Unpopular Opinions

[VarsityEditor]

Heath Ledger's Joker is an absurd character, and people wouldn't fawn over his performance nearly so much if it were not for the unfortunate death of Ledger before the film came out.

 

[Malthus]

Rebel Moon is really good and I'm probably going to enjoy part 2 more than Dune 2

 

[Bobson Dugnutt]

Rebel Moon is really good and I'm probably going to enjoy part 2 more than Dune 2

And you think you know someone...

 

[Moe_Syzlak]

Heath Ledger's Joker is an absurd character, and people wouldn't fawn over his performance nearly so much if it were not for the unfortunate death of Ledger before the film came out.

I kinda have the opposite unpopular opinion. The Dark Knight is a mess of a movie maybe maybe saved by the charismatic performance of Heath Ledger.

 

[Gibichung]

Rebel Moon is really good and I'm probably going to enjoy part 2 more than Dune 2

IMO, Rebel Moon was shockingly watchable and honestly, one of the better paced Snyder movies. The first 30 minutes was nearly perfect- as best as Snyder can do storytelling (and this is coming from a Snyder-agnostic. I'm not moved by his movies at all).

I was waiting for it to fuck up and it just didn't. I really don't understand the nasty vitriol against Rebel Moon.

 

[Malthus]

I really don't understand the nasty vitriol against Rebel Moon.

Uh oh, rant incoming...

I believe the vitriol stems from confirmation bias and the fact that people can't separate the art from the artist. I can understand that to a degree. For example I can honestly say if U2 were to release an album that was meant to be fantastic I wouldn't engage with it simply because I strongly dislike U2 and "don't get the hype". Is it childish, yes, but I can't envision myself ever enjoying U2's work simply because of who created it so it is very easy to just default to being dismissive. Sadly we live in a world were people actively "hate watch" things only to tear them down. I'd simply skip something that I knew wasn't for me but some people can't help themselves.

Synder has created some fantastic films. Unfortunately he has a very distinctive style and is very much a visual oriented film maker. He has created some iconic movies in cinema and I'd go as far as saying his style is just as valid as Wes Anderson who is all about the visual panache and whimsy. I like both film makers. I like both of their styles. I love knowing what sort of film I'm walking into. Sadly, not everyone gets Synder's style. It is seen as shallow or edgy due to the genres he chooses to works within and the way he chooses to tell his stories. I personally love that he makes movie for himself and damn those who don't like them. That self indulgent cinema really makes me happy. I enjoy art when I know the artist enjoyed creating it.

So now consider Rebel Moon?

Not only is it a Synder film (divisive already by virtue of its director) it was also repeatedly called "his Star Wars" which was just a lazy (and largely inaccurate) portrayal of a pretty fantastic space opera. That immediately set it against a very polarised fan base. It also had a female lead (shock horror, how can this be, it's the great emasculation of our generation) and so the misogynistic masses had reason to be angry at it as did the anti woke reviewer's who see diversity as the death of cinema. AND THEN it's announced the release will be followed by a superior directors cut so it was lambasted for not being the finished product. It truly was a perfect storm.

I loved it. It was fun and inventive and I'm excited for more.

 

[PanteraSteel]

I kinda have the opposite unpopular opinion. The Dark Knight is a mess of a movie

That's an interesting take. Would you care to elaborate??

 

[Moe_Syzlak]

That's an interesting take. Would you care to elaborate??

Sure. The whole movie hinges on the themes of chaos and that people aren’t inherently good when push comes to shove. Yet everything the Joker does from the opening bank robbery to the finale is elaborately planned and could fall apart if just one little thing doesn’t go according to these ridiculously overwrought plans, making the Joker the least chaotic character in the movie. Everything that happens seems to happen because it is scripted and nothing feels organic. Harvey Dent and his prosecutor girlfriend pursuing organized crime yet have zero protection. Not one but two ferries are loaded with barrels of explosives and no one notices. A billionaire hosts a party with all the elite of Gotham and there’s no security. And why was the Joker there? Just to look for Dent and throw Rachel off the balcony? Did he just go home after that? The cell phone bomb in the dude’s stomach goes off and everyone but the Joker is incapacitated. And even stupid stuff like Dent only realizing the nurse is Joker when he removes the mask!? Fake/fake out deaths. The dude who knows who Batman is never says anything!? Even after Batman is a wanted fugitive!? In short, it’s a poorly written movie. And many of these transgressions could be forgiven if it were “just a comic book movie.” But that’s clearly not what it aspired to be. The themes don’t ring true as many many of the people on the ferries seemed okay with sacrificing the other ferry full of people even if they wanted someone else to pull the trigger. And the dangers of tech surveillance but only if someone bad is using it!? Batman is as willing to break his own rules as the Joker thinks he is. It’s a movie that thinks it is smart but instead is both underwritten and overwritten at the same time. It’s hard to feel any emotion when things are so obviously structured to happen in order to advance the plot. And if Ledger wasn’t so compelling I think the film would receive far more scrutiny.

