Joker: Folie à Deux Weekend Thread

[vale9001]

I don't understand the discussion about "audience taste" cause they didn't asked for this movie. The first movie (everyone can agree liking It or not It's not the same cgi stuff around) was huge. 

 

The fact they didn't Need It like they don't Need taxi driver 2 shouldn't show they ask also for something different or at least not for things they feel It's just cash grab?

 

 

Edited Sunday at 12:11 PM by vale9001

[wildphantom]

Just saw Joker. Wow, it wasn’t anywhere near as bad as I was lead to believe. I am shocked! 🙄

[Mad Max007]

33 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

(Having not seen the movie or read any spoilers, but just the general gist of this thread)...It's not an unreasonable expectation...the name is in the title.

 

If the movie director and the studio really decided that you should spend the whole time taking the character from the end of movie 1, and now putting him back in his place as an unknown loser in movie 2...well, it deserves every loss possible.

 

They failed at the concept stage of the movie.  They didn't understand the Joker (the 1st movie actually completely showed how anyone could become the Joker, which is a thing in the comics - but the comics never go into "and now go back to just being a loser")...if you fail so hard on the concept of a known character IP, you're gonna get anger and hate from almost all GA b/c you set an expectation naming the movie "Joker" and you didn't keep it...

Yes, it's like they used the title because they know no one would watch a film called "Fleck". The few enjoyers can defend it all day but doesn't change the fact.

[DAR]

More like Folie a Doo Doo.

 

[wildphantom]

45 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

(Having not seen the movie or read any spoilers, but just the general gist of this thread)...It's not an unreasonable expectation...the name is in the title.

 

If the movie director and the studio really decided that you should spend the whole time taking the character from the end of movie 1, and now putting him back in his place as an unknown loser in movie 2...well, it deserves every loss possible.

 

They failed at the concept stage of the movie.  They didn't understand the Joker (the 1st movie actually completely showed how anyone could become the Joker, which is a thing in the comics - but the comics never go into "and now go back to just being a loser")...if you fail so hard on the concept of a known character IP, you're gonna get anger and hate from almost all GA b/c you set an expectation naming the movie "Joker" and you didn't keep it...

That in essence was my major problem with the first film. That it provoked such chatter about an origin, rather than the deeper themes and subtext that was the film’s real point.  
 

The sequel, at least to me, is an unsubtle commentary on what was intended to be taken away from the first film.  Its use of the IP was intended to bring people in for a greater conversation, but Phillips definitely has a disdain for this IP culture. Something that’s further rammed home in the new film. 
 

I get why people are pissed. Yet for me it was obvious what he was trying to subvert and use for another purpose first time around.  

[Spidey Freak]

1 hour ago, TwoMisfits said:

They failed at the concept stage of the movie.  They didn't understand the Joker (the 1st movie actually completely showed how anyone could become the Joker, which is a thing in the comics - but the comics never go into "and now go back to just being a loser")...

 

The irony is that Alan Moore, the originator of the "Anyone can become Joker" concept in The Killing Joke, has later gone on record saying he considers the story a mess. Regardless, the actual theory is disproven in the book itself when Joker tries to turn Gordon insane but flops. I've never understood how the resolution of the story was lost on so many people who took away the opposite meaning entirely.

 

TKJ is very popular with pseudo-intellectual edgelords and Phillips managed to tap into that fanbase with the first film. Phillips has very limited skills though and it seems this sequel has made it blatantly obvious to everyone who didn't realize it the first time around. The initial trailers seemed fascinating which fooled me into thinking TP finally managed to deliver (also because I thought this was going to be a Harley Quinn story with the Folie a Deux title and that he was borrowing heavily from actually good source material like Harleen and Mad Love) but from all the reviews it looks like Harley and Gaga fans, and Gaga herself possibly, were all conned.

Edited Sunday at 12:59 PM by Spidey Freak

[YM!]

3 hours ago, Spidey Freak said:

 

I forget how young some of you guys are that you can't remember how bleak the 2000s really were 😭 Josie and the Pussycats walked so that Barbie could rollerblade at the BO

Josie and the Pussycats is a top tier CBM, I am hopeful it places high when the CBM forum list comes pretty soon (hint hint) 😉

Edited Sunday at 01:51 PM by YM!

[YM!]

