sufi

lala
amazing that we have done 8 pages and it seems ? noone mentioned these 3 key canonical batman(TM) sources - all in need of decoding

1. the original tv series
Based on the comic book character of the same name, no origin for the character is provided within the series.
Since Cesar Romero refused to shave his trademark mustache, his white pancake makeup was applied over it. However it was still visible in many screen close-ups.[6]
joker.jpg
i don't recall him as being particularly creepier than any other baddy (esp not the obvs paedo penguin) , but these stories are how the characters became hardwired into the mythological dna and our young brains - too deeply to analyse the associations so many years later. I don't recall the episodes in any detail, they are hard to watch now, primitive, but i'd not be surprised to find some heavily laden symbolic narratives in there.

2. fast forward to the first "dark knight" - the 80's "graphic novel" re-imagined batman & joker as right nasty hard cases - the whole scenario is much more dystopic and dirtier than the moore/bolland killing joke comic which came out about the same time iirc (droid wtf?).
there's a distinct frisson between the joker and the bat, but the whole telling is gratuitously brutal
dark-knight-returns-joker.jpg
the transforming factor presumably is Frank Miller a grim misanthropic vision and i believe he is outed as a nasty rightist himself these days, which seems to make sense.
the trilogy had a hefty impact on comics, a re-imagining of super-heroes out of Miller's experience of 80's NY. I have seen it analysed in most ernest comic nerd lit crit fashion on youtube.

3. incidentally, that sexual tension is a big feature of the relationship in the excellent lego batman movie too
51NkfpYCvHL.jpgthe cute joker constantly desperate to be bat's number 1 villain
 

sadmanbarty

New member
"The circulation of hostile political rumors (including but not limited to false news and conspiracy theories) has gained prominence in public debates across advanced democracies. Here, we provide the first comprehensive assessment of the psychological syndrome that elicits motivations to share hostile political rumors among citizens of democratic societies. Against the notion that sharing occurs to help one mainstream political actor in the increasingly polarized electoral competition against other mainstream actors, we demonstrate that sharing motivations are associated with ‘chaotic’ motivations to “burn down” the entire established democratic ‘cosmos’. We show that this extreme discontent is associated with motivations to share hostile political rumors, not because such rumors are viewed to be true but because they are believed to mobilize the audience against disliked elites. We introduce an individual difference measure, the “Need for Chaos”, to measure these motivations and illuminate their social causes, linked to frustrated status-seeking. Finally, we show that chaotic motivations are surprisingly widespread within advanced democracies, having some hold in up to 40 percent of the American national population."

https://psyarxiv.com/6m4ts/
 

Corpsey

call me big papa
Here’s the deal. “Joker” is not a great leap forward, or a deep dive into our collective unconscious, let alone a work of art. It’s a product. All the pre-launch rumblings, the rants and the raves, testify to a cunning provocation, and, if we yield to it, we’re not joining a debate; we’re offering our services, unpaid, to the marketing department at Warner Bros. When Dalí and Buñuel made “L’Âge d’Or” (1930), they wanted to start a riot, and they succeeded, but “Joker” yearns for little more than a hundred op-ed pieces and a firestorm of tweets. With ticket sales, naturally, to match.
FASFqRQ35
 
"The circulation of hostile political rumors (including but not limited to false news and conspiracy theories) has gained prominence in public debates across advanced democracies. Here, we provide the first comprehensive assessment of the psychological syndrome that elicits motivations to share hostile political rumors among citizens of democratic societies. Against the notion that sharing occurs to help one mainstream political actor in the increasingly polarized electoral competition against other mainstream actors, we demonstrate that sharing motivations are associated with ‘chaotic’ motivations to “burn down” the entire established democratic ‘cosmos’. We show that this extreme discontent is associated with motivations to share hostile political rumors, not because such rumors are viewed to be true but because they are believed to mobilize the audience against disliked elites. We introduce an individual difference measure, the “Need for Chaos”, to measure these motivations and illuminate their social causes, linked to frustrated status-seeking. Finally, we show that chaotic motivations are surprisingly widespread within advanced democracies, having some hold in up to 40 percent of the American national population."

https://psyarxiv.com/6m4ts/
seems about right if applied to the right. the left, although definitely not abstaining from hostility, seem more intent on political gain.

thought you'd eschew academia, barty
 

luka

Active member
Staff member
seems about right if applied to the right. the left, although definitely not abstaining from hostility, seem more intent on political gain.

thought you'd eschew academia, barty
Yeah it was weird that wasn't it. Are you feeling ok mate we're worried about you
 

sufi

lala
I read an interesting review of the film yesterday that said it's overblown and fails to overcome the hollywoodness of its own plot - it compromises and doesn't achieve its own ambitions to be really edgy & make relevant social comment.

obvs the review was written by a woman - i read it as that she was underwhelmed by the edginess of it, perhaps that's just a bloke appeal thing,

i guess that wouldn't prevent shallow desperados from being influenced - as long as their own narratives are not wider than stories as defined by hollywood, and i expect that covers many of them.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Here’s the deal. “Joker” is not a great leap forward, or a deep dive into our collective unconscious, let alone a work of art. It’s a product. All the pre-launch rumblings, the rants and the raves, testify to a cunning provocation, and, if we yield to it, we’re not joining a debate; we’re offering our services, unpaid, to the marketing department at Warner Bros. When Dalí and Buñuel made “L’Âge d’Or” (1930), they wanted to start a riot, and they succeeded, but “Joker” yearns for little more than a hundred op-ed pieces and a firestorm of tweets. With ticket sales, naturally, to match.
This is an absolutely coruscating, even eviscerating point, I'm really truly beginning to think that there are some people in Hollywood who are mainly interested in making money.
 

luka

Active member
Staff member
That was bad corpse tbf well embarrassing mate. Oroper internet writing. Im 23 years old and I've got an opinion
 
i havent posted on here in a while but im commenting on here because in the end all the nonsense surrounding the movie i felt that ill fall on my sword and watch it

and its crap top to bottom,i say this as a bloke aswell and im im not surprised its taken gotten all the film festivals falling for it cause it ticks alot of boxes of the kind of films that usually have that type going wild for it

it was a waste of time in the end because its not a movie thats about anything and i agree with that quote because yes people got worked by the marketing especially film writers who should know better getting paranoid about what kind of influence itll have on dissafected white brehs and whatever they got worked by the marketing and its only because it wasnt telegraphed as such that it was marketing

Its like when Nas named his album Hip hop is dead and every writer under the sun went to rappers to argue the fact i think it was Aesop Rock of all people who pointed out that they were basically doing the job that his label shouldve been doing same with "untitled"

honestly the most "shocking" thing about the film is when hes dancing down the stairs to Rock n Roll part 2 and thats not even intentional on the films part the stuff that is is so telegraphed from a mile away so predictable juvenile i was eyerolling my way through the ting

Phoenix was fine, Deniro was bad whats her name who played his girlfriend was barely in the film the whole thing just felt like a waste of my time

Its even more weak that i saw it in black history month cause Phoenix dancing in his pants to thats life by sinatra is some full on cracka whitebread shit

and this was directed by the dude who did fucking Road Trip and the Hangover movies, trash
 
Last edited:
it reeks of a director who wants to be taken seriously and if my man wanted to be taken seriously as some kinda artist when hearing people get upset about it he wouldve been like oh that unsettled you? good instead of trying to compare it to John Wick

dickhead, none of the pros whove been doing this for ages do that and they dont have this idea that theyre martyrs for some kind of wider cause or some comment on political correctness etc etc

hell Scorsese got death threats for last temptation of christ and he didnt say anyting did he?
 
I think the controversy is pretty interesting. Not whether or not it can be construed as an incitement of alt-right chaos and violence, but this dichotomy of opinion it splits both audiences and critics into. Corny is the inverse silhouette of art, they're kindred, analogous, often ostensibly similar, but at the same time polar opposites. Real/fake, authentic/contrived, original/pastiche.

I don't recall a movie that made audiences diagree so intensely on which of the two sides they were seeing, as Joker does. It's a bit like that dress that's either white/gold or blue/black.
 

version

Who loves ya, baby?
I think the controversy is pretty interesting. Not whether or not it can be construed as an incitement of alt-right chaos and violence, but this dichotomy of opinion it splits both audiences and critics into. Corny is the inverse silhouette of art, they're kindred, analogous, often ostensibly similar, but at the same time polar opposites. Real/fake, authentic/contrived, original/pastiche.

I don't recall a movie that made audiences diagree so intensely on which of the two sides they were seeing, as Joker does. It's a bit like that dress that's either white/gold or blue/black.
Tim Pool
‏Verified account @Timcast
Oct 3

Just saw Joker

Its Amazing

Oddly though

Joker's supporters are literally Antifa
 

Corpsey

call me big papa
He wanted to see Germany burn when it became clear to him that it wasn't strong enough to follow his impossible instructions.
 

Corpsey

call me big papa
Hitler was a sort of 4Chan type, really. Impoverished, bitter, failed artist, guzzling right-wing pamphlets, no romantic prospects, no friends, a loser with visions of grandeur.
 
Top