Joker: Folie a Deux | October 4, 2024 | Lady Gaga is Harley Quinn in this 200M+ musical sequel

[YM!]

8 hours ago, Porthos said:

 

Want to add a bit to this, @YM!, after thinking about it some more.

 

I think I know where you're coming from when it comes to a trepidation to a Harley/Joker relationship being viewed as Unironically A Good Thing™.  I want to say right off the bat that Harley Quinn is one of my favorite additions to DC from the last few decades.  Her character is just such a breath of fresh air in many many ways, and let's face it she was portrayed brilliantly in the first animated series she debuted in (as well as nearly everything else since).

 

Even her (mostly) one sided affection with the Joker worked in those first animated series, when that was a thing.  With one notable exception.  I have always had... mixed feelings regarding the origin of her affections as a part of her overall origin tale.  It may not be part of the infamous soap opera trope of "Fall in love with your rapist", but it's maybe a second or third cousin removed in that Joker's mental manipulations helped "birthed" the Harley Quinn persona in the first place.  Could make a decent tale about the dangers of grooming there, in fact.  So I've always been a little bit... uneasy about that side of the equation.

 

On the other hand, having Dr. Harleen Quinzel be a professional and very competent person that still succumbed to her own inner demons (if after a shove or three) *ALSO* works as part of the origin tale, and that's how I personally square the circle by more focusing on that aspect than the Joker manipulation part. 

 

So if the film was going to set up THAT as part of a Fleck/Quinn romance I would be very concerned.

 

But if Quinn is already well on her way to being broken and she has her own motivations and drives and she is in control of her own destiny... Well, it's the difference between character agency and not (which as you probably know is one of my hobby horses lately when it comes to characterization).  It turns Harley Quinn from being a victim to being... well, whatever she is in this film.  And that's worth seeing where it goes.

 

Personally, I'm betting on: Ending Not Well At All.

 

But even the origin itself looks different enough that I am gonna give this a bit more room than I would a more standard Harely Quinn/Joker "romance".

 

(no, really though, they really ought to explore the dangers of toxic relationships)

 

I am also a big fan of Harley Quinn. This a great response by the way, it perfectly summed up the potential on where it could go and if Todd Phillips goes that route and has something meaningful to say on toxic relationships, I’d be game. I just don’t trust him as much as I think the first Joker itself is kind of lame in the characterization of Joker and a lame pastiche of the films the movie is inspired, that it winds up having nothing to really say.

Edited April 10 by YM!

[YM!]

Do think this will likely be the biggest movie of the year domestically and the biggest CBM. Feel like it has the least amount of pressure to hit the right notes in order to get big numbers and to be honest, Joker has enough traits to seperate itself from the normal CBM as well and think the musical angle and Harley will be huge draws. I’m fully expecting the worst people you know dressed as Harley and Joker for Halloween lol. Thinking a performance of 155/410 domestic.

[Firepower]

34 minutes ago, SpiderByte said:

Man you cannot be pretending that this 200 million dollar blockbuster is not also made to make money 

It's absolutely made to make money, I just want other 200+ mln productions have effort put into them. And I don't mean only comic book movies, Indy 5 cost 320+ mln and looks super fake and so poorly put together for something so expensive.

[Hatebox]

17 minutes ago, YM! said:

I am also a big fan of Harley Quinn. This a great response by the way, it perfectly summed up the potential on where it could go and if Todd Phillips goes that route and has something meaningful to say on toxic relationships, I’d be game. I just don’t trust him as much as I think the first Joker itself is kind of lame in the characterization of Joker.

I don’t love the first film but I internally reconciled the character as someone who basically fantasises about being the joker. It’s certainly more interesting than taking him as literal version of the joker, because he’d be fucking useless if he was. 
 

 

Edited April 10 by Hatebox

[SpiderByte]

You could maybe make the argument for the first one as a more artistic thing but a 200 million dollar Batman franchise film does have comparable financial expectations. Hell this actually makes it more expensive than several of the actual Batman films

[Firepower]

First Joker was deconstruction of the character, deconstruction of the myth about him, that's why it's the most realistic version of Joker, he's not this cool and fetishized mastermind like in the source material and all other adaptations, but more of a sad and miserable mentally ill guy who desperately needs help, but can't get one. I understand why some people want to see "cool criminal mastermind" version more, but I don't see the problem with having this one when we already have many versions of cool mastermind and will get many more. Plus there's no movie with criminal mastermind version, unless you want to see 2 hours of Joker being successful with his evil plans and that's about it.

Edited April 10 by Firepower

[Cap]

3 hours ago, Porthos said:

 

$52m alone for Gaga ($12m), Phillips ($20m), and Phoenix ($20m).   So, yeah, a tiny bit higher.  

glaring at that pay gap 

[JustLurking]

1 minute ago, Cap said:

glaring at that pay gap 

Gaga is a new addition...why would she be getting as much as Joaquin and Phil?

[Cap]

Just now, JustLurking said:

Gaga is a new addition...why would she be getting as much as Joaquin and Phil?

