After watching "Joker", in addition to feeling that the actor is very much like Phil from "Modern Family", he has the feeling that he has finally been driven crazy by life to realize the clown dream of the show business for Cam. In fact, I think there is some content worthy of it. Feel free to write.
I think there are actually several categories of superhero movies. One is the more commercial type, the one that uses imagination, the script is industrialized and skilled, the movie watching will make you feel smooth and enjoyable, and the special effects are getting better and better. In this category, you don't have to care about the script, as long as you immediately feel good-looking, let the older children and the children like it.
There is another kind, which is to go deeper and start to discuss some issues such as the inner heart of some characters and the social environment, but because it is still taking the line of commercial genres, there are still routines, and the entertainment can not be completely discarded.
There is another category, which is to take the route of spoofing and B-level filming. They are full of cool girls and cool boys. How do you complain about pop culture? If you do well, everyone likes it.
These heroic movies are generally stylized, but they don't really get into the discussion in the literary sense.
However, the "Joker" I watched today basically abandoned the theme of superheroes. Although it was made as a villain origin movie, the script is still very delicate.
I have seen many comments that criticized the film from the perspective of ideology and worldview. For example, it may be too dark and too chaotic. In my opinion, this is not enough. After all, the purpose of the film at the beginning is to express. Such a chaotic and disorderly world and the charming villain born in this world.
After watching this movie, I can probably understand why it can be put in that kind of film festival and still win awards. In essence, it actually has a literary experience, modeling and depiction of characters.
So, I think I can talk about my personal views casually from this perspective.
I think a good film in the literary sense (of course, I will mainly talk about the script), in general, it still needs to have its own perspective. First of all, you don’t have to pay too much attention to the content and ideology of the content, but it needs to have a A good angle has a unique personal temperament. If the things it portrays are organic and attractive, for a few moments, you will feel that the things the author portrays are real, vivid, and naturally alive. I think the image of a clown is quite fascinating by nature.
Because this character has been shaped a lot before, such as the kind of Gothic, theater style, such as very personal, especially chaotic, but these are already shown to the audience after his image has been "formed".
Therefore, this origin movie must start with how he "formed".
So speaking of this, I think the writing logic of the movie's script is basically very clear: that is, the reverse method, first imagine the formed "clown" image, and then reverse it back to his original form a little bit.
From this perspective, I feel that the movie has almost no flaws, everything will come naturally, through the placement of life’s frustrations to the clown, nesting in the middle of the big event structure (that is, the TV host’s initial affirmation of the clown and the final desperate blow) All kinds of small setbacks (such as being bullied by a gangster, looking for a biological father but discovering that everything is actually the mother’s imagination, and also ravaging Little Batman by the way), all the script structure is reasonable, and the actors are also very powerful, shaping the clown It has already scored three points and overturned the previously classic clown image. I think, first of all, in the general direction, there is nothing wrong with this movie.
However, from a certain obsessive-compulsive perspective, I would feel that this movie is still too "relaxed" if it is to be viewed as a particularly good and clever serious movie. Here "Easy" means that the screenwriter’s power is still too great, such as constantly using coincidences to defeat the character, such as imposing various dramas in order to shape the character, the character of the clown, constantly following the screenwriter’s command, from the original form Evolving all the way to a mature form, none of this has gone out of control, and his growth trajectory is still firmly in the hands of the screenwriter.
Secondly, because after all, the clown is a classic image of disorder, chaos, and no obvious logic, this origin movie also inserted him with signs of mental illness such as conjecture. Generally speaking, he was still portrayed. He is a little bit like a mental patient with neurological deficits at the beginning. He did not evolve from a more general introverted freak into the final clown form. I would think that this is still not ruthless enough, because after all, he himself is a bit "abnormal." Well", so that he is more likely to be destroyed by the sufferings of life, which reduces the intensity of these sufferings. Of course, this is just a personal nitpicking or I didn't fully understand it.
But, I think that discussing this movie from a particularly serious literary script cannot fully explain any problems. For example, my favorite Coen brothers, I don't think they are so "literary", but they can't stand their particularly good-looking.
For the same reason, I think this "Joker" is particularly beautiful. From the perspective of personal viewing experience, I think this movie is full of tension. In this regard, I think many Korean commercial films are also doing quite well, but "Joker" still forcibly killed them in seconds.
I won’t talk about more specific plots, but here’s just one point: What I particularly like is not the dancing with makeup when the clown gradually evolves into the ultimate image, nor the various Easter eggs of Batman in it, nor the final scene. The climax (this climax is really wonderful, making the whole script complete and exquisite, echoing before and after), but the scene where the clown is on the street, putting on makeup at home, and the former colleague comes to the house.
In that scene, as a horror movie lover, I saw the horror created by this actor. He killed the fat colleague and let the dwarf colleague leave. The dwarf colleague was too short to reach the door lock, and his face was full of blood. He opened the door, and at this moment, I saw my horror, with a particularly cold horror. It's black, it's funny, cult and humorous, I like it very much.
My memory is as bad as me. The last time I had an impression of the villain was the gas tank killer in "Old Nowhere". What's interesting is that both movies have similar depictions of the villain killing women, implying that the clown killed the female neighbor and the last female doctor. The sound of police sirens and bloody footprints, there are also details of the killer grinding his feet on the carpet in the ending.
It’s a bit too far away. In short, I think the movie is worth a five-star recommendation with the above paragraph.
Others are not spoiled, it's still worth watching, but it's boring.
View more about Joker reviews