 

[WilliamRedRobin]

. I personally love that he makes movie for himself and damn those who don't like them. That self indulgent cinema really makes me happy. I enjoy art when I know the artist enjoyed creating it.

This is the biggest reason why I love the Snyder Cut so much.
When it came out there was a lot of confusion about what it actually was. Some people thought it was the movie we would have gotten if Snyder hadn't left the project, some people thought that it was an entirely new movie shot almost from the ground up, some people said it was an assembly cut that he just finished the vfx on, and some people (who obviously hadn't seen it) said it was "basically the same" as the theatrical cut with a bunch of deleted scenes added in.
In reality, Zack Snyder took all of the footage shot for the movie and just did whatever he wanted with it. He wasnt trying to finish or remake the movie he wanted to make in 2015, he wasn't trying to make a profit or appeal to a mass audience, he was just doing whatever he thought would be coolest with the footage he had.
It's essentially the largest scale fanedit of all time.

Sadly we live in a world were people actively "hate watch" things only to tear them down.

I had this epiphany a couple of years ago when I realised that I knew every little detail about the Star Wars sequels even though I hate them, and I couldn't think of any movie I liked that I knew that much about.
I realised how weird that is and decided that I wouldn't care about bad movies anymore.
Who cares if someone makes a movie that isn't good? It doesn't really matter

 

[PanteraSteel]

Sure. The whole movie hinges on the themes of chaos and that people aren’t inherently good when push comes to shove. Yet everything the Joker does from the opening bank robbery to the finale is elaborately planned and could fall apart if just one little thing doesn’t go according to these ridiculously overwrought plans, making the Joker the least chaotic character in the movie. Everything that happens seems to happen because it is scripted and nothing feels organic. Harvey Dent and his prosecutor girlfriend pursuing organized crime yet have zero protection. Not one but two ferries are loaded with barrels of explosives and no one notices. A billionaire hosts a party with all the elite of Gotham and there’s no security. And why was the Joker there? Just to look for Dent and throw Rachel off the balcony? Did he just go home after that? The cell phone bomb in the dude’s stomach goes off and everyone but the Joker is incapacitated. And even stupid stuff like Dent only realizing the nurse is Joker when he removes the mask!? Fake/fake out deaths. The dude who knows who Batman is never says anything!? Even after Batman is a wanted fugitive!? In short, it’s a poorly written movie. And many of these transgressions could be forgiven if it were “just a comic book movie.” But that’s clearly not what it aspired to be. The themes don’t ring true as many many of the people on the ferries seemed okay with sacrificing the other ferry full of people even if they wanted someone else to pull the trigger. And the dangers of tech surveillance but only if someone bad is using it!? Batman is as willing to break his own rules as the Joker thinks he is. It’s a movie that thinks it is smart but instead is both underwritten and overwritten at the same time. It’s hard to feel any emotion when things are so obviously structured to happen in order to advance the plot. And if Ledger wasn’t so compelling I think the film would receive far more scrutiny.

Interesting. I never quite thought of it that way. May I ask what Batman films you do enjoy? Maybe your top 3 or so??

 

[Gibichung]

Uh oh, rant incoming...

I believe the vitriol stems from confirmation bias and the fact that people can't separate the art from the artist. I can understand that to a degree. For example I can honestly say if U2 were to release an album that was meant to be fantastic I wouldn't engage with it simply because I strongly dislike U2 and "don't get the hype". Is it childish, yes, but I can't envision myself ever enjoying U2's work simply because of who created it so it is very easy to just default to being dismissive. Sadly we live in a world were people actively "hate watch" things only to tear them down. I'd simply skip something that I knew wasn't for me but some people can't help themselves.

Synder has created some fantastic films. Unfortunately he has a very distinctive style and is very much a visual oriented film maker. He has created some iconic movies in cinema and I'd go as far as saying his style is just as valid as Wes Anderson who is all about the visual panache and whimsy. I like both film makers. I like both of their styles. I love knowing what sort of film I'm walking into. Sadly, not everyone gets Synder's style. It is seen as shallow or edgy due to the genres he chooses to works within and the way he chooses to tell his stories. I personally love that he makes movie for himself and damn those who don't like them. That self indulgent cinema really makes me happy. I enjoy art when I know the artist enjoyed creating it.

