>You probably think DC and Disney shill there their stuff here
Shills exist everywhere, homosexual. It's a fact corporations use bots or npcs to promote stuff. Some even do it for free. NTA. Cinema is bussiness. Not art.
Especially in hindsight cause the entire part was of a sad, depressed outcast. I love Leo but he fricking cannot do sad scenes, let alone a character whose entire life is an extended sad scene.
do we have any clue of the premise? I bet they'll go with phoenix only being the inspiration for the actual protagonist but they'll market it with phoenix entirely.
Joker 2 being a musical is a huge risk. The movie's success will depend so much on the strength of the music and modern musicals haven't been memorable since the 80's.
>Joker 2 being a musical
No way.
>it's not a joke
what the frick? i will just skip it unless it releases to exceptional praise. but what the frick? how? why? what did I miss?
It's from his perspective and the character is insane.
It might actually work. >First film is real, gritty, depressing, ends with a mental break >Second film pure insanity, musical to the backdrop of some "ultra-violence"
It could work. It's extremely risky but it could potentially be one of the best movies of all time if done right.
It's ambitious as frick however you spin it.
Even if it's perfect and amazing it might still bomb as it could potentially go way over the target audiences head.
Joker 2 being a musical is a huge risk. The movie's success will depend so much on the strength of the music and modern musicals haven't been memorable since the 80's.
>Highly doubt Joker 2 will be as good as those two but I'm hoping it's still decent.
Scorsese accepted to produce it with his company (Sikelia). So it will probably be good.
>Joker 2 is a musical
WTF. i swear they are just fricking with us at this point. their life goals are to take anything us NEETs can enjoy or relate to and just ruin it. I bet the Joker character will be told what to do by a sassy black female character
Lady gaga is Harley Quinn.
I assume it'll cover Arkham and her origins.
It's a huge draw for a female audience. I don't think you have to worry about sassy black women taking a major role in the cast. There's too much shit to cover
I didn't like the original Joker but my girlfriend did. It wouldn't surprise me if the original movie had more female fans and thus the sequel is pandering to them more.
>Maybe with that amount of money Joaquin will stay dedicated to losing weight.
Remember when Twitter cancelled him and called him fatphobe or something for saying he felt a lot better skinny than fat after Joker?
They also tried to cancel him for actually kicking one of the actors from the subway scene despite said actors saying it was ok and that's what they wanted for the scene.
Feel like Lady Gaga is such a huge miscast. She might be able to play the role if she was 20 years younger, but a nearly 50 Harlequin? Hope they have a good make up and CGI department.
The plot for the new Joker movie Joker 2: Eccentric Boogaloo: Two Clowns, A Bank, And A Suicide is going to be about a bank robbery that goes wrong, and ends up as a hostage situation involving multiple criminals. While I don't know anything about movie making, you can't just expect a hostage situation to happen by itself with no help from the criminals involved.
But, there is a problem with that storyline. The Joker, as everyone knows, likes killing people. So, I don't know if they'll go that route. Maybe they'll introduce another villain into the mix, or they'll be an "accident."
In a world where clowns are looked down upon, are we still living in that world, or are they now looked down upon for not being able to terrorize?
Buddy, give your head a shake. Musicals are the highest form of art. Only plebs are trying to diss them by calling them gay. Lowest of the low opinions. >inb4 they can't make money
Frozen, Mamma Mia, La La Land, Beauty and the Beast exist and many more
The execs make infinitely more. Just remember that almost no blockbuster movie has ever made it's money back. I'm willing to bet same is with Joker. That billion box office and future streaming money gone in the wind somehow.
>Just remember that almost no blockbuster movie has ever made it's money back
not literally. They make money, a shitton of them like the Joker but due to creative accounting, shits like lending money to yourselves and all the weird stuff in the papers it's not properly reported. You can see stuff like >30m budget >392m box office >calculated net profit - 89m
LOL. It's a difference between how much money studios and people make and how much "the movie" makes.
Isn't that almost half the budget of the original? I assume they didn't want to give him points this time around and this was as cheap as they could get him?
>Isn't that almost half the budget of the original?
that's still not much considering the potential. Even if it's not as successfull as the first movie it will still make hundreds of millions.
Yeah, I'm just hoping this isn't another victim of surprise hit that gets way more money thrown at its sequel, along with way more studio attention/intervention, which turns out to be shit.
As I said $20 million is cheaper than what they would lose out by giving him points because it'll almost certainly make a shitload.
Todd Phillips took no salary for Joker but got something like 13 points. He would've made over a hundred million from that deal. He did the same shit with Hangover. Guy is pretty canny.
he was the only interesting part of an otherwise mediocre movie
Thor 4 flopped
>if you think capeshit brand 1 le bad you must think capeshit brand 2 is le good
>Le greentext to pretend he didn't seethe
Pathetic.
You are a manchild stuck in the company wars mindset. You probably think DC and Disney shill there their stuff here
>You probably think DC and Disney shill there their stuff here
Shills exist everywhere, homosexual. It's a fact corporations use bots or npcs to promote stuff. Some even do it for free. NTA. Cinema is bussiness. Not art.
>Le posting
Fricking Reddit shit stain.
the seething coming off of this post... amazing...
>The only interesting part was the character that the whole fricking movie revolved around
Came here to say this. Without Phoenix the whole thing falls completely apart imo. It’s not that interesting a movie except to see him act.
>the only interesting part of a character study was the main character
Disneyshills, ladies and gentlemen
>my capeshit is better than yours
stop embarrassing yourselves, gentlemen
>$20M
Yeah, all of his other films lately have been indie flops
Hes doing Napoleon
>Napoleon but mostly Josephine
That's like making an Augustus biopic but focusing on his bawd daughter.
reasonable
Imagine how shit it would have been if Leo had played the part like they originally intended.
Especially in hindsight cause the entire part was of a sad, depressed outcast. I love Leo but he fricking cannot do sad scenes, let alone a character whose entire life is an extended sad scene.
Taxi driver with clowns
do we have any clue of the premise? I bet they'll go with phoenix only being the inspiration for the actual protagonist but they'll market it with phoenix entirely.
It's a musical and Lady Gaga might play the female lead.
>it's not a joke
what the frick? i will just skip it unless it releases to exceptional praise. but what the frick? how? why? what did I miss?
It's from his perspective and the character is insane.
It might actually work.
>First film is real, gritty, depressing, ends with a mental break
>Second film pure insanity, musical to the backdrop of some "ultra-violence"
It could work. It's extremely risky but it could potentially be one of the best movies of all time if done right.
It's ambitious as frick however you spin it.
Even if it's perfect and amazing it might still bomb as it could potentially go way over the target audiences head.
if something is either the best movie of all time or dogshit it will be dogshit
>It's not a joke
That's the joke.
>he WANTS more of the same
OH NO NO NO NO
>Lady Gaga
Least organic industry plant OF ALL TIME
Any sexy female pop singer is an industry plant you moron.
I have read somewhere that they have saved up the best part of the story for the second installments : The gender reveal part.
Joker 2 being a musical is a huge risk. The movie's success will depend so much on the strength of the music and modern musicals haven't been memorable since the 80's.
>Joker 2 being a musical
No way.
Old news tbh, music likely cowritten by Lady Gaga.
of course it is. they have to shame the people who identify with it.
i think it fits with the absurdity of the character
Well. Dropped.
>its real
What the frick hahahahah
Feels like it's a gamble but likely the only way it could even hope to be good. More of the same would just be boring.
Holy shit lol that's hilarious. Phillips is no artist but he's clearly fricking with people at this point.
La La Land was amazing and West Side Story (remake) was pretty good.
Highly doubt Joker 2 will be as good as those two but I'm hoping it's still decent.
>Highly doubt Joker 2 will be as good as those two but I'm hoping it's still decent.
Scorsese accepted to produce it with his company (Sikelia). So it will probably be good.
I did like La La Land but I'm positive I'd hate that West Side Story remake.
Chris Hemsworth earned the same for Thor 4 and the movie is shit
They don't really expect to make a billion again do they
Ben Affleck is untalented and unlikeable.
>crisis on infinite earth adaptation.
This could be DC's infinity war except I have yet to find people who give a shit about DC characters beyond joker and batman.
Just throw several different Batmen and Jokers there. Bale being back would create a huge buzz.
That would be badass but then the movie budget would increase a frick lot
Bale was worst bats by far so no
>Bale was worst
WRONG.
That's not Clooney
Bring back heath ledger
So is Pattinson finished?
He never started
not a real source
Bro it says right in the image "our trusted and proven sources." It must be real.
>our trusted and proven sources
This means the network who approved the article can get sued if it's fake news right?
Sirs, we need to pay more bots, sirs I repeat we need to pay more bots, we are winning sirs
How the hell would they even do this? Isn't the Flash supposed to split the DCEU into 2 continuities already?
WBD is just throwing money at actors.
Duh. The first one made over a billion dollars on a budget of like $40 million or whatever it was. Hell of a return.
WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY
>Spend 2-3 months playing pretend
>Get paid $20 million
Jelly of Joaquin. Some people have all the luck.
>Joker 2 is a musical
WTF. i swear they are just fricking with us at this point. their life goals are to take anything us NEETs can enjoy or relate to and just ruin it. I bet the Joker character will be told what to do by a sassy black female character
Lady gaga is Harley Quinn.
I assume it'll cover Arkham and her origins.
It's a huge draw for a female audience. I don't think you have to worry about sassy black women taking a major role in the cast. There's too much shit to cover
I didn't like the original Joker but my girlfriend did. It wouldn't surprise me if the original movie had more female fans and thus the sequel is pandering to them more.
Why exactly do you think women connected with the Joker movie more than men?
Idk, why did they?
that's more that will earn in a lifetime, frick actors and frick movies
>WBD
>$20M for a musical
I'm sure it'd go well.
Maybe with that amount of money Joaquin will stay dedicated to losing weight.
>Maybe with that amount of money Joaquin will stay dedicated to losing weight.
Remember when Twitter cancelled him and called him fatphobe or something for saying he felt a lot better skinny than fat after Joker?
They also tried to cancel him for actually kicking one of the actors from the subway scene despite said actors saying it was ok and that's what they wanted for the scene.
Feel like Lady Gaga is such a huge miscast. She might be able to play the role if she was 20 years younger, but a nearly 50 Harlequin? Hope they have a good make up and CGI department.
>nearly 50
she's 35 anon
>35
You've gotta be kidding me.
and we slave for years just to save up a few thousand
quite a joke indeed
The plot for the new Joker movie Joker 2: Eccentric Boogaloo: Two Clowns, A Bank, And A Suicide is going to be about a bank robbery that goes wrong, and ends up as a hostage situation involving multiple criminals. While I don't know anything about movie making, you can't just expect a hostage situation to happen by itself with no help from the criminals involved.
But, there is a problem with that storyline. The Joker, as everyone knows, likes killing people. So, I don't know if they'll go that route. Maybe they'll introduce another villain into the mix, or they'll be an "accident."
In a world where clowns are looked down upon, are we still living in that world, or are they now looked down upon for not being able to terrorize?
That's honestly peanuts.
>Joker 2: Jokerer
Buddy, give your head a shake. Musicals are the highest form of art. Only plebs are trying to diss them by calling them gay. Lowest of the low opinions.
>inb4 they can't make money
Frozen, Mamma Mia, La La Land, Beauty and the Beast exist and many more
Why do musicalgays always, and I mean always, need to insult those who aren't fans of the genre?
>20mil
Can't wait to see the joker doing product placements
first movie made over 1b. 20m for the lead for the sequel is no big deal.
The musical idea sounds like Joaquin went to letterboxd and saw that the art hoes preferred parasite
Isn't it gonna be a musical?
How the frick are they paid so much
The execs make infinitely more. Just remember that almost no blockbuster movie has ever made it's money back. I'm willing to bet same is with Joker. That billion box office and future streaming money gone in the wind somehow.
>Just remember that almost no blockbuster movie has ever made it's money back
not literally. They make money, a shitton of them like the Joker but due to creative accounting, shits like lending money to yourselves and all the weird stuff in the papers it's not properly reported. You can see stuff like
>30m budget
>392m box office
>calculated net profit - 89m
LOL. It's a difference between how much money studios and people make and how much "the movie" makes.
'member when disney lost the capeshit console wars? I 'member
I 'member
RLM has never recovered from this.
>didn't' cap my post of "It's even got a watermark" with 20+ replies
Sad.
>'member
meme spouting homosexual
Isn't that almost half the budget of the original? I assume they didn't want to give him points this time around and this was as cheap as they could get him?
>Isn't that almost half the budget of the original?
that's still not much considering the potential. Even if it's not as successfull as the first movie it will still make hundreds of millions.
Yeah, I'm just hoping this isn't another victim of surprise hit that gets way more money thrown at its sequel, along with way more studio attention/intervention, which turns out to be shit.
As I said $20 million is cheaper than what they would lose out by giving him points because it'll almost certainly make a shitload.
Todd Phillips took no salary for Joker but got something like 13 points. He would've made over a hundred million from that deal. He did the same shit with Hangover. Guy is pretty canny.
Not only is this old news, the first song has already been leaked
>20M to make them 1 billion
>has to 'method act' and go gaunt skeleton for it
right. hes moronic if he doesnt get percent of box office.
Theres literally no way a sequel for this could have been good. They should have just started putting Joaquin in the Batman movies.