• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Joker Origin Story Announced

Anwar said:
https://www.thewrap.com/joker-direc...dnt-make-the-movie-to-push-buttons-exclusive/

Joker Director explains how he pitched movie to Phoenix:

" "We didn’t make the movie to push buttons,” Phillips told TheWrap’s Sharon Waxman in an interview last Friday about the filmmaking process. “I literally described to Joaquin at one point in those three months as like, ‘Look at this as a way to sneak a real movie in the studio system under the guise of a comic book film’. It wasn’t, ‘We want to glorify this behavior.’ It was literally like ‘Let’s make a real movie with a real budget and we’ll call it f–ing Joker’. That’s what it was. “

So yeah, these guys knew all along it was a "Joker in Name Only" pic and were just hijacking the name for brand recognition. Because to them nothing from a comic book can be made into a "Real" movie.
Click to expand...
YntEsoA.gif
 
Anwar said:
https://www.thewrap.com/joker-direc...dnt-make-the-movie-to-push-buttons-exclusive/

Joker Director explains how he pitched movie to Phoenix:

" "We didn’t make the movie to push buttons,” Phillips told TheWrap’s Sharon Waxman in an interview last Friday about the filmmaking process. “I literally described to Joaquin at one point in those three months as like, ‘Look at this as a way to sneak a real movie in the studio system under the guise of a comic book film’. It wasn’t, ‘We want to glorify this behavior.’ It was literally like ‘Let’s make a real movie with a real budget and we’ll call it f–ing Joker’. That’s what it was. “

So yeah, these guys knew all along it was a "Joker in Name Only" pic and were just hijacking the name for brand recognition. Because to them nothing from a comic book can be made into a "Real" movie.
Click to expand...

Don’t care. Still going. Probably opening day. Can’t wait.
 
Anwar said:
“I literally described to Joaquin at one point in those three months as like, ‘Look at this as a way to sneak a real movie in the studio system under the guise of a comic book film’.
Click to expand...

I was considering going to see the film, but if the director feels he needs to make backhanded insults to fans of "comic book films", he can go fuck himself.
 
crookeddy said:
Make sure to buy concessions, Otherwise you are only supporting the studio.
Click to expand...
Agreed! Hehe.... Maybe I'll go to the cinema, buy some popcorn and a bottle of water, and then stand in front of the 'Joker' cardboard cutout and look at it until I'm done chowing. Win!
 
fireproof78 said:
Sums up my feelings fairly well. Studio heads thought Star Wars was a "dumb kids movie" that wouldn't make money. Too bad people liked it...:shrug:
Click to expand...

Yeah. And I don't care if the director had to sell it to Phoenix as something it's not or whatever. I don't care that Batman isn't in it.

It looks like a compelling film. Something that isn't the same old rinse and repeat. And I miss those. So, WB gets my money that week.
 
So, the idiot that made the same shitty comedy movie three times, and has actually never made a movie that wasn't pretty shit, thinks that superhero movies aren't real movies? Even if this movie wasn't becoming a rallying point for some of the worst people around (which is the original reason I had decided would never pay to see it), I wouldn't pay to see it based on this shit alone.

I mean, seriously. What an asshole. At least James Cameron has made a few good movies in his career, which doesn't make his complaints/thoughts about comicbook movies any more valid then Philips' but at least he doesn't look quite as stupid as the hack who directed The Hangover three times and other "real movies" like Starsky & Hutch, Road Trip and Old School.
 
