Tales of the Parodyverse >> View Thread

Author
anonymous


Member Since: Thu Feb 05, 2004

Posted with Mozilla Firefox 49.0 on Windows 7


Just wondering what folks thought.  Obviously this can be as spoiler-filled or as spoiler-free as you want it to be. 

Just trying to stick to my somewhat promise to post more often...still haven't figured out posting from home yet though. 

Hopefully everyone's lives are great.






HH



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 47.0 on Windows XP




Jack



Posted with Apple Safari 9.1.2 on MacOS X




Manga Shoggoth


Member Since: Fri Jan 02, 2004
Posts: 391

Posted with Mozilla Firefox 47.0 on Windows 7

Alas, like HH, I won't be seeing the film either. Unlike HH, it is because I have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the cinema and there is always the risk of being thrown out due to the gashes in the carpet as I fight to escape. If I here sufficient good about it I might get it on DVD later, so I can FFWD the bits that waste my time.

On the Joker: There is a thread running on Giant in the Playground concerning portrayals of the Joker. This is what one poster had to say about Leto's attempt:

He's... strange. For Joker, I mean.

There are typically three archetypes Joker embodies: the Clown (Caesar Romero, Keith Richardson), the Kingpin (Jack Nicholson, Mark Hamill), and the Crazy (Heath Ledger, John DiMaggio).

Leto is definitely the Kingpin archetype. He revels in dominance, is goal oriented, and ruthless in the pursuit of his goals. He doesn't do it to have fun, but he does have fun doing it. He has a philosophy of the Joke, but he doesn't preach it like the Crazy does.

His mannerisms are new for a Joker, but often rather interesting. One particular new quirk is a tattoo on the back of his right hand that portrays a laughing mouth, which he places over his and other people's mouths, so that the tattoo makes it look (somewhat) like they're splitting a gut. It's creepy and disconcerting and I think that's the joke.

Possibly the most unusual part of Leto's Joker, though, is the fact he displays a more genuine fondness for Harley than other versions do, to the point of putting himself in danger to protect or save her. Now, you can easily argue that he still sees her as a possession and not a person, and that his actions are about protecting his property rather than actual affection, but he doesn't show much concern for property in other cases. Personally, I think this Joker sees Harley as a work of art, a masterpiece he has chipped and molded to psychotic perfection, and he's protecting that masterpiece rather than a person or property.

He's definitely a new Joker, much like Ledger was. We've not seen anything like him. I don't think he's as engaging, however. Ledger was a philosopher who saw through the self-delusion humanity wraps itself in for comfort, and strives to tear it away. Leto is a gangster with an unusual style and philosophy. End result is that he's not as intriguing nor as much fun, and it's capped off with the fact that Suicide Squad doesn't make good use of him. I do think he has potential, however.






As is always the case with my writing, please feel free to comment. I welcome both positive and negative criticism of my work, although I cannot promise to enjoy the negative.

Visionary

says hello to all the fine PV folks!


Posted with Apple iPad 601.1.46

It sure has been interesting to read about though!  Like all of the DC flicks, I'm sure that I will at least catch it on cable.

Harley of course would be the main draw for me, but like HH I knew that they were going in a direction that didn't overly interest me with her being hyper sexualized.  I like my Harley a bit more plausibly innocent in that respect... Not all hot pants and wet T-shirt.  The childish side of her becomes too creepy when she's dressed up like a stripper for us to leer at.

I understand that the reason that Leto's Joker role in the film has been so trimmed down is because the original cut of the film treated the Harley/Joker relationship as highly abusive, as it was in the cartoons and comics.  It didn't test well with audiences though, and so they re-cut it to make it seem like the Joker truly cared about Harley.  (One example being a scene where he pushes her out of a helicopter...  Originally it was apparently because he was peeved at her, but the new edit placed it right before the helicopter gets shot down, making it look like he saved her on purpose.)  I gather her arc was originally supposed to be her gaining some independence and choosing the Squad over him, but now the less-abusive version keeps them together in the end and almost seems like it's endorsing her relationship with her abuser because he really does care.  That's potentially all kinds of messed up.

But again, maybe it will play differently/better to me when I actually see it for myself.





Al B. Harper

I saw it last night and can confirm: it was pretty bad SPOILERS

Member Since: Mon Jan 04, 2016
Posts: 485

Posted with Google Chrome 49.0.2623.112 on Windows Vista

Holes in the plot are par for the course with a lot of superhero movies, but this one has it in spades. Look - it was entertaining enough if you are bored and need a diversion but the storyline is seriously lacking any depth or weight. The more you think about it the more stupid the whole world they inhabit seems to be and the characters are all seriously one dimensional. Cliches were rife. 

On the plus side, there were some nice graphics. I enjoyed the look of the Enchantress using her magic with all the ash and burning embers effect, but after that (when she was all sexy-dance-magicing) it was 'meh'.  But yeah...there's not a lot of pluses. Margot Robbie's butt is the star of the film depending on your point of view.  Most of the jokes are seen in the trailer. 






On Topic™ © 2003-2024 Powermad Software