Thread: The Joker - film analysis

Wow. I haven't seen this movie, but I think I need to. I see many parallels to my own life.

https://youtu.be/NiwROYqJ1E8

The Joker's experience is very, very MGTOW. It's interesting also that the Better Bachelor chose the handle "Joker." I wonder if there's a connection.

But Joker has a girlfriend. OK it's somewhat ambiguous that maybe he hallucinated that bit.

That movie was fantastically well done as a piece of impressionism.
It evokes perfectly the depressing atmosphere of NYC in the 1970s.

Originally Posted by Joe Magarac

But Joker has a girlfriend. OK it's somewhat ambiguous that maybe he hallucinated that bit.

That movie was fantastically well done as a piece of impressionism.
It evokes perfectly the depressing atmosphere of NYC in the 1970s.

The 1970's? Have you seen the five borough shithole lately?

There isn't a major city within 500 miles of me that hasn't been transformed from a Victorian masterpiece of brick, stone, industry, and success, to a run-down shithole of human degradation and filth!

A nuclear holocaust around here would not break my heart, or stride!

Even though the Joker had a girlfriend who depended on him, that doesn't negate the notion that he did everything for himself and his interests.
This is one of those characters who goes manifestly against rules and authority.
Love it.

I wouldn't say he is MGTOW. I'd say he is someone who got broken in the process of becomming one. Instead of standing up on his own he decided to fallow his hatered of society. He went from someone who was abused and neglected by society to someone who wrecks havoc on it. He never went his own way. He was always a part of society. Only those who stop caring about society truly go their own way, not those who hate it.

Originally Posted by Witch Doctor

I wouldn't say he is MGTOW. I'd say he is someone who got broken in the process of becomming one. Instead of standing up on his own he decided to fallow his hatered of society. He went from someone who was abused and neglected by society to someone who wrecks havoc on it. He never went his own way. He was always a part of society. Only those who stop caring about society truly go their own way, not those who hate it.

Replace the word society with toxiculture and it's more befitting about how we feel and how we arrived at these feelings.

Calling this cultural transformation and molestation a society, is an insult and slanderous to the word society!

Originally Posted by Witch Doctor

Only those who stop caring about society truly go their own way, not those who hate it.

Superbly said, Doc.

You must still care in order to hate. If you hate something, you must first believe that it is worthy of your hate. Love and hate are merely different sides of the same coin.

The true opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference. When you decide to no longer care, you no longer need to love or hate. When you no longer love or hate, you can make decisions based solely on your own needs. Placing your own needs foremost in your mind allows you to go your own way.

Society as a whole and women as a group are not worth caring about. Remain automatically indifferent to both. When we must interact with either - we all must at some time - carefully choose how much and for how long you allow yourself to care. You make your choices based on your needs and not on the expectations, desires, or demands of others.

Choose the hard path and go your own way.

Personal, subjective opinion ahead.

The movie Joker was irredeemable. Just like Parasite from S. Korea. Both movies glorified victimhood and becoming amoral criminal assholes as a result. They both displace their generalized rage on specific individuals who often had nothing to do with their predicament.

Joker could have been good, had they given real reasons for his bad life. Instead, he suffers from certain things - like laughing uncontrollably at times and not having a social life. A lot of us don't have much of a social life and worse issues than laughing. Because of this "oppression" Joker/Arthur goes ahead and kills his mother (really didn't do much to him except say he wasn't funny as he was trying to be a comedian), his friend (who gave him a gun to protect himself ; and who helped him by taking the blame for something Joker/Arthur did and got fired for it instead of Joker), and a comedian who claimed Joker/Arthur wasn't funny.

What a sack of shit.

Had he just addressed the root cause of his problems instead of attacking mostly random or even sympathetic people, might have made sense. They do say his mother looked the other way when he was abused as a child, but while very wrong, does not justify murder at all.