1 hour ago, Eric Quinn said:

Okay but like…none of those movies would be seen as overintellectual or risqué back then? They aren’t hard to follow, they don’t say anything that daring, even by the standards of the 2000s. I dunno. Maybe most of those movies were hits because they are based on nostalgic brands. 🤷 

I'm trying to think of what would be overintellectual or risque to understand about Inside Out 2. Feel like the Inside Out series would've dominated the 2000s.

[Cooper Legion]

9 hours ago, interiorgatordecorator said:

 

both 1.5 legs ww and an 80% second weekend drop seem impossible to me 

The sub 150WW should be impossible but I’d say 80%+ wknd drop likely. I have the 2nd weekend under 7M atm

[Cooper Legion]

Joker 2 DOM under Croods 2 DOM

 

[Mandatory]

21 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

TKJ is very popular with pseudo-intellectual edgelords and Phillips managed to tap into that fanbase with the first film.

 

Joker was the first R-rated movie to make a billion worldwide and it remains the highest grossing R-rated movie overseas, so this wasn't just some passionate bunch of comic book nerds who saw the movie 20 times each. Millions of "average" people from all over the globe, many of whom couldn't care less about comic books or Joker origin stories, flocked to that largely well-received film. I know many people want to wave away the astounding worldwide success of Joker as some kind of incel-based movement, but that just doesn't seem based in reality.

[TalismanRing]

45 minutes ago, wildphantom said:

That in essence was my major problem with the first film. That it provoked such chatter about an origin, rather than the deeper themes and subtext that was the film’s real point.  
 

The sequel, at least to me, is an unsubtle commentary on what was intended to be taken away from the first film.  Its use of the IP was intended to bring people in for a greater conversation, but Phillips definitely has a disdain for this IP culture. Something that’s further rammed home in the new film. 
 

I get why people are pissed. Yet for me it was obvious what he was trying to subvert and use for another purpose first time around.  

 

 Its use of the IP was intended to bring people in for a greater conversation $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[Cooper Legion]

On 10/4/2024 at 9:37 PM, Skim Beeble said:

Mission failed

 

F Cinemascore ❌

Drop from true Friday - ☑️

#2 on Saturday & Sunday - unlikely Sat, almost certain sun

80%+ drop - likely 

Sub shazam 2 multiplier - essentially locked

Sub 70M Domestic - essentially locked

Sub 150M Worldwide - essentially impossible 

 

[harry713]

I quite enjoyed it. So did my husband. 🤷‍♂️

[JimmyB]

7 hours ago, ListenHunnyUrOver said:

So did Joker 1 fans actually think the sequel was going to be Joaquin fighting Batman or something?

I think they did.  I remember people cheering/clapping when he put the Joker makeup on in my theater 5 years ago.  The general audience doesnt like having expectations subverted.  The major thought Joker was the origin story movie and this sequel would be the next step.  Joker Folie A Deux did align audiences and critics in their dislike of the movie. It's a movie where no one is happy with it, which is kind of amazing.

[filmlover]

What's everyone feeling for next weekend's openers? Terrifier 3 should max out its potential with its niche audience, and maybe Saturday Night can translate solid limited numbers into mainstream appeal, but Piece by Piece and The Apprentice aren't going to make much.

[MrFanaticGuy34]

23 minutes ago, Cooper Legion said:

Joker 2 DOM under Croods 2 DOM

 

Croods 2’s DOM box office: $58,568,815

[MrFanaticGuy34]

Since we are still in the topic of Joaquin Phoenix movies, shall I tell you one favorite movie of mine that has Joaquin Phoenix in it? 👩🏻‍💼💁🏻‍♀️😉

 

But you’re gonna laugh since it’s one of his obscure roles. 😅

Edited Sunday at 01:55 PM by MrFanaticGuy34

[Spidey Freak]

35 minutes ago, YM! said:

I'm trying to think of what would be overintellectual or risque to understand about Inside Out 2. Feel like the Inside Out series would've dominated the 2000s.

 

Even a Ratatouille wasn't breaking out in the 2000s. I don't think a movie about an adolescent girl's anthropomorphic emotions including Anxiety would have done particularly well.

 

Which is if it had been greenlit in the first place in the 2000s which it NEVER WOULD HAVE. Pixar was VERY much a Boys' Club in the 2000s and weren't even ready to make a girl-led film saying there wasn't an "organic" inspiration for it on record. Of course, women creatives came out later saying how they had to fight the men in charge to do justice to stories about women or even supporting female characters: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/11/pixar-john-lasseter-boys-club 

[YM!]

You know what one of the best CBMs this decade is that one talks enough about: