Intelligent people realize this Joker movie ISN'T a comic book movie at all.

[Spliff]

I hear ya OP.

They also fukked up a classic Western by adding in X-Men and slapping Wolverine's government in the title.

Spoiler

 

[Deltron]

Think of these Cloverfield spinoffs that weren't really Cloverfield sequels or prequels. They were screenplays that got tweaked at the last minute and called Cloverfield.

that's practically every die hard movie, except I think the god awful 5th one.


yet we still call'em Die Hard, and not the trope Die Hard on a...

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

So let me get this straight. Actually no, I’ll ask the question: what constitutes a comic book movie? How do you define it?

Still waiting on an answer homie lol

As of 2019?

But in all seriousness, the market. From a major blockbuster like Avengers or Justice League, to a minor league flick like Shazaam or Ant-Man..

Blade was never considered a comic book movie, even though it was a comic book character, because of how it was marketed (not to mention most people didn't know he was a comic book character in the first place.

This Joker movie doesn't fit into any of those molds because of how its being marketed and introduced. Not to mention, the director/writers are going out of their way to differentiate it from the typical comic book movie.

I kinda wish this was an original flick without the DC elements. The cast is stong, and it looks like it could be a compelling story, but to sell it, they had to make fit it into the "comic book" genre which sucks.

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

that's practically every die hard movie, except I think the god awful 5th one.


yet we still call'em Die Hard, and not the trope Die Hard on a...

That's a bad example. Every die movie has the same characteristics.

John McClain annoys the bad guys.
Bad guys are annoyed by McClain.
Bad guys try to kill McClain.
McClain kills bad guys.
A relative of McClain is shoehorned into the plot
Bruce Willis gets to use a lot of fake blood and bruised face make up.
Bruce Willis blows shyt up.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

 

[Deltron]

But in all seriousness, the market. From a major blockbuster like Avengers or Justice League, to a minor league flick like Shazaam or Ant-Man..

Blade was never considered a comic book movie, even though it was a comic book character, because of how it was marketed (not to mention most people didn't know he was a comic book character in the first place.

This Joker movie doesn't fit into any of those molds because of how its being marketed and introduced. Not to mention, the director/writers are going out of their way to differentiate it from the typical comic book movie.

I kinda wish this was an original flick without the DC elements. The cast is stong, and it looks like it could be a compelling story, but to sell it, they had to make fit it into the "comic book" genre which sucks.

so would you consider Rampage a video game movie? Or the last Tomb Raider? They most definitely borrowed elements from their game source but weren't really video gamey per se.

 

[MartyMcFly]

As of 2019?

But in all seriousness, the market. From a major blockbuster like Avengers or Justice League, to a minor league flick like Shazaam or Ant-Man..

Blade was never considered a comic book movie, even though it was a comic book character, because of how it was marketed (not to mention most people didn't know he was a comic book character in the first place.

This Joker movie doesn't fit into any of those molds because of how its being marketed and introduced. Not to mention, the director/writers are going out of their way to differentiate it from the typical comic book movie.

I kinda wish this was an original flick without the DC elements. The cast is stong, and it looks like it could be a compelling story, but to sell it, they had to make fit it into the "comic book" genre which sucks.

So you’re entire argument is based on marketing then. Not the actual movie itself or the elements. That’s a faulty place to start an argument. That’s the same argument people wanted to make with get out calling it a “social thriller” to escape the term “horror” even tho the director and studio said it’s a horror flick. The same argument a studio made when silence of the lambs was campaigning for an Oscar so they called it a thriller when it’s clearly a horror movie. In fact, the term “thriller” was only derived so not to make people feel bad about liking horror movies. It’s a semantics argument based on selling rather than a factual argument based on what is.

Its a movie about a comic book character therefore it’s a comic book movie. Comic book movies can be all types of genres and tones because comics are all types of genres and tones. Saga isn’t Spider-Man. But if they made a saga movie, it would still be a comic book movie.

