What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

This could be interesting.

Last fall, Victor Miller, who wrote the original screenplay for Friday the 13th, won a lawsuit that gave him the domestic rights to the slasher franchise under an old copyright law that grants authors rights to their original work after a period of 35 years. The case is still being appealed, but it was an important ruling within the Hollywood legal community, which was watching very closely, knowing just how much was at stake.

See, until recently, screenwriters rarely used the law to their advantage, and it was mostly employed by musicians who were eager to control their back catalog. But Eriq Gardner, the intrepid legal reporter at the Hollywood Reporter, has looked into legal records and discovered a bunch of high-profile termination notices that were filed within the past year.

According to THR, the most notable titles include The Terminator, Die Hard, Beetlejuice and Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Apparently, Gale Anne Hurd, who co-wrote the original Terminator movie that was released in 1984, has moved to terminate (natch!) a copyright grant made 35 years ago. As of right now, David Ellison‘s Skydance Media controls the Terminator rights, having acquired them from his sister, Megan Ellison, who bought them at auction for $20 million back in 2011. Under this law, Skydance would lose the rights, and they would revert to Hurd and her co-writer, Terminator director James Cameron, even though Cameron has previously said that she “did no actual writing at all,” per Wikipedia. Thus, if Skydance wants to make a sequel to its upcoming Dark Fate, it would have to renegotiate with Cameron and Hurd — otherwise, they could shop the rights to other studios, not to mention deep-pocketed streaming services.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

An hour in and Joker is the most disturbing film I've seen in a long, long time.
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

ticapnews said:
An hour in and Joker is the most disturbing film I've seen in a long, long time.
Click to expand...

I heard it gets way more disturbing after that :eek:

I am seeing it in IMAX tomorrow...cant wait!
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

Seeing it on Sunday. Also cannot wait. Don't recall the last movie I was THIS excited to see.


The Hate U Give:

Solid movie. It will have you cursing and nodding/agreeing, and sometimes with the same points the movie brings up throughout. It REALLY swings that pendulum on the different viewpoints, and it has to, given the nature of the movie. It's really balanced on that, and that is a tough thing to do. It does not shy away from discussion, controversy, after-effects, anything. Off the top of my head, it's an updated Boyz N The Hood, with a slightly different overall take. Highly recommend.
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

There are so many thoughts circling through my head right now. That was deeply disturbing. Perhaps the most disturbing film I have ever watched. The terror is psychological, not the slasher kind we've gotten used to. There are a couple of moments of brutal - and I do mean brutal - violence, but the vast majority of the film is witnessing an already scarred psyche descend into madness.

I have read how this film glorifies that madness and the associated violence. I would disagree. I remember when Pulp Fiction was released there were many who claimed the film glorified drug use. I can't imagine anyone watching the scene where Uma Thurman overdoses and nearly dies and thinking, "That looks cool! I gotta get me some of that!" Likewise, we can clearly see the transformation of this already fragile mind into a homicidal maniac. The issue is not that it makes this look attractive. The issue is that society is already at this point which makes the story that much scarier.

Want to see the Joker in real life? Just turn on the evening news. His handiwork is evident in every mass shooting our nation suffers. The film doesn't glorify this violence - it holds a mirror up to American society and shows us our reality. There WILL be people who go on a murder spree and claim this movie inspired them. Or talking heads will say this was their motivation. Don't buy it for a second. Those matches were already lit. They were going to kill people regardless, but they will use this as an excuse, as a way to become famous by tying their violence to a piece of popular culture.

I'm really struggling to come up with a score for this. I thought it was brilliant. It might be the film of the year. Yet watching it was so uncomfortable I cannot with a good conscience say this is a must-see. It depends on each person. For posterity I'll give it a 9/10 but you'll have to decide if you want to subject yourself to this piece of cinema. I both want to see it again and simultaneously wish I had never seen it in the first place.
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

ticapnews said:
There are so many thoughts circling through my head right now. That was deeply disturbing. Perhaps the most disturbing film I have ever watched. The terror is psychological, not the slasher kind we've gotten used to. There are a couple of moments of brutal - and I do mean brutal - violence, but the vast majority of the film is witnessing an already scarred psyche descend into madness.

