Joker (2019)

[Silver Raven]

6 hours ago, Robert Lynch said:

I don't think Joaquin Phoenix is much of a dancer, anyway.

That isn't Joaquin Phoenix dancing, it's Arthur Fleck.

[Featherhat]

But Arkham wouldn't have him dancing around going "into the light" at the end, not to mention it's the cleanest it's ever looked, including in it's appearance in the middle of the film. Plus the bloody footprints. I do think it over relied on the "unreliable narrator" trope, even though it was mostly easy to tell what wasn't real like his "relationship" or suddenly being awesome at the stand up club. 

[Spartan Girl]

WTF is up with the dancing anyway?! I don't remember any version of the Joker doing that much dancing. 

From all the clips and spoilers I've seen, I'll be generous and say that maybe Joaquin does a good job playing a mentally ill man named Arthur. But that doesn't make him a good Joker by default. In fact, this guy doesn't seem to have anything in common with any of the Jokers, except a creepy laugh and killing people. The only time he even acts remotely like Joker is when Murray pointed out all the damage he's done and he giggled "I knooooow!" 

Look, I'm not disparaging anyone that liked the movie. That's good for you, sincerely. But I just can't get behind it. Maybe if there was one final twist that Arthur wasn't really Joker at all, just a obsessed guy that tried to be a copycat and invented the whole backstory in his mind while the REAL Joker was out on the loose in Gotham...

[scarynikki12]

I thought it was excellent. All of the actors were great, the direction was great (though the director can shut his damn mouth now), and the music and editing blew me away. I completely understand the accolades it's received as well as the ones to come.

Regarding the question of what was actually real, that was my favorite part. Other than Gotham, which benefited from casting Cameron to play Jerome and Jeremiah and WB not allowing them to actually use the name, I never ever want a backstory for Joker so the fact that we have no idea if anything we saw actually happened really worked for me (the uncertainty is also one of the few things I do like about Killing Joke). For all we know everything happened and he ended up in Arkham like we saw. Or maybe only certain things happened and we're to guess which were real. Or maybe some of the events were real but Arthur's been locked up the entire time and mentally inserted himself into Gotham's fall into chaos. Or maybe none of it was real and in fact was all one long joke that he thought up in that counseling session and the punchline is that he kills his therapist and escapes Arkham to make his joke a reality. We don't know and that really works for me.

When the trailer first came out I said that it looked to be channeling Taxi Driver in the best way and I stand by that now that I've seen it. If anyone's on the fence about seeing it and is also a huge fan of Scorsese, and Taxi Driver in particular, then I recommend seeing it.

[Racj82]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

WTF is up with the dancing anyway?! I don't remember any version of the Joker doing that much dancing. 

From all the clips and spoilers I've seen, I'll be generous and say that maybe Joaquin does a good job playing a mentally ill man named Arthur. But that doesn't make him a good Joker by default. In fact, this guy doesn't seem to have anything in common with any of the Jokers, except a creepy laugh and killing people. The only time he even acts remotely like Joker is when Murray pointed out all the damage he's done and he giggled "I knooooow!" 

Look, I'm not disparaging anyone that liked the movie. That's good for you, sincerely. But I just can't get behind it. Maybe if there was one final twist that Arthur wasn't really Joker at all, just a obsessed guy that tried to be a copycat and invented the whole backstory in his mind while the REAL Joker was out on the loose in Gotham...

So you haven't actually watched it?

I don't have any hang ups about what Joker should be. The most important thing about Joker to me is that he's an agent of chaos. That is nailed in the movie. 

The third act of the movie is pure joker. 

Even the dancing works for me. It shows his confidence grow throughout the movie so by the time he's dancing on steps in his own world near the end, he's just completely I'm his element now. This is all so much fun for him. The joke he gets to tell on the talk show is pure Joker.

[revbfc]

I stick by the theory that Arthur is not “THE” Joker, but “A” Joker.  There will be another after him.

[Danny Franks]

Wait... this movie features a song by convicted (and still imprisoned) paedophile, Gary Glitter? What the fuck?

I don't care whether Glitter makes money off it - hard to spend when you're locked up for raping children - but the poor judgement to use one of his songs is staggering.

Edited October 7, 2019 by Danny Franks

[Zuleikha]

Not all of us subscribe to the idea that a person's horrible crimes make their artwork off limits, especially given how many artists are guilty of horrible crimes. I don't love that Glitter may earn money, but this is something that the majority of the audience wouldn't know about or have any emotional connection to.