So now consider Rebel Moon?

Not only is it a Synder film (divisive already by virtue of its director) it was also repeatedly called "his Star Wars" which was just a lazy (and largely inaccurate) portrayal of a pretty fantastic space opera. That immediately set it against a very polarised fan base. It also had a female lead (shock horror, how can this be, it's the great emasculation of our generation) and so the misogynistic masses had reason to be angry at it as did the anti woke reviewer's who see diversity as the death of cinema. AND THEN it's announced the release will be followed by a superior directors cut so it was lambasted for not being the finished product. It truly was a perfect storm.

I loved it. It was fun and inventive and I'm excited for more.

yeah, it’s interesting. I don’t hold Snyder in any high reverence at all. He’s closer to a himbo hack than anything else he pretends to be, but I digress. Even I can separate whatever he is from the actual work That he has out there.

Rebel Moon to me is a solid sci-fi action flick which contains laughably apparent, yet sincere homage to images that came before it. You say it’s inventive, I say it doesn’t do anything remotely new at all (and that’s okay!). All I ask of movies is that the filmmakers not waste my time by showing me something that clearly felt like they were wasting THEIR TIME (as in: no passion, lazy effort, poor execution, etc.). It was clear to me that Snyder has a lot of love and respect for this kind of genre filmmaking. Though, I can imagine people would disagree. They’ll have their reasons and that’s cool. I’m not here to speculate or make excuses for why people like or don’t like something. Thats a waste of time and brainpower lol That’s just the way it is, and I love that about movies. I don’t have to agree with why people don’t enjoy it or why their indifferent about it. It doesn’t bother me one bit, but it is fascinating to try to understand, and that’s why I ask.

I’m finding out that Rebel Moon hasn’t garner much praise from any side of the discourse lol That’s so funny to me because I didn’t think it was that bad at all. BvS, Army, and Sucker Punch are worse movies to watch IMO.

 

[Gibichung]

Sorry to double post. But to stay on topic (which seems to be tending to Nolan’s filmography)

I think Memento is fucking unwatchable and has contributed much to Nolan’s worst tendencies moving forward in his career. A garbage, torturous movie that I wouldnt wish on my deplorable enemies.

 

[VarsityEditor]

Sure. The whole movie hinges on the themes of chaos and that people aren’t inherently good when push comes to shove. Yet everything the Joker does from the opening bank robbery to the finale is elaborately planned and could fall apart if just one little thing doesn’t go according to these ridiculously overwrought plans, making the Joker the least chaotic character in the movie. Everything that happens seems to happen because it is scripted and nothing feels organic. Harvey Dent and his prosecutor girlfriend pursuing organized crime yet have zero protection. Not one but two ferries are loaded with barrels of explosives and no one notices. A billionaire hosts a party with all the elite of Gotham and there’s no security. And why was the Joker there? Just to look for Dent and throw Rachel off the balcony? Did he just go home after that? The cell phone bomb in the dude’s stomach goes off and everyone but the Joker is incapacitated. And even stupid stuff like Dent only realizing the nurse is Joker when he removes the mask!? Fake/fake out deaths. The dude who knows who Batman is never says anything!? Even after Batman is a wanted fugitive!? In short, it’s a poorly written movie. And many of these transgressions could be forgiven if it were “just a comic book movie.” But that’s clearly not what it aspired to be. The themes don’t ring true as many many of the people on the ferries seemed okay with sacrificing the other ferry full of people even if they wanted someone else to pull the trigger. And the dangers of tech surveillance but only if someone bad is using it!? Batman is as willing to break his own rules as the Joker thinks he is. It’s a movie that thinks it is smart but instead is both underwritten and overwritten at the same time. It’s hard to feel any emotion when things are so obviously structured to happen in order to advance the plot.

This perfectly sums up why I said the Joker is an absurd character. We were basically saying the same thing but taking a different angle, I was criticising the character while you were criticising the film. I was focusing on the Joker as a character as almost universally whenever anyone talks about that movie they are automatically talking about the Joker. He's presented as this agent of chaos but everything he does is so intricately planned like as if a whole city can be set up like a giant Rube Goldberg machine with perfect accuracy.

The thing that annoys me more than the intricate perfectly-timed-surgically-implanted-exploding-cellphone type plans hinging on a thousand variables, is that pretty much any of Joker's many henchmen would just put a bullet in the back of his head at the first opportunity (and would be congratulated and thanked by the other henchmen for doing so). Joker treats everyone around him as more expendable than a post-it note, clearly has no sense of responsibility or connection to his underlings (compared to say a mafia don, for whom it's understandable that the underlings would show loyalty), and he even burns the money!