And don't get me started on Parasite. Even worse in this regard. Western culture, and that of our vassal states, are dragging the entire region into the gutter with these kinds of productions.

Originally Posted by jagrmeister

Personal, subjective opinion ahead.

The movie Joker was irredeemable. Just like Parasite from S. Korea. Both movies glorified victimhood and becoming amoral criminal assholes as a result. They both displace their generalized rage on specific individuals who often had nothing to do with their predicament.

Joker could have been good, had they given real reasons for his bad life. Instead, he suffers from certain things - like laughing uncontrollably at times and not having a social life. A lot of us don't have much of a social life and worse issues than laughing. Because of this "oppression" Joker/Arthur goes ahead and kills his mother (who really didn't do much to him except say he wasn't funny as he was trying to be a comedian), his friend (who helped him by taking the blame for something Joker/Arthur did and got fired for it instead of Joker), and a comedian who claimed Joker/Arthur wasn't funny.

What a sack of shit.

Had he just addressed the root cause of his problems instead of attacking mostly random or even sympathetic people, might have made sense. They do say his mother looked the other way when he was abused as a child, but while very wrong, does not justify murder at all.

And don't get me started on Parasite. Even worse in this regard. Western culture, and that of our vassal states, are dragging the entire region into the gutter with these kinds of productions.

Interesting. Would you say that Joker is still worth watching as an anti-hero dystopian movie? I haven't seen it because I really am not very interested in the Batman movies other than the one they made way back in the 60s. I like the campy and goofy Batman TV show, and found the first couple modern films too cliched, so I quit watching.

But one thing was for sure about the Joker film, based on just seeing that analysis. The character has depth, and he becomes who he is as a reaction to abuse. I'm thinking it might be worth seeing based on that, not that he's a character worth emulating.

In short, if a film is interesting, I might see it, even if it's dark.

Originally Posted by TigPlaze

Interesting. Would you say that Joker is still worth watching as an anti-hero dystopian movie? I haven't seen it because I really am not very interested in the Batman movies other than the one they made way back in the 60s.

The Joker movie from 2019 is not a Batman movie. In this film he is the hero. He doesn't do anything wrong and always gets the A-card in life. His mother lied to him about his father, his father has abandonned him and doesn't give a shit about him, both of his parents are not supportive. His job exploits him, his work buddies don't appreciate him, he faces a serious mental disorder and has neither friends nor a spouse. The encouter with this girl in the movie he probably imagined as well. So, I can very much understand why the point arrived where he wanted revenge. He is morally right, but wrong in terms of the law. His act of self-justice is an expression of serious societal problems and fits very well in these times.

Originally Posted by mgtower

The 1970's? Have you seen the five borough shithole lately?

Fair enough, but Gotham is NYC and the movie really does seem to take place in the 1970s.
You had to be there I guess.

NYC really did get better after that before getting worse.

The Joker's experience is very, very MGTOW. It's interesting also that the Better Bachelor chose the handle "Joker." I wonder if there's a connection.

There isn't. A Better Bachelor video not too long ago had him explaining his Joker moniker. Seems in the military he was considered humorous and given the nickname Joker. This was years before the movies came out.

Originally Posted by mgtower

Replace the word society with toxiculture and it's more befitting about how we feel and how we arrived at these feelings.

Calling this cultural transformation and molestation a society, is an insult and slanderous to the word society!

I'm not saying you are not supposed to have these feelings or that you are not justified to have them. Even I sometimes feel angry and hopeless when I see what is going on around me. The thing I am saying is that you should not act purely on your feelings. There should be a level of controll over your feelings. When you act on logic rather than feelings, you can chose the path you take.

As long as a man acts on his feelings he is doomed to react to his surroundings and unable to make his own decisions. His life is created by others and he has no say in it. Like joker in the movie.

Originally Posted by Prokopton2

Superbly said, Doc.

You must still care in order to hate. If you hate something, you must first believe that it is worthy of your hate. Love and hate are merely different sides of the same coin.

The true opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference. When you decide to no longer care, you no longer need to love or hate. When you no longer love or hate, you can make decisions based solely on your own needs. Placing your own needs foremost in your mind allows you to go your own way.

Society as a whole and women as a group are not worth caring about. Remain automatically indifferent to both. When we must interact with either - we all must at some time - carefully choose how much and for how long you allow yourself to care. You make your choices based on your needs and not on the expectations, desires, or demands of others.

Choose the hard path and go your own way.

You are right, but I want to offer my point of view, or a precision. Our actions must be taken based on logic and benefit/risk ratios, I totally concur. But these emotions must continue to traverse you, they help you understand an other part of the picture, and especially about yourself. Learning to manage them and listen to them is the best solution - it guards you against insanity. I get what you say about indifference. That may be some dangerous path if taken to the extreme. For example psychopaths are at the completely opposite end of the spectrum of a sane human. Empathy also is a sane and fulfilling emotion. It is dangerous only because it is exploited. Although not everyone is worth of empathy that's sure

In between love and hate there is peace, but this is addition of the two emotions, not the cancelling. Stripping you of love and hate will deny your human nature. You cannot deny what you are.

Originally Posted by Witch Doctor

I'm not saying you are not supposed to have these feelings or that you are not justified to have them. Even I sometimes feel angry and hopeless when I see what is going on around me. The thing I am saying is that you should not act purely on your feelings. There should be a level of controll over your feelings. When you act on logic rather than feelings, you can chose the path you take.

As long as a man acts on his feelings he is doomed to react to his surroundings and unable to make his own decisions. His life is created by others and he has no say in it. Like joker in the movie.

Feelings? What are those? This society shoves a man's feelings so far up his ass that he only has feeling in the hair follicles on the very top of his head!

How I write vs. how I act in the real world are as opposite as it gets. Nothing moves me, I'm literally battle hardened in every way a man can be, there no soft underbelly here, even that has thick impenetrable armor.

Originally Posted by max999

You are right, but I want to offer my point of view, or a precision. Our actions must be taken based on logic and benefit/risk ratios, I totally concur. But these emotions must continue to traverse you, they help you understand an other part of the picture, and especially about yourself. Learning to manage them and listen to them is the best solution - it guards you against insanity. I get what you say about indifference. That may be some dangerous path if taken to the extreme. For example psychopaths are at the completely opposite end of the spectrum of a sane human. Empathy also is a sane and fulfilling emotion. It is dangerous only because it is exploited. Although not everyone is worth of empathy that's sure

In between love and hate there is peace, but this is addition of the two emotions, not the cancelling. Stripping you of love and hate will deny your human nature. You cannot deny what you are.

I generally agree that a man should make decisions based on logical analysis in order to get the best possible result. However, we're human, and as such, it is not possible for feelings to play no role at all. We're not robots. For example, if you want to accomplish something, for example, you want to get a better-paying job, you set up a logical plan to do so. You figure out where the job leads are. You write the best resume you can. You network, etc. Then, if you've done that part well, you probably get interviews. You make sure to know the company well, and you go to those interviews. Eventually, you get offered something good. You have accomplished the goal, and that's a great feeling. Having more money in the bank is then also another great feeling.

It was the same when I got my mess of a place back in shape. I had logical reasons for doing so. A clean place is more healthy. In a tidy place, it's easier to be organized and to find things. I put together a logical and organized plan to get the place in shape, as was necessary since it was much more than a one-day job. Now that my place is in great shape, those logical things are true, but it's also an amazing feeling to have accomplished this.

I'm not saying don't use logic. It's very important to do so. I'm just also saying to validate your emotions. They're important too. We go our whole lives being told by a sick society that we have no right to feel certain things. In your pre-MGTOW days, you wanted a girlfriend and companionship. That was normal, since you're human. However, the feminist hate movement reframed that basic desire as something evil. They claimed you felt "entitled" to sex, as if they knew your feelings better than you do. No, you wanted to have a girlfriend because you were NORMAL.