And I suspect it wouldn't be an issue if the Joker hadn't been designated a call out target weeks before its release. Glee used Gary Glitter's "Do You Want To Touch Me"--which is WAY more inappropriate--and it was a blip in the media.

[Racj82]

12 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

Wait... this movie features a song by convicted (and still imprisoned) paedophile, Gary Glitter? What the fuck?

I don't care whether Glitter makes money off it - hard to spend when you're locked up for raping children - but the poor judgement to use one of his songs is staggering.

Good luck trying to remove all past and future use of music people that have done criminal and down right heinous from entertainment.

And that song is literally a jock jam. It plays at sporting events all over the world. Which I think it was the point of it's use. Joker getting hyped up and ready for his big moment as if it was a big game. 

[Bill1978]

34 minutes ago, Racj82 said:

Good luck trying to remove all past and future use of music people that have done criminal and down right heinous from entertainment.

I agree. Radio is still happy to play Chris Brown. Even his new stuff.

[Danny Franks]

4 hours ago, Racj82 said:

Good luck trying to remove all past and future use of music people that have done criminal and down right heinous from entertainment.

And that song is literally a jock jam. It plays at sporting events all over the world. Which I think it was the point of it's use. Joker getting hyped up and ready for his big moment as if it was a big game. 

Can't remove past uses? I agree. Choosing to use it once the person responsible has been found guilty of disgusting crimes? I don't think so.

But hey, if it hypes up high school kids, I'm sure it's fine. Not at all a disturbing juxtaposition.

[clack]

6 hours ago, Racj82 said:

Good luck trying to remove all past and future use of music people that have done criminal and down right heinous from entertainment.

And that song is literally a jock jam. It plays at sporting events all over the world. Which I think it was the point of it's use. Joker getting hyped up and ready for his big moment as if it was a big game. 

Chuck Berry, anyone?

[rmontro]

On 10/6/2019 at 6:10 PM, Spartan Girl said:

From all the clips and spoilers I've seen, I'll be generous and say that maybe Joaquin does a good job playing a mentally ill man named Arthur. But that doesn't make him a good Joker by default. In fact, this guy doesn't seem to have anything in common with any of the Jokers, except a creepy laugh and killing people. 

The Joker, like Batman et al, is open to different interpretations.  This is just one of many.  Nicholson's was another, Ledger another, etc.  Think of it as an alternate reality/dimension.  If you don't like this one, there will be another one along any time now.

I haven't seen this movie yet, but it looks good IMO.  Like you, I don't think it looks much like a supervillain movie.  It looks more like a portrait of a disturbed individual, and I'm cool with that.

[Racj82]

3 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

Can't remove past uses? I agree. Choosing to use it once the person responsible has been found guilty of disgusting crimes? I don't think so.

But hey, if it hypes up high school kids, I'm sure it's fine. Not at all a disturbing juxtaposition.

Not saying it's right. Just that it won't happen. Especially once you go further and further back. Some sketchy sketchy stuff used to happen. 

There are so many people to erase. 

[Racj82]

53 minutes ago, rmontro said:

The Joker, like Batman et al, is open to different interpretations.  This is just one of many.  Nicholson's was another, Ledger another, etc.  Think of it as an alternate reality/dimension.  If you don't like this one, there will be another one along any time now.

I haven't seen this movie yet, but it looks good IMO.  Like you, I don't think it looks much like a supervillain movie.  It looks more like a portrait of a disturbed individual, and I'm cool with that.

It's not a supervillain movie. No human villain starts out as a supervillain. There is a rise. There is a origin. That's what this is about.

Also, of all people to complain about someone not being my character or the real version of a character, why would joker be that person for you? No one knows his real origin. He is the ultimate unreliable narrator for his own story. That's the point. This in itself isn't his definitive origin. It's just one origin. 

[Silver Raven]

I just saw something about people walking out of the theater because of the "excessive violence".  Is this really happening?  I haven't heard of it till this unsubstantiated post.

[galaxygirl76]

On 9/26/2019 at 4:30 PM, supposebly said:

Another reason maybe not to go see this.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/us-army-warns-of-possible-incel-shootings-at-joker-film-screenings/ar-AAHTiTR?li=AAggFp4

So I'm at the theater right now waiting for Abominable to start and there are two cops standing at the entrance of the area where the theaters are. That's a new one for me and unnerved me a little. 

