Home Artists Posts Import Register
Patreon importer is back online! Tell your friends ✅

Files

Joker Reaction - Google Drive

Comments

Dean Nolan

It is such a disturbingly good fillm, Quaquin Pheonix does a phenomaly good job and deserved all the awards and praise. Someone pointed out to me that whatever scene the Joker is in his outfit is the same colour as the background. Not sure why the director made it like that but maybe to show the character fit or belonged in that city, and made him feel more real.

Thomas Corp

The critics weren’t kidding when they said that this movie was Taxi Driver meets The King of Comedy. For me, I did like Joaquin Phoenix in this, I thought he was good, albeit, not to the level of Heath Ledger’s performance. In fairness, both are unable to surpass either Jack Nicholson or Cesar Romero who, for my money are the best in terms of live action portrayals and are tied for second overall behind Mark Hamill who is forever going to be the best Joker that ever was or ever will be; no one’s ever going to be able to dethrone him on that. Your question about how this film fits into overall DC canon, it’s kind of a “what if…?” type scenario by way of one of the more famous lines that the Joker has in The Killing Joke, which is, “Something like that... Something like that happened to me, you know. I... I'm not exactly sure what it was. Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another... if I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!” I have several personal problems with this movie that ultimately prevent me from enjoying it anywhere near the level that, it seems like everyone else did. That said, I am quite happy to see that you really enjoyed it and that you had a good time seeing this.

Ryan

With Heath Ledger and Joaquin Phoenix, the Joker is now just the second character who two different actors won Oscars for playing, after Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro as Vito Corleone. Makes it rather fitting that De Niro is actually in the film.

WastedPo

Can I suggest that people *not* explain to her why she shouldn't yet watch "Split?" Because in explaining the reason, it would defeat any effect the Easter egg at the end would've otherwise had. I think at this point, there's really no way to replicate the authentic surprise people experienced for the first time in the theater. The best to shoot for now would be to let her watch "Split," then explain afterwards why certain reveals really impacted people when the movie had just come out. Edit: Well shoot. Nevermind. I just watched the full intro to Joker, and it's a moot issue now.

Jeff Clark

If someone hadn't watched Unbreakable and just watched Split, the ending would just be out of the blue and confusing. Unfortunately the true impact could ONLY be felt by those of us who watched Unbreakable years and years ago and came into Split when it was released.

WastedPo

Yeah, I realize at this point, there's no way for someone to "naturally" experience what people experienced in the theater. I guess in my mind, it was better for her to just be confused by the little easter egg. My reasoning was that if someone is told they absolutely HAVE to watch another movie first, then (a) they'll be distracted the whole time watching Split, wondering how the movies relate, rather than appreciating the story in front of them. (b) When that moment does happen in Split, it won't be much of a surprise. Having said all that, I can understand why people wanted her to watch both movies.