And if Ledger wasn’t so compelling I think the film would receive far more scrutiny.

Maybe I'm being too cynical, I just think his whole performance is kinda hammy, and that the posthumous release caused people to heap praise onto him.

 

[Moe_Syzlak]

Interesting. I never quite thought of it that way. May I ask what Batman films you do enjoy? Maybe your top 3 or so??

I mean I’m not really a superhero fan. I think I liked Batman Begins the best of the Batman movies because it balances the “real worldedness” with appropriate tone for the absurdity of the subject matter. I can appreciate the goal of making a serious film superhero movie and I’ve even praised Snyder for his attempts (though I haven’t enjoyed the results). I think superheroes can be modern myth, but it still has to operate within the confines of the world it sets up. And if you want to have emotional connection and larger subtextual themes, they have to be earned. If not, make a simple superhero movie, which is what I felt Begins was more like.

 

[WilliamRedRobin]

The main issue I have with Heath Ledger's Joker is that he's always trying to scare people and act intimidating. If you compare that to the '89 version for example, Jack Nicholson's Joker does all of these horrible things because he honestly finds them funny. Even when Ledger's joker laughs, he's being sarcastic like he's trying to make a point. There's no point in the movie where it feels like the Joker is actually  Joking.

I think it comes down to the fact that comic book movies don't really want to be comic book movies. Everyone wants to pretend that the Joker is some deep and meaningful character when he's really just a scary clown man.
Personally, I blame Alan Moore.

 

[Malthus]

I think you're all missing the point here

He's a pathological liar. The repeated changes to his own origin story about his scars prove he just says what he wants people to hear. His chaos is all a front hiding a big and brilliant mind that rivals that of Bruce Wayne.

Ultimately, he is an anarchist and the big joke is he doesn't care about the outcome he just wants to kick the Ants nest. He's the definition of a troll who finds humour in winding up people in power.

 

[Moe_Syzlak]

I think you're all missing the point here

He's a pathological liar. The repeated changes to his own origin story about his scars prove he just says what he wants people to hear. His chaos is all a front hiding a big and brilliant mind that rivals that of Bruce Wayne.

Ultimately, he is an anarchist and the big joke is he doesn't care about the outcome he just wants to kick the Ants nest. He's the definition of a troll who finds humour in winding up people in power.

Respectfully, no one is missing the point. The issue is not with Joker’s motivations; it is with the movie feeling like things happen due to screenwriters wanting them to happen rather than any earned logical plotting.

 

[Malthus]

No offence meant, I was really refering to this statement:

He's presented as this agent of chaos but everything he does is so intricately planned like as if a whole city can be set up like a giant Rube Goldberg machine with perfect accuracy.

I think he is presented as a genius tactician. I agree his plots are complex bordering on absurd and you're right to disagree with that side of things.

Personally I like this version of the joker but I also enjoy Leto's Joker and Hamill's as well. It's a fun character.

My main issue is I dislike pretty much all of Nolan's films. I don't get the hype.

 

[Moe_Syzlak]

No offence meant, I was really refering to this statement:



I think he is presented as a genius tactician. I agree his plots are complex bordering on absurd and you're right to disagree with that side of things.

Personally I like this version of the joker but I also enjoy Leto's Joker and Hamill's as well. It's a fun character.

My main issue is I dislike pretty much all of Nolan's films. I don't get the hype.

I think Nolan is fine, but I also don’t get the hype. He’s technically very good but despite having top tier talent in his films I never connect with the characters. The movies are always good, but never move me. And he often seems more interested in tricking the audience than he is in just telling a good story. He’s like a more competent and consistent M. Knight.

Also, no offense taken. All good fun to talk movies; nothing to get too serious about.

 

[VarsityEditor]

His chaos is all a front.
...
he doesn't care about the outcome he just wants to kick the Ants nest

Choose one.

I think he is presented as a genius tactician

Ok I get it, you can say he is some kind of savant when it comes to his schemes, clearly he is, but he is also clearly presented as some sort of choatic demon in human form who has just materialised into Gotham to cause chaos... but also has a supernatural ability to set up elaborate traps which would necessarily require huge numbers of collaborators working with perfect loyalty.

If the film weren't going for the "gritty/realistic" tone it wouldn't be so bad, but as it tries so hard for the grounded tone, the pieces just don't hold together for me. For me, it's a case of Nolan sacrificing in-world believability for the sake of doing his high-concept thematic thing. If Joker was allowed to just be a "force of nature" without relying so heavily on large scale military precision operations conjured up in any situation, I probably would have loved it.

(I should add it's a long time since I saw this film, and my memory is probably being a bit unkind in the remembering.)