The thing is, these people are still right, as much as it irks us. Very few comic book movies aim to be cinema as art... and the ones that do (Snyder movies) don't do it very well and up maligned. Even the Dark Knight trilogy, which IMO is as close to "real" cinema as we've gotten with superhero movies, had to add some "comic booky" stuff to up the entertainment value. The sell for Joker is that it's a full on Oscar bait type film. Comic booky considerations are not a part of its equation.
 
crookeddy said:
The thing is, these people are still right, as much as it irks us. Very few comic book movies aim to be cinema as art... and the ones that do (Snyder movies) don't do it very well and up maligned. Even the Dark Knight trilogy, which IMO is as close to "real" cinema as we've gotten with superhero movies, had to add some "comic booky" stuff to up the entertainment value. The sell for Joker is that it's a full on Oscar bait type film. Comic booky considerations are not a part of its equation.
Click to expand...
And if they can get past the "comic book" label trap then it might move more towards these movies as cinema art.
 
Anwar said:
https://www.thewrap.com/joker-direc...dnt-make-the-movie-to-push-buttons-exclusive/

Joker Director explains how he pitched movie to Phoenix:

" "We didn’t make the movie to push buttons,” Phillips told TheWrap’s Sharon Waxman in an interview last Friday about the filmmaking process. “I literally described to Joaquin at one point in those three months as like, ‘Look at this as a way to sneak a real movie in the studio system under the guise of a comic book film’. It wasn’t, ‘We want to glorify this behavior.’ It was literally like ‘Let’s make a real movie with a real budget and we’ll call it f–ing Joker’. That’s what it was. “

So yeah, these guys knew all along it was a "Joker in Name Only" pic and were just hijacking the name for brand recognition. Because to them nothing from a comic book can be made into a "Real" movie.
Click to expand...
I'm a bit surprised to see that kind of attitude still around. I would have thought by now comic book movies would have proven themselves to be worth at least some respect.
It's a little aggravating to see someone involved with a movie "based" on a comic book character take that kind of attitude.
I do still plan on seeing the movie, but it'll probably be a rental for me, rather than seeing it in the theater.
 
flavaflav said:
Thing is, they already are cinema art. Opinions of those who think otherwise are just that. Opinions.
Click to expand...
Yes, those are opinions. But they are opinions of filmmakers who may other wise produce a very great film if they didn't look down upon comic book films.

It's a weird twisty rope to walk but it's a matter of how these films are perceived as cinema art. Opinions or not, those opinions and perceptions carry weight.
JD said:
I'm a bit surprised to see that kind of attitude still around. I would have thought by now comic book movies would have proven themselves to be worth at least some respect.
Click to expand...
I'm not. Hollywood is slow to embrace change, and attitudes are pretty well entrenched. Especially since comic book films have become blockbuster gold, there is a tendency to snub films just because it is made for the money rather than for the art.

Hollywood is a strange place.
 
I still find it a bit surprising that the guy who made Avatar and the first two Terminator movies would look down on comic book movies, those aren't exactly high brow art films. Especially when you consider the fact that he almost made a Spider-Man movie.
 
JD said:
I still find it a bit surprising that the guy who made Avatar and the first two Terminator movies would look down on comic book movies, those aren't exactly high brow art films.
Click to expand...
But, it's his art, not someone else's with a storied history. Comic books are things for kids.

Or so the narrative goes. Again, look at Star Wars and how it was regarded at the time. "Dumb kid's movie" and that's being nice about it.
 
crookeddy said:
The thing is, these people are still right, as much as it irks us. Very few comic book movies aim to be cinema as art
Click to expand...

True--most are not exactly aiming to marry the intellectually stimulating (whatever the level) with fantasy adventure. Most are the textbook example of "popcorn movies".

Even the Dark Knight trilogy, which IMO is as close to "real" cinema as we've gotten with superhero movies, had to add some "comic booky" stuff to up the entertainment value.
Click to expand...

….and that worked beautifully.

The sell for Joker is that it's a full on Oscar bait type film. Comic booky considerations are not a part of its equation.
Click to expand...

Agreed. This was never intended to be a Joker running around like Caesar Romero, and not trying to be the next CGI-overloaded extravaganza. It did not need to be because the Joker's very nature is--at the beginning and end of it all--about his mind, as seen in the best Joker stories from the comics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top