Joaquin Phoenix as the Joker - Won an Oscar

What will the combined score of shootings blamed on "Joker" be after opening weekend?

  • 0

    Votos: 13 11.7%
  • 1-10

    Votos: 23 20.7%
  • 11-20

    Votos: 3 2.7%
  • 21-39

    Votos: 5 4.5%
  • 40+

    Votos: 67 60.4%

  • Total de votantes
    111
  • Encuesta cerrada .
I saw Suicide Squad while stuck at a hotel. It's actually a very good movie to half-watch while reading shitposts on a laptop at a hotel. Don't get the hate. It's just crappy fast food. Who expected anything deep? Or even very good?
 
My favorite example when discussing this is that Citizen Kane, widely regarded as one of the best movies ever made, didn't even win Best Picture. What did win Best Picture was How Green Was My Valley, a movie you aren't going to find much, if any discussion about other than it beating Citizen Kane.

And nearly every oscar Martin Scorsese ever lost, the most famous being Goodfellas somehow losing to Dances With White Saviors.
 
Joaquin Phoenix gave the best performance of the decade, turning what could have been a mediocre capeshit flick into a stand-alone masterpiece (indeed you can make a serious claim the film defines the decade) and this is how they respond? Do any of them recall the controversy Taxi Driver caused upon release, which is now considered one of the best American films ever made?
 
I don't think movies made just to piss a specific subset of people off tend to be very good.

Spite isn't a good ingredient for good film-making. Passion and love are needed as I feel they are one of the most important ingredients for a good film and something like Joker shows the love and passion Todd Phillips has for film and that though he won't do comedies, if this the direction he is going, I have high hopes.
 
EGdo17CWkAAMUjl
 
The violence wasn't as bad as expected, except for one scene, but I still question the BBFC for giving Joker a 15. The guy next to me even said 'How the fuck was that a 15?' to me after the movie ended.

When I saw the rating I was a little disappointed and was expecting a letdown on the whole "R Rated Joker" concept.
Turns out I was completely wrong (Not that I'm complaining).
The BBFC has always been oversensitive to these sorts of things so I'm surprised that they let the violence go (Despite them viewing violence far more harshly than sexual content) and while the movie was great I think 18 IS actually too high a rating. The violence was done pretty tastefully all things considered.
 
When I saw the rating I was a little disappointed and was expecting a letdown on the whole "R Rated Joker" concept.
Turns out I was completely wrong (Not that I'm complaining).
The BBFC has always been oversensitive to these sorts of things so I'm surprised that they let the violence go (Despite them viewing violence far more harshly than sexual content) and while the movie was great I think 18 IS actually too high a rating. The violence was done pretty tastefully all things considered.

Well still,the film had foul language and it really works for the film and the violence is exactly how it should be, rather sudden, brutal, and impactful as violence in media is rather trivialized.
 
My favorite example when discussing this is that Citizen Kane, widely regarded as one of the best movies ever made, didn't even win Best Picture. What did win Best Picture was How Green Was My Valley, a movie you aren't going to find much, if any discussion about other than it beating Citizen Kane.

There was also when Saving Private Ryan lost Best Picture to Shakespeare in Love. And the 2004 Crash winning despite everyone agreeing that it was Oscar Bait in its purest form.
IIRC, the Academy Award voting system is extremely asinine. Instead of simply choosing a best performance/nominee/what have you, you're ranking them from your top choice to the bottom, with different point levels depending on the position. (#1 gets five points, #5 gets one, etc.)

For example Green Book won because while it had the most consistently middle-of-the-road positions, all the other nominees were wildly split between top and bottom positions, consequently handing GB the win, among many other questionable BP decisions.
 
IIRC, the Academy Award voting system is extremely asinine. Instead of simply choosing a best performance/nominee/what have you, you're ranking them from your top choice to the bottom, with different point levels depending on the position. (#1 gets five points, #5 gets one, etc.)

For example Green Book won because while it had the most consistently middle-of-the-road positions, all the other nominees were wildly split between top and bottom positions, consequently handing GB the win, among many other questionable BP decisions.

Well, that sounds like a good voting system for selecting something uncontroversial, that most people are at least okay with.
 
Spite isn't a good ingredient for good film-making. Passion and love are needed as I feel they are one of the most important ingredients for a good film and something like Joker shows the love and passion Todd Phillips has for film and that though he won't do comedies, if this the direction he is going, I have high hopes.
Spite typically isn’t a good thing for creating in general. At least not on its own.
 
IIRC, the Academy Award voting system is extremely asinine. Instead of simply choosing a best performance/nominee/what have you, you're ranking them from your top choice to the bottom, with different point levels depending on the position. (#1 gets five points, #5 gets one, etc.)

For example Green Book won because while it had the most consistently middle-of-the-road positions, all the other nominees were wildly split between top and bottom positions, consequently handing GB the win, among many other questionable BP decisions.
Nope. Best Picture uses instant runoff preference voting, which is good. They rank the movies, but they don't award points:
initially, the top votes are considered,
if a movie gets 50%+ votes, it wins;
if not, the worst-performing movie is knocked off the list,
whoever picked the worst performer's votes get reassigned to their second choice,
etc

So if there are 100 members,
movie A got 51 first place votes and 49 last place votes ("divisive"),
and movie B got 49 first place votes and 51 second place votes ("universally appealing"),
movie A wins.

The problem is the people who vote for shitty movies, not the voting system.
 
I don't need the Oscars to validate what I liked.

According to them, Dances With Wolves is better than Goodfellas, Forest Gump is better than Pulp Fiction, Shawshank, and The Lion King, and Slumdog Millionaire is better than The Dark Knight, Wall-E, and Gran Torino. Also because of them, Sean Penn is walking around with two Oscars that should probably belong to Bill Murray and Mickey Rourke respectively.

But hey, what do I know?
 
SJWs: Do not give any money!

*Box office hit*

SJWs: It seems that they got their ill gotten money but I say, screw them!....IN THE EAAAAAAAR!!!

Edit: The oscars are a fucking joke so I actually doubt that Phoenix is getting one...probably gonna go for Brie Larson or some woke but awful actor. Phoenix is a winner to us.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo