Movies you hate that everyone else likes

[Laspector]

Woke up before waaay before dawn yesterday. Can't find the thread on Movies Everybody Hates But I Like......Well, Showgirls was on. I've never seen it. I was kinda sleepy and thought- "Okay, I'll try it. I bet it's got some good T&A" (which it really does)!! Jessie/Mama was fairly hot on Saved By The Bell, what-th-hell-let's give it a try....

Y'know what? It's really not that bad of a movie. The ending is stupid, but the rest of it is really not that bad. I mean, for a movie about a chick going from a hooker to a Vegas Showgirl, it covers all the bases that you would typically think it would cover. I actually didn't really have a problem with it....Wasn't great by any means, and Paul Atreides' chin can always fill up the screen like no other.

Rich idiots screwing up their lives is always kinda fun to watch...And Jessie butt naked is really hot to watch!! "I'm so excited, I just can't hide it!!"

Zach should'a hit that poo-nanny so hard......

 

[Cephus]

They seemed to use the name to guarantee an audience. If the movie was name Arthur, and there was no Wayne/Gotham reference, would anyone have connected this with the actual Joker? No.

Yet no one should have connected this with the actual Joker. That's the lie. They named the movie and applied the face paint specifically to get comic book fans in seats, then they pulled a bait and switch and presented a movie that had nothing at all to do with the real Joker. That's the lie. This isn't an origin story for the comic character. It just isn't. In fact, if we didn't know better, I would swear this was just like Cloverfield Paradox and was an independent movie that was bought to staple onto an existing franchise, but which had absolutely nothing at all to do with it. It's like calling your movie "Batman" and telling the story of Fred Jones, an accountant from Peoria.

 

[Strikerkc]

there is no such thing as the "real" joker. He's fiction. If they make another fiction movie with him this way, this becomes a version of the Joker. Same way if they made a different version of bats in a movie. he could be a departure; but if the people that get to make batman movies make a movie where batman was different, it'd still be a new version of batman. same thing with joker. you didn't like it, gotcha. but just because something doesn't match your fan fiction or the things that came before, doesn't make it a "lie". lol

 

[JoeG]

It's like calling your movie "Batman" and telling the story of Fred Jones, an accountant from Peoria.

 

[Psab keel]

Jared Leo's Joker was a lie. Or was he just a joke? I think we can all agree on that.

The more I think about it the more I think this version of the Joker really is so far removed from the character we know other than a few thin associations with the comics that it's fair to say fans could easily dismiss him as a different character entirely.

I'm totally fine with different interpretations because even the nature of comics have allowed these icons to endure for decades beyond their origins so I'm not saying this version isn't worthy so much as I'm saying it makes sense why some fans wouldn't embrace this version and their feelings have merit. Not every version has to adhere exactly to past iterations but it's important to honor the nature of the character as much as it is to reinterpret him or her for a new generation. Arthur Fleck is not smart. He's a beaten dog of a man and he snaps. Removing his intelligence and cunning as a criminal mastermind who is ten steps ahead of everyone else really does remove the key element to what separates him from other villains.

I understand and agree with the sentiment that Arthur Fleck is but a pale interpretation of the Joker. That's not conjecture or some head canon talking either because I'm not well versed in the comics but I do know the character enough (thank you Mark Hamill and the Batman Animated series) to know that Todd Phillips version is nowhere near as interesting as the traditional version. Plus there are decades worth of comic books that can support this stance.

I did enjoy the movie and it's an interesting take on the idea but I think by stripping away the core element of his intelligence really did the movie a disservice if you're going to make it a movie called Joker.

As a character piece and as an examination of mental illness it's interesting.

 

[Monkey67]

It's like calling your movie "Batman" and telling the story of Fred Jones, an accountant from Peoria.

Hey man, Fred Jones is the leader of Mystery Inc. No way he could be an accountant from Peoria. He told his father no way he is going to do that for a living.