I have read how this film glorifies that madness and the associated violence. I would disagree. I remember when Pulp Fiction was released there were many who claimed the film glorified drug use. I can't imagine anyone watching the scene where Uma Thurman overdoses and nearly dies and thinking, "That looks cool! I gotta get me some of that!" Likewise, we can clearly see the transformation of this already fragile mind into a homicidal maniac. The issue is not that it makes this look attractive. The issue is that society is already at this point which makes the story that much scarier.

Want to see the Joker in real life? Just turn on the evening news. His handiwork is evident in every mass shooting our nation suffers. The film doesn't glorify this violence - it holds a mirror up to American society and shows us our reality. There WILL be people who go on a murder spree and claim this movie inspired them. Or talking heads will say this was their motivation. Don't buy it for a second. Those matches were already lit. They were going to kill people regardless, but they will use this as an excuse, as a way to become famous by tying their violence to a piece of popular culture.

I'm really struggling to come up with a score for this. I thought it was brilliant. It might be the film of the year. Yet watching it was so uncomfortable I cannot with a good conscience say this is a must-see. It depends on each person. For posterity I'll give it a 9/10 but you'll have to decide if you want to subject yourself to this piece of cinema. I both want to see it again and simultaneously wish I had never seen it in the first place.
Click to expand...

That's exactly why I'm excited to see this movie. Previous movies, he was already a nutjob. This movie SHOWS how he became that way, and as you say, it's closer to real life than previous Joker versions. Hence, the creepiness, horror, etc.
 
ticapnews said:
There are so many thoughts circling through my head right now. That was deeply disturbing. Perhaps the most disturbing film I have ever watched. The terror is psychological, not the slasher kind we've gotten used to. There are a couple of moments of brutal - and I do mean brutal - violence, but the vast majority of the film is witnessing an already scarred psyche descend into madness.

I have read how this film glorifies that madness and the associated violence. I would disagree. I remember when Pulp Fiction was released there were many who claimed the film glorified drug use. I can't imagine anyone watching the scene where Uma Thurman overdoses and nearly dies and thinking, "That looks cool! I gotta get me some of that!" Likewise, we can clearly see the transformation of this already fragile mind into a homicidal maniac. The issue is not that it makes this look attractive. The issue is that society is already at this point which makes the story that much scarier.

Want to see the Joker in real life? Just turn on the evening news. His handiwork is evident in every mass shooting our nation suffers. The film doesn't glorify this violence - it holds a mirror up to American society and shows us our reality. There WILL be people who go on a murder spree and claim this movie inspired them. Or talking heads will say this was their motivation. Don't buy it for a second. Those matches were already lit. They were going to kill people regardless, but they will use this as an excuse, as a way to become famous by tying their violence to a piece of popular culture.

I'm really struggling to come up with a score for this. I thought it was brilliant. It might be the film of the year. Yet watching it was so uncomfortable I cannot with a good conscience say this is a must-see. It depends on each person. For posterity I'll give it a 9/10 but you'll have to decide if you want to subject yourself to this piece of cinema. I both want to see it again and simultaneously wish I had never seen it in the first place.
Click to expand...

Boom! This is why I want to see it. I hope it sparks conversations about many of our problems and i’m Also looking forward to Phoenix’s Interpretation of Joker.

Taxi Driveresque is what some are saying. That’s incredible company.

Can’t Wait for tomorrow!
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

Yes, they are saying Taxi Driver, and that makes total sense. Now, to see how it's done with this particular character...hoo boy.
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

ticapnews said:
There are so many thoughts circling through my head right now. That was deeply disturbing. Perhaps the most disturbing film I have ever watched. The terror is psychological, not the slasher kind we've gotten used to. There are a couple of moments of brutal - and I do mean brutal - violence, but the vast majority of the film is witnessing an already scarred psyche descend into madness.