You may have expressed a distaste for the numerous hateful things that feminists do. They responded with the hateful notion that you're just a "fragile male." Then, out of the other side of their mouth they claimed you were part of so-called "toxic masculinity" if you hid your feelings. For years, the feminist lunatics have blamed you if you withheld your emotions, and then they blamed you and looked down on you if you expressed them. No wonder so many men have been driven mad.

The truth is, you have emotions, and there's nothing wrong with that. Having them only makes you human. When you felt attracted to a young woman with a shapely and beautiful body, that was normal emotion programmed in by your instincts. You were never some kind of creep, dirty old man, or a groomer. That's all horseshit made up by feminists to hate on and to belittle men. We as MGTOW have walked away from the dating market, not because we don't have normal emotions and attractions, but because the whole thing has gotten sick and toxic. We walk away to protect ourselves. If society weren't as sick as it is, we wouldn't need to. However, we see that it's so sick that it cannot be reformed, so, instead of becoming MRAs, we walk away.

Originally Posted by TigPlaze

Interesting. Would you say that Joker is still worth watching as an anti-hero dystopian movie? I haven't seen it because I really am not very interested in the Batman movies other than the one they made way back in the 60s. I like the campy and goofy Batman TV show, and found the first couple modern films too cliched, so I quit watching.

But one thing was for sure about the Joker film, based on just seeing that analysis. The character has depth, and he becomes who he is as a reaction to abuse. I'm thinking it might be worth seeing based on that, not that he's a character worth emulating.

In short, if a film is interesting, I might see it, even if it's dark.

I think it's part of a larger trend that is being foisted on us by the global loansharks that run our country, that is to- come up with whatever justifications for evil. These goons have been on a warpath to show us Up is Down and Evil = Good. They pride themselves that they can use the entertainment media to cloud the minds of the masses- to the point no one really knows who's the hero or villain anymore.

Joker is a horrible human being who is constantly killing people and antagonizing the people of Gotham and Batman. Now these conniving types are trying to show how the worst human being is actually just a "victim of circumstances" - a poor, widdle baby who's arbitrary violence is actually justified because some TV late night host mocked one of his jokes so he has a right to kill everyone. If they can convince us that evil is justifiable, what moral force do we have to stop their shenanigans in real life.

If Joker simply only killed those men who were trying to assault that woman on the train, that would be fine. But the rest? Every criminal in prison has a sob story to justify why they did what they did - but it's a matter of whether we choose to accept their narrative.

You see this constant trend of "I can be an evil asshole......because......" in Hollywood today. Another example of this was that recent J-Lo movie Hustlers where they drug and rob men bcoz "men r bad"- they are greedy, take advantage of women, etc. etc. Nevermind the men they are drugging and robbing are not necessarily those kinds of men but they have some broad narrative that supports their evil, criminal efforts.

We have derided all our moral authorities and now the wolves are leading the sheep to the slaughterhouse; where their values are being slaughtered, and they are paying for the privilege.

Originally Posted by jagrmeister

I think it's part of a larger trend that is being foisted on us by the global loansharks that run our country, that is to- come up with whatever justifications for evil. These goons have been on a warpath to show us Up is Down and Evil = Good. They pride themselves that they can use the entertainment media to cloud the minds of the masses- to the point no one really knows who's the hero or villain anymore.

Joker is a horrible human being who is constantly killing people and antagonizing the people of Gotham and Batman. Now these conniving types are trying to show how the worst human being is actually just a "victim of circumstances" - a poor, widdle baby who's arbitrary violence is actually justified because some TV late night host mocked one of his jokes so he has a right to kill everyone. If they can convince us that evil is justifiable, what moral force do we have to stop their shenanigans in real life.

If Joker simply only killed those men who were trying to assault that woman on the train, that would be fine. But the rest? Every criminal in prison has a sob story to justify why they did what they did - but it's a matter of whether we choose to accept their narrative.

You see this constant trend of "I can be an evil asshole......because......" in Hollywood today. Another example of this was that recent J-Lo movie Hustlers where they drug and rob men bcoz "men r bad"- they are greedy, take advantage of women, etc. etc. Nevermind the men they are drugging and robbing are not necessarily those kinds of men but they have some broad narrative that supports their evil, criminal efforts.

We have derided all our moral authorities and now the wolves are leading the sheep to the slaughterhouse; where their values are being slaughtered, and they are paying for the privilege.

Do you believe the anti-hero trend in Hollywood is a bad idea? It used to be that the protagonist was always also the hero of a story. In a movie or TV show, you rooted for the good guy to defeat the bad guys. The good guy was not necessarily perfect. He could be flawed. For example, Superman could be defeated with kryptonite. Captain Kirk could be stubborn. But overall they were good people whom we wanted to win.

It's been in recent years that they've gone for more twisted movies and shows. Your protagonist is not necessarily a good person. In fact, he could be a terrible person. Dexter was a serial murderer, but he justified what he did by only killing people who he claimed deserved it. In Breaking Bad, Walter White started out as a normal and decent guy, but slowly became more evil as he built up his meth empire.

I need to finish watching Joker before I can render final judgement on it, but I do think that Breaking Bad was a great series, even if Walter White was an extremely rotten person by the end. At first they gave you numerous reasons to like and to root for Walter. It was his 50th birthday, and people celebrated it with him, but didn't really respect him. His wife didn't even give him any passionate sex. She did a half-assed job jerking him off while she was distracted by some auction on the Internet. He was good at his job as a chemistry teacher in high school, but he didn't get the respect he felt he deserved, and the audience usually felt he deserved it was well. When he starts to develop some backbone, we cheer for him. Some bullies harass his handicapped son, and Walter takes great risk by standing up to them. I was like, "Go, Walter!" when he did that. However, Walter keeps doing worse and worse things as he gets deeper and deeper into the drug business. For me, he lost my support when he deliberately let Jesse's girlfriend, Jane, die from choking on her vomit. It was in Walter's interests for her to die, and the old Walter may have saved her, but this new and ruthless version was cold and calculating enough to do that.

I'm okay with an anti-hero-based story if it's an interesting story. And, man, is Breaking Bad ever interesting! Despite how evil Walter became, my take from the drama was not, "It's perfectly good to build a meth business and to murder people to protect it." You got used to identifying with Walter's goals, and so you would root for him, but then you would be like, "Wait a minute, he's a terrible guy." For me, the show created feelings of inner conflict, but I was right there in it because the story was interesting.

I have lesser praises for Dexter because I don't think the show was as interesting as BB, but it had its moments. Some really shitty villains got murdered by Dexter, and the plot did get interesting many times, but the end result was not a belief that: "If someone is a bad person, it's perfectly okay to abduct him and kill him." But if the story is interesting, I might be willing to watch a show where the protagonist thinks like that.

So I'll need to finish Joker and see how I feel about it. If he ends up as another anti-hero whose story is interesting, I'll probably like it. But finding a story interesting is not the same thing as endorsing the actions that a character takes. I suspect the Joker will end up in my list of anti-heroes like Walter White and Dexter, whom I found interesting to watch, but whom I would not like to be like.

It's okay if you're against anti-hero-based shows. Everyone doesn't like the same stuff, and that's perfectly fine. But I'm okay with shows that feature an anti-hero, just as long as I find the story interesting.

I don't like anti-hero tv shows or movies because they contribute to moral decay - which seems lame but has real impact on the nature of people and ultimately our quality of life (since we have to interact with said people).

I didn't watch Breaking Bad. I heard Dexter was romanticizing a serial killer. I watched Sideways with the protagonist stealing money out of his mother's purse- when he didn't have to. My GF at the time said it was ok and meant he was a "flawed" human being like the rest of us. Not in my book.

