Ororo Munroe

As I said, you haven't seen movie. That he is sympathetic at all is what people are objecting to. Saying that a lot of people saw Ledger's Joker as cool or he's right is hardly damning given that people say the same about plenty of other villains. The difference between them and this Joker is that they don't resemble men who terrorize people in real life. Add that to the fact that this movie centers such a man and makes him sympathetic and you get the current controversy.

First of all, you haven't seen the movie. Secondly, Ledger's Joker was not painted as cool or inspiring, there was no attempt to make him sympathetic or blame others for his actions. He was a villain, responsible for his own actions and the movie made that clear. What could be seen as inspiring is a Joker who is shown as a loser, one who's been abandoned or neglected by society...you know, like how a lot of the dangerous men we know in real life see themselves?

Lol No. Phillips' version is closer to the men we see in real life, which is why there is so much controversy around the movie. Joker in SS and TDK were closer to a fantasy, the comic book version of the character. And most importantly, there was no attempt to explain why the Joker is who he is via some wannabe deep, political message.

Not the most exciting choices but Cameron does look the part. He was only ok to me on Krypton but did have chemistry with the ladies and I suppose that's most important.

Wrong thread, lol but I appreciate Spirit more now than when I first heard it. It's great.

Safe to say that won't happen because unlike Chan, they aren't playing forgettable characters who only appeared one movie.

I can't speak on specifics since I haven't seen the movie or read any reviews. But you've pointed out one of the big reasons why people aren't objecting to Hustlers. It's essentially a heist movie, one of the few which centers women of color. That in itself makes comparisons to Joker far less compelling. And even if this one gives its protagonists the moral high ground, it still doesn't carry the same weight or perceptions as Joker. The latter hits on a very big issue and for some, doesn't do enough to subvert its very real narrative. Good joke.

I'm sorry but this doesn't sound too different from those racebending arguments where the anti crowd think they've made a point by suggesting a white Shaft or Black Panther, etc. There is some important context you'd have to miss or ignore to think this is a valid comparison.

If they think that, so what? Who are you to tell them that their interpretation is wrong, particularly when you haven't seen the movie? To say that a film, its writing or narrative is too sympathetic towards its homicidal maniac protagonist, or doesn't go far enough in examining or condemning his behavior, is a perfectly legitimate critique. Having no interest in seeing this movie doesn't mean I can't have an opinion on it or the discourse surrounding it. To suggest otherwise is silly.

I'm so confused by this idea that critics are injecting politics into Joker when the movie itself has a political narrative or at the very least, invites political discourse. Todd Phillips obviously wanted to make a statement with this movie and even many of the fans were excited about it exactly because this wasn't another "forgettable" cbm. Joker is supposedly more than that...more serious, more adult, real ART! And yet, it seems like many of these same fans want critics to treat this like a "popcorn movie"... just turn off their brains and enjoy. Hilarious. Most of the negative reviews I've seen, by the way, do mention valid criticisms (lack of originality/irony, weak script, not going far enough). So it isn't all politics or suggesting that the movie will inspire violence.

Or... some people simply aren't interested in a Joker standalone film. Count me as one of those people.

This has to be the most hilarious and ironic thing you've said yet. The only reason we are even talking about Marvel right now is because of the criticism Joker is getting. If that ain't the perfect example of "whataboutism".. lmao. You haven't once seen me excuse or defend Marvel. The point is, don't use Mavel or its popularity as an excuse for why other movies shouldn't be critiqued. But I get that doing so serves your own bias. Self awareness on zero, I see. By the way, I saw tweets about military propaganda and promotion in Captain Marvel when the movie was in theaters. So it's not like this wasn't already being discussed. Seems you just hate that Joker isn't getting a pass for its wannabe edgy tale that's already been told and by better filmmakers.

Why? Because you say so? Lol I'd say your attempt at placing qualifiers on why we should care more about propaganda in Marvel movies is doing more to perpetuate fandom bs than anything else. Carry on.

Based on how much money MoS made, I'm pretty there are plenty of people out there who don't see it as a shitty product. But keep peddling this silly argument.

Lol You just said a wider audience makes problematic elements more problematic. But not MoS because it's divisive..as if that makes its problematic elements less problematic...as if the movie were divisive because of its problematic elements. It's amazing that you don't see how silly this all sounds.

Lol It's not just about one critic. I know what I see with my own eyes, anyhow. You can spin the rest however you like, it's still a ridiculous argument. Man of Steel made over 650M, more than TFA and TWS, which in itself proves how weak your argument is. But even if that weren't the case, it's still silly and short-sighted to try position this an MCU or Disney issue, if for no other reason than it gives the impression that other big studios or big budget movies aren't perpetuating the very same problematic elements with some success.

Right, that angle is not meant to elicit any sympathy. That some critics have said that's exactly what they got from it means nothing. Did I say Joker was dangerous? I'm trying to make sense of your logic. And yeah, the notion that we shouldn't care or discuss an equally problematic element in some movies because they aren't as popular as others is weak as hell. Try harder.

The irony... lol Uh, I was referring to Joker's backstory in the movie. The trailers pretty much tell us that Arthur was neglected, abused by society. Hell, at least one of the rave reviews says the movie is compelling because Joker is sympathetic, lol. Oh so you want to be able to determine what's more relevant, important or dangerous based on popularity? Joker is now just some movie that has a guy dressed up as a clown killing people. Lmao! We should ignore the rave reviews it's gotten, the fact that it may be a big hit at the box office, may win more awards?? Hilarious!

You do, obviously, since you're triggered any time anyone says anything "negative" about white males.

How would I have no clue when everything we know about his backstory suggests exactly that? I'm not even arguing that it will do any harm at all. Point is, don't start with the distraction tactics or try to turn this into an Marvel vs. DC debate. (Glorification of the military is not brand exclusive.) You say there is no conversation to be had but you're the one who posted the tweets, lol. I'm saying if we're going to have this conversation, then there is no reason Joker should be ignored or excluded.

I'm not going to defend any glorification of the military but saying the conversation needs to start with the MCU is an absolute joke. You want to talk about problematic elements in MCU movies, fine. But don't use it as a distraction from Joker. The need to not only center a white male villain but to make him sympathetic should remain at the forefront of the conversation.

I think you make some good points here but the idea that there is something wrong with "shitting on white privilege" is hilarious.

How about Oscar for Alfre Woodard. That's who I'm rooting for. Not a shock to hear that this isn't an inspired biopic. I was officially over it when Cynthia was cast. Still a shame because an iconic hero like Harriet deserves something special.

Not only that but it's amusing to see fans talking like Venice holds some grand importance when most of them probably didn't know what a Golden Lion was before Joker won it. And now that reviews are coming back down to earth, the Vice and Green Book Oscar noms are popping up to try to keep Joker's hopes alive, lol. I'm not gonna say it has no chance at a BP nom but folks are missing some key factors with movies like GB and Vice getting a nom. Those were Oscar-friendly movies, for one...Joker is not. The latter already has to deal with genre bias and if it's as dark as some claim, that's another strike against it. It's probably going to need an amazing box office run to even stay in the conversation. Not a chance. Superheroes are on their way to becoming timeless and most cbm are essentially modern action movies so they aren't going out of style any time soon.

Sorry but I'm not praising Phillips for simply making a CBM version of movies we've seen already. I did not say Phillips personally asked for anything. Obviously, the studio decides if a movie will get an awards campaign.