I have read how this film glorifies that madness and the associated violence. I would disagree. I remember when Pulp Fiction was released there were many who claimed the film glorified drug use. I can't imagine anyone watching the scene where Uma Thurman overdoses and nearly dies and thinking, "That looks cool! I gotta get me some of that!" Likewise, we can clearly see the transformation of this already fragile mind into a homicidal maniac. The issue is not that it makes this look attractive. The issue is that society is already at this point which makes the story that much scarier.

Want to see the Joker in real life? Just turn on the evening news. His handiwork is evident in every mass shooting our nation suffers. The film doesn't glorify this violence - it holds a mirror up to American society and shows us our reality. There WILL be people who go on a murder spree and claim this movie inspired them. Or talking heads will say this was their motivation. Don't buy it for a second. Those matches were already lit. They were going to kill people regardless, but they will use this as an excuse, as a way to become famous by tying their violence to a piece of popular culture.

I'm really struggling to come up with a score for this. I thought it was brilliant. It might be the film of the year. Yet watching it was so uncomfortable I cannot with a good conscience say this is a must-see. It depends on each person. For posterity I'll give it a 9/10 but you'll have to decide if you want to subject yourself to this piece of cinema. I both want to see it again and simultaneously wish I had never seen it in the first place.
Click to expand...

Your thoughts seem to be what a lot of people feel, including critics who talk about how great it is in one breathe and then in the next pan it for almost the same reasons they loved it. It seems the film is not a binary "yes or no" on the likeability matrix.

Thanks for the write up :)
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

Handyman said:
Your thoughts seem to be what a lot of people feel, including critics who talk about how great it is in one breathe and then in the next pan it for almost the same reasons they loved it. It seems the film is not a binary "yes or no" on the likeability matrix.

Thanks for the write up :)
Click to expand...
I think we get what he is saying. I mean, "Kids" and "Requiem For A Dream (director's cut)" are AWESOME movies that I never want to see again. Ever. EVER. Quality, but man, they are disturbing.

Other movies might include American Psycho, Schindler's List, even Saving Private Ryan. Disturbing in different forms, but....
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

ticapnews said:
There are so many thoughts circling through my head right now. That was deeply disturbing. Perhaps the most disturbing film I have ever watched. The terror is psychological, not the slasher kind we've gotten used to. There are a couple of moments of brutal - and I do mean brutal - violence, but the vast majority of the film is witnessing an already scarred psyche descend into madness.

I have read how this film glorifies that madness and the associated violence. I would disagree. I remember when Pulp Fiction was released there were many who claimed the film glorified drug use. I can't imagine anyone watching the scene where Uma Thurman overdoses and nearly dies and thinking, "That looks cool! I gotta get me some of that!" Likewise, we can clearly see the transformation of this already fragile mind into a homicidal maniac. The issue is not that it makes this look attractive. The issue is that society is already at this point which makes the story that much scarier.

Want to see the Joker in real life? Just turn on the evening news. His handiwork is evident in every mass shooting our nation suffers. The film doesn't glorify this violence - it holds a mirror up to American society and shows us our reality. There WILL be people who go on a murder spree and claim this movie inspired them. Or talking heads will say this was their motivation. Don't buy it for a second. Those matches were already lit. They were going to kill people regardless, but they will use this as an excuse, as a way to become famous by tying their violence to a piece of popular culture.

I'm really struggling to come up with a score for this. I thought it was brilliant. It might be the film of the year. Yet watching it was so uncomfortable I cannot with a good conscience say this is a must-see. It depends on each person. For posterity I'll give it a 9/10 but you'll have to decide if you want to subject yourself to this piece of cinema. I both want to see it again and simultaneously wish I had never seen it in the first place.
Click to expand...

Dang...
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

Handyman said:
Your thoughts seem to be what a lot of people feel, including critics who talk about how great it is in one breathe and then in the next pan it for almost the same reasons they loved it. It seems the film is not a binary "yes or no" on the likeability matrix.

Thanks for the write up :)
Click to expand...

Likability is going to be a major point of contention. As far as the story goes - ****ing brilliant. Todd Phillips crafted a masterpiece. The Academy can save everyone the trouble and just ship the Oscar to Joaquin Phoenix now. His performance is phenomenal. It may be heresy, but it even outshines Heath Ledger's Oscar winning performance. But likable? No. This film was not likable in the least. It is going to be divisive, which I think was the whole point. Maybe, just maybe, we use this to jump start a national conversation about the mentally unstable, about income inequality, about that thin veneer that separates our polite society from our baser animal instincts. But I have little faith this will spark a serious discussion. People will shape this to fit their own agenda and it will become just so much noise to clutter up our daily lives.
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

One of my friends in another forum asked if I would recommend skipping the movie if you're "not in the right frame of mind." YES! If you've had a bad day (or week, or month, or life) then go see something that'll make you laugh. This isn't it. I've been down a dark path and if I had seen this movie then...I don't even want to think about it.
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

ticapnews said:
Likability is going to be a major point of contention. As far as the story goes - ****ing brilliant. Todd Phillips crafted a masterpiece. The Academy can save everyone the trouble and just ship the Oscar to Joaquin Phoenix now. His performance is phenomenal. It may be heresy, but it even outshines Heath Ledger's Oscar winning performance. But likable? No. This film was not likable in the least. It is going to be divisive, which I think was the whole point. Maybe, just maybe, we use this to jump start a national conversation about the mentally unstable, about income inequality, about that thin veneer that separates our polite society from our baser animal instincts. But I have little faith this will spark a serious discussion. People will shape this to fit their own agenda and it will become just so much noise to clutter up our daily lives.
Click to expand...

Why don’t you keep your Hollywood mouths shut and stick to movies?




(I deeply hope you’re right)
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

dxmnkd316 said:
Why don’t you keep your Hollywood mouths shut and stick to movies?
Click to expand...

Precisely.

ETA: Don't get me wrong. This can easily be reframed by the Left as well as the Right. It shouldn't be. It could be much more than that. But...
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

I read a few RT-ized review summaries and it’s hard to make out what to think. I trust your reviews pretty much unequivocally. So I’m going to see this (and I appreciate your warnings).

But the RT summaries have all the “smart” critics (Slate, Atlantic, NYT, NPR, WaPo, New Yorker, AP, etc.) all saying the same thing: this movie is nothing; it’s garbage; it’s “faux social commentary”. Which both makes me wonder whether so many top reviewers could be wrong or if they just somehow don’t get it. Usually they don’t all struggle to not get it, not all of them at once.

Again, I actually believe comic book character movies are allowed to make social commentary, so that probably takes out at least Slate and the New Yorker. The NYT can’t get anything right these days, so nix them. AP probably has an issue with violence in general, and it’s essentially mcmedia for the masses, so they get a pass. That leaves WaPo, NPR, and the Atlantic. Why would all of them hate the movie so much? Atlantic and NPR at least think about the stores they publish and don’t really have oxen to gore.

How on earth could all the smarties hate this movie so much?
 
Re: Movies 51 - Rise of the Frozen Joker: Chapter II: Dark Fate

dxmnkd316 said:
I read a few RT-ized review summaries and it’s hard to make out what to think. I trust your reviews pretty much unequivocally. So I’m going to see this (and I appreciate your warnings).

But the RT summaries have all the “smart” critics (Slate, Atlantic, NYT, NPR, WaPo, New Yorker, AP, etc.) all saying the same thing: this movie is nothing; it’s garbage; it’s “faux social commentary”. Which both makes me wonder whether so many top reviewers could be wrong or if they just somehow don’t get it. Usually they don’t all struggle to not get it, not all of them at once.

Again, I actually believe comic book character movies are allowed to make social commentary, so that probably takes out at least Slate and the New Yorker. The NYT can’t get anything right these days, so nix them. AP probably has an issue with violence in general, and it’s essentially mcmedia for the masses, so they get a pass. That leaves WaPo, NPR, and the Atlantic. Why would all of them hate the movie so much? Atlantic and NPR at least think about the stores they publish and don’t really have oxen to gore.

How on earth could all the smarties hate this movie so much?
Click to expand...

This is a very easy film to not like. I don't like it. I see it as a diamond fitted into the world's ugliest, most gauche, ring. It's much easier to dismiss this as a bad movie than to face the reality that this was not only a quality film, but a spot on look at society today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top