I have friends watching these creepy productions like Game of Thrones and then talking interestedly about some incest scene. People are dying for titiillation and the elites know it and give it to them. Then you have this House of Cards, where people are getting off the main character being conniving and exploiting; or Mad Men where the guy finger-bangs some woman who was his adversary.

Anti-hero productions appeal to people because the average person does not regard himself as a hero. Our inner nature has nothing to do with morality; it has to do with 'winning', or service to self. We enjoy watching people win, especially through some clever dark triad way; and heck, if that protagonist doesn't care about morality and do wrong things, they see themselves even more so in those protagonists.

Only a small percentage of people care about morality or ethics; and they are usually mocked as squares. These same elites have tried to depict every moral authority as a hypocrite so people don't believe in morality at all. Ultimately, watching amoral people do crazy things is much more interesting to audiences than some moral square doing positive things-- and this is an entertainment industry based on eyeballs.

One reason I think America keeps getting further in the gutter - and it's obvious in how the people act- is because they put the Market in charge of the culture (including morality). Huge mistake because the entertainment industry knows that titillating people with stories of drugs, incest, rape, crass manipulation and seduction of others will Always get more people than some square like superman helping people. Then we wonder why people are such shit.

Anyhow I realize I seem like a moral scold, just my POV on it; I can understand people enjoying these productions and some like yourself being able to consciously realize the problems with the protag and not subconsciously identify with him- but I would say most viewers do, and don't think about it.

Originally Posted by jagrmeister

I don't like anti-hero tv shows or movies because they contribute to moral decay - which seems lame but has real impact on the nature of people and ultimately our quality of life (since we have to interact with said people).

I didn't watch Breaking Bad. I heard Dexter was romanticizing a serial killer. I watched Sideways with the protagonist stealing money out of his mother's purse- when he didn't have to. My GF at the time said it was ok and meant he was a "flawed" human being like the rest of us. Not in my book.

I have friends watching these creepy productions like Game of Thrones and then talking interestedly about some incest scene. People are dying for titiillation and the elites know it and give it to them. Then you have this House of Cards, where people are getting off the main character being conniving and exploiting; or Mad Men where the guy finger-bangs some woman who was his adversary.

Anti-hero productions appeal to people because the average person does not regard himself as a hero. Our inner nature has nothing to do with morality; it has to do with 'winning', or service to self. We enjoy watching people win, especially through some clever dark triad way; and heck, if that protagonist doesn't care about morality and do wrong things, they see themselves even more so in those protagonists.

Only a small percentage of people care about morality or ethics; and they are usually mocked as squares. These same elites have tried to depict every moral authority as a hypocrite so people don't believe in morality at all. Ultimately, watching amoral people do crazy things is much more interesting to audiences than some moral square doing positive things-- and this is an entertainment industry based on eyeballs.

One reason I think America keeps getting further in the gutter - and it's obvious in how the people act- is because they put the Market in charge of the culture (including morality). Huge mistake because the entertainment industry knows that titillating people with stories of drugs, incest, rape, crass manipulation and seduction of others will Always get more people than some square like superman helping people. Then we wonder why people are such shit.

Anyhow I realize I seem like a moral scold, just my POV on it; I can understand people enjoying these productions and some like yourself being able to consciously realize the problems with the protag and not subconsciously identify with him- but I would say most viewers do, and don't think about it.

You must really love Jerry Springer and Ricky Lake!

I'm so sick of the barf-bag bullshit I had to create an island unto myself!

Some call it "the swamp", but guys like us know it's a cesspool!

After they slandered western movies (with their long legacy of masculinity and moral fortitude) with Brokeback Mountain, that was the end of Hollywood for me! I hope the place becomes Detroit v.2.0! They have people shitting on the sidewalks, that's how morally bankrupt they are! Human beings living like wild animals in the streets!