Because she is his co-Star, equally did the work (especially if there is dance and song routines involved), and 10000000000% a draw onto herself. Y’all think some would sit through this without her? 
 

Also, you know, women, historically, getting paid less for doing the same thing in this industry!!! 

[Eric Prime]

4 minutes ago, Cap said:

Because she is his co-Star, equally did the work (especially if there is dance and song routines involved), and 10000000000% a draw onto herself. Y’all think some would sit through this without her? 

Can confirm. This looks bad, but the only reason I'm seeing this is because Gaga. 🤣

[Firepower]

8 minutes ago, Cap said:

Because she is his co-Star, equally did the work (especially if there is dance and song routines involved), and 10000000000% a draw onto herself. Y’all think some would sit through this without her? 
 

Also, you know, women, historically, getting paid less for doing the same thing in this industry!!! 

This has nothing to do with gender pay gap, she would've gotten 20 mln if she was a co-star in the first movie, it's absolutely logical Joaquin would earn more since the movie not only did a billion, but also earned him his first Oscar, he simply has more leverage. And 12 mln is still big star paycheck, nothing to be sad about.

Edited April 10 by Firepower

[JustLurking]

11 minutes ago, Cap said:

Because she is his co-Star, equally did the work (especially if there is dance and song routines involved), and 10000000000% a draw onto herself. Y’all think some would sit through this without her?

She is A draw, but she is not THE draw. Without Joaquin they literally don't make the freaking film, y'all. Get real.

 

Quote

Also, you know, women, historically, getting paid less for doing the same thing in this industry!!! 

Certainly an issue in the industry but does not mean it was an issue for this film specifically. 12M as a newly added cast member is a big fucking paycheck. If they go on to make Joker 3 she'll get to demand an even better one next time.

[MightyDargon]

well known impoverished female Lady Gaga, who was so materially deprived she had to serve drinks to Joaquin on set just to pay off her college tuition

[Hatebox]

[Lisa Simpson doing a presentation meme] 

Multi-million dollar hollywood pay checks are an unhelpful battleground to fight the (very worthwhile) gender pay disparity war on.
 

We all know why phoenix is getting paid more for this film, and it’s not because he has a dick. 

[YM!]

35 minutes ago, Firepower said:

First Joker was deconstruction of the character, deconstruction of the myth about him, that's why it's the most realistic version of Joker, he's not this cool and fetishized mastermind like in the source material and all other adaptations, but more of a sad and miserable mentally ill guy who desperately needs help, but can't get one. I understand why some people want to see "cool criminal mastermind" version more, but I don't see the problem with having this one when we already have many versions of cool mastermind and will get many more. Plus there's no movie with criminal mastermind version, unless you want to see 2 hours of Joker being successful with his evil plans and that's about it.

Thats not why I or others got a problem with the Joker. To say he’s just a cool mastermind or meant to say something about society is an mis-exaggeration of the character (which is arguably thanks to The Dark Knight’s interpretation). There’s many different interpretations of the character, from deranged mastermind to psychotic comedian to a broken man with just “One Bad Day” from turning. That’s the beauty of the Joker character: there’s no finite origin! You can do whatever you want with the Joker and in any sort of way. He’s a blank canvas for whatever themes or messages of the story the artist wants to convey. 
 

I was happy with the fact instead of a villain origin story in the first, they did try to focus on the mental health aspect. However, the ideas and execution were definitely not up to par for me and instead speedrun through a bunch of cliches and failed to do anything new with the mental health aspect from other movies. That’s not a knock on anyone who likes the movie or ignore that a lot of people liked Joker quite a bit. I just don’t think it does anything interesting or profound with the setup as much as Phillips hoped to.

Edited April 10 by YM!

[AniNate]

It does seem like the "musical" element won't be as much of a turnoff as people think. I would've expected to hear more Internet rage at this point if it was.

[filmlover]

Joaquin also has probably never received a paycheck that big, so I don't see what the issue is with him getting a much bigger payday for what is, essentially, his franchise. Secure the giant bag of cash while you can, dude!

[Firepower]

55 minutes ago, YM! said:

I was happy with the fact instead of a villain origin story in the first, they did try to focus on the mental health aspect. However, the ideas and execution were definitely not up to par for me and instead speedrun through a bunch of cliches and failed to do anything new with the mental health aspect from other movies.

I disagree about this, unless you mean movies which are not mentioned as Joker's main inspirations. Mentally ill character who actually visits a dispensary constantly as part of his daily life and has trouble getting prescription for medication he needs because of distribution problems and nearly closed health institutions is something very real and absolutely wasn't done in those particular movies at all.

Edited April 10 by Firepower

[YM!]

7 minutes ago, Firepower said:

I disagree about this, unless you mean movies which are not mentioned as Joker's main inspirations. Mentally ill character who actually visits a dispensary constantly as part of his daily life and has trouble getting prescription for medication he needs because of distribution problems and nearly closed health institutions is something very real and absolutely wasn't done in those particular movies at all.

When I said other movies I don’t mean other Batman or CBMs, I meant movies in general.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

Joker 2 will probably be enough of a musical to be in the "Musical or Comedy" categories at the Golden Globes.