 

[Deltron]

That's a bad example. Every die movie has the same characteristics.

John McClain annoys the bad guys.
Bad guys are annoyed by McClain.
Bad guys try to kill McClain.
McClain kills bad guys.
A relative of McClain is shoehorned into the plot
Bruce Willis gets to use a lot of fake blood and bruised face make up.
Bruce Willis blows shyt up.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

but those were the "tweaks" you spoke of to make the film as the film in the franchise.

DH3 (I think) was supposed to be a LW flick. If it had been a LW, most of the DH characterisitcs wouldn't have carried over.

 

[steadyrighteous]

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

So you’re entire argument is based on marketing then. Not the actual movie itself or the elements. That’s a faulty place to start an argument. That’s the same argument people wanted to make with get out calling it a “social thriller” to escape the term “horror” even tho the director and studio said it’s a horror flick. The same argument a studio made when silence of the lambs was campaigning for an Oscar so they called it a thriller when it’s clearly a horror movie. In fact, the term “thriller” was only derived so not to make people feel bad about liking horror movies. It’s a semantics argument based on selling rather than a factual argument based on what is.

Its a movie about a comic book character therefore it’s a comic book movie. Comic book movies can be all types of genres and tones because comics are all types of genres and tones. Saga isn’t Spider-Man. But if they made a saga movie, it would still be a comic book movie.

The actual movie and its elements has everything to do with how its marketed tho

 

[BXKingPin82]

Wheres Brehtto for this tho??

 

[MartyMcFly]

The actual movie and its elements has everything to do with how its marketed tho

no the fukk it doesn’t and that laughter isn’t for you it’s to the very idea.

A studio can market a movie any way they want. Regardless of its content. I’ve seen scream marketed as a comedy and light hearted horror flick. It’s got comedy yeah but it’s not light hearted. At all. Power rangers was marketed to kids as this light coming of age movie filled with power ranger action....it’s not light nor is there plenty of power ranger action. Marketing is a selling tool that’s it. You angle it the way you want it to go into the marketing place especially when you want awards for those movies.

There’s a whole argument on film twitter every year regarding how A24 markets their movies and how a lot of fans feel hustled by the marketing. And often times, their movies are marketed to seem faster than they actually are.

You market it the way you know voters will respond to it and influence their thinking. It’s all part of the game.

 

[MartyMcFly]

Wheres Brehtto for this tho??

breh you know he got perma banned

 

[Deltron]

A studio can market a movie any way they want. Regardless of its content. I’ve seen scream marketed as a comedy and light hearted horror flick. It’s got comedy yeah but it’s not light hearted. At all. Power rangers was marketed to kids as this light coming of age movie filled with power ranger action....it’s not light nor is there plenty of power ranger action. Marketing is a selling tool that’s it. You angle it the way you want it to go into the marketing place especially when you want awards for those movies.

word to this...I remember peeping this film (before I peeped the trailer) and after watching the trailer, they positioned it as your typical Rob Schnider film...when it was probably his most "serious" role to date at the time. At the most it was a dramady, but really he played it straight and there was little comedy at all..hell the hanging scene they played up for laughs in the trailer wasn't really like that at all in the actual film:

 

[MartyMcFly]

word to this...I remember peeping this film (before I peeped the trailer) and after watching the trailer, they positioned it as your typical Rob Schnider film...when it was probably his most "serious" role to date at the time. At the most it was a dramady, but really he played it straight and there was little comedy at all..hell the hanging scene they played up for laughs in the trailer wasn't really like that at all in the actual film:

Cable guy was marketed as a goofy Jim Carey movie. Typical ace Ventura fare. Yeah it ain’t that.

 

[Th3G3ntleman]

If we're in agreement that Joker doesn't have a tangible origin story than how the fukk does this origin story somehow do a disservice to the comics?


I keep reading shyt that says this movie isn't faithful to the comics and I'm scratching my head because in this history of comic books damn near every character has different continuations with varying origin stories. How is this any different?