[FilmTVGeek80]

On 10/4/2019 at 3:41 PM, Sakura12 said:

I'm going to guess that Joaquin Phoenix plays the Joker as depressed, lonely and/or drunk with a weird quirk and anger management issues.  That is basically the character he plays in all his movies. He is also one of those actors that likes to use the method acting excuse to be an a-hole to his co-workers. So no thanks. He's the reason I have no interests in this movie. 

It's okay not to like JP and not to find him talented, but to say that's basically the only character he plays, I think, is a gross exaggeration. Yes, a lot of the characters he plays have some of those traits and issues, but that doesn't make them the same character or that he played them the same way. Arthur clearly has anger issues and is depressed. So was the character Johnny Cash in Walk the Line. Despite that, those characters could not be more different. His characters in The Village, Signs, Quills, Gladiator, etc. do not fit that mold you described and are all different in a lot of ways.

On 10/6/2019 at 7:46 PM, Racj82 said:

So you haven't actually watched it?

I don't have any hang ups about what Joker should be. The most important thing about Joker to me is that he's an agent of chaos. That is nailed in the movie. 

The third act of the movie is pure joker. 

Even the dancing works for me. It shows his confidence grow throughout the movie so by the time he's dancing on steps in his own world near the end, he's just completely I'm his element now. This is all so much fun for him. The joke he gets to tell on the talk show is pure Joker.

Agree with all of this. His transformation at the end is truly brilliant.

On 10/7/2019 at 1:46 PM, Danny Franks said:

Wait... this movie features a song by convicted (and still imprisoned) paedophile, Gary Glitter? What the fuck?

I don't care whether Glitter makes money off it - hard to spend when you're locked up for raping children - but the poor judgement to use one of his songs is staggering.

I remember when I heard the song, it did give me slight pause, but I think it's perfect for that moment even taking account the singer's history. An amoral creep dancing to the song by an amoral creep seems fitting. What Glitter did was horrific but we can't wipe the song from existence. Joker is not the first, or last, piece of entertainment that will ever use that particular song or other songs by other horrible people.

[QueerGirrl]

3 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

I just saw something about people walking out of the theater because of the "excessive violence".  Is this really happening?  I haven't heard of it till this unsubstantiated post.

There were two instances where the violence was graphic and slightly shocking but honestly I've seen worse violence in trailers. 

I didn't think Arthur killing the three guys was over the top but the time it took him to kill his former coworker and the suddenness of how he shot Marty caught me off guard. 

Maybe it's the realistic ways these deaths occurred is what's offputting.   It's not cartoon violence, which can be so over the top that it doesn't feel possible in the real world. 

[Anela]

3 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

I just saw something about people walking out of the theater because of the "excessive violence".  Is this really happening?  I haven't heard of it till this unsubstantiated post.

A friend posted an article like that, and in response, there were several comments about "snowflakes ruining everything". Another person just commented on the same link, and said that the violence was at an uncomfortable level for him (as someone who watches horror movies all the time, and thought he wouldn't be bothered). So it's possible.

[FilmTVGeek80]

10 minutes ago, QueerGirrl said:

There were two instances where the violence was graphic and slightly shocking but honestly I've seen worse violence in trailers. 

I didn't think Arthur killing the three guys was over the top but the time it took him to kill his former coworker and the suddenness of how he shot Marty caught me off guard. 

I agree. At first, I wasn't aware about how violent this movie was supposed to be but then everyone started going on about the shocking and brutal violence and I started getting antsy about seeing the movie and wondering just how violent it was going to be, but it honestly was not nearly as bad as the hoopla made it sound. There were only three truly graphic violent moments in the movie, and only two of them I found really brutal. The killing of Marty was graphic but it happened so quick. The killing of the first two Wall Street guys is quick but the way he hunts the third one down is vicious (though not graphic.) But it's the killing of the co-worker that's really hard to stomach. Though funnily enough, directly following that brutality is the funniest moment in the movie (it got the biggest laughs in the theater I was at.)

[slf]

I was bored with it. The violence was overhyped; I've seen far worse on tv. Deconstructing the Joker in a way isn't a bad idea and I don't have a problem with this new approach to filming superhero movies where they're filmed more like character dramas than shiny big blockbusters. I just wish it wasn't producing such overwrought and "intentionally hammy" acting. Phoenix must be desperate for an Oscar. I wish I'd gone to see Judy instead.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

I just saw something about people walking out of the theater because of the "excessive violence".  Is this really happening?  I haven't heard of it till this unