechanism that gives him power – but this transition is only brought forward at the very end, with his initial slaughter of obnoxious yuppies on the subway followed by scenes wherein Arthur acts as if nothing happened while a barely-developed “anarchist movement” rises in the backdrop.

“Joker” seems to have more on its mind than the usual comic book fare, and its attempts at making an “adult,” R-rated production – especially at a time when Disney’s franchises threaten to consume everything else at the cinema – are laudable. It’s just not a very good film, despite its convincing visual portrait of a run-down metropolis awash in crime and assorted filth, anchored by Phoenix’s self-indulgent turn which feels at times as if Phillips was content to just let the actor improvise and keep the cameras rolling. Whether or not you find Phoenix’s performance compelling, the film is a wholly unsatisfying, nearly pointless dramatic experience.