I gave "Joker" a 2 out of 10 after reading it before, because it's superficial and I don't think it says anything. In the film, I can't feel the director Todd Phillips' control of the film at all, and it is actually showing the role of "The Joker" or the actor Joaquin Phoenix; so, I am not convinced by the Golden Lion.
But I thought about it again last night. In fact, I can think about "Joker" from another angle; that is, this film actually didn't want to talk about anything, it just talked about what a "Joker" is (note that it is not a "person"). It's actually a bit risky to think so, because I directly eliminated all the director's level, including the supporting roles, the role of the clown is the only and existing role. Including the staff level, the scenes they played do not exist, they are all expressions of Arthur's character, you see, including blue light and green light. In fact, any movie complements each other like this, but I changed it to a one-sided understanding in order to make a reasonable interpretation of "Joker".
Some people criticize that Gotham is a city of layers of paper, with skin and bones. I also think so. Since everyone thinks so, let's get rid of the city; Gotham is actually the Joker, or Arthur's Inner projection, if he is bad, Gotham is bad, if he is good, Gotham is good.
There seems to be some traces of this in there. Didn't Arthur say in it that he didn't confirm his existence? There is also a small detail that happens to be that the clown walked to the automatic door, but the door did not open. From a philosophical point of view, it seems to be somewhat related to the above-mentioned "Gotham City is his inner projection". Of course I can only start. Perhaps "philosophy" is the only thing that shines in this world, whether it exists or not.
The clown is essentially a comedic character. Arthur has always wanted to be a comedian, but has always failed, but the role of the clown is also very interesting, he is completely the opposite of Arthur, the more miserable and evil Arthur, the more "comedy" the clown. You see at the end, chatting with the black female doctor again in the same room with the same structure, and finally walking out of the door, stepping on the bloody footprints, facing the bright future, walking forward, walking to the right, can you not be caught by the police, this scene Isn't it full of cartoon comedy?
"Joker" doesn't even want to say how Gotham City is, or use Gotham City as a metaphor for what the United States is like now. It's more ruthless. Just think about it. The last one who ran out and went to the bright future did not come to reality. ? Because "Joker" is a film that echoes the beginning and the end, his first scene and the last scene are connected. Where did Arthur leave the treatment room in the first scene? He didn't go anywhere, he was robbed when he went out, and he lived in a city with a strong sense of one-sidedness; but when the last scene went out, he had a bright future, and he didn't say where he went. Everyone in "V for Vendetta" wears masks on the streets, where is the clown? In fact, Gotham is the United States, do you all agree? "Joker" is a closed-narrative film. The characters live in the city in the film. Where did the clown go in the end? The answer is America.
The Joker is actually a spiritual symbol, thanks not only to "Joker", but also "The Dark Knight", and so many previous Batman movies that featured clowns, "Joker" is actually a bit deeply rooted in people's hearts. What "The Clown" does is actually a "sweet push" to really spread the horror atmosphere of the clown into reality. This is actually worse than the shooting case, or should I say, it is fortunate that there was no shooting case during the release of "Joker".
"Joker" may have hinted at the future of the United States by the way. I think this may be the main reason for winning the Golden Lion. There should be very few movies that can do this, and "Joker" not only relies on "Joker", but relies on this A deeply evil character. Really thanks to Heath Ledger. If you think about it this way, the various classes in the movie can be explained very one-sidedly. Because it is too deep, it will make the audience unable to get it. Too deep is the character in the movie, and if it is superficial, it depicts the real world in a superficial way. Of course, I think this is very unfounded, and you are welcome to refute me at any time.
Thinking about it this way, "Joker" is still quite scary, and he can be more deeply rooted in people's hearts than ordinary movies.
View more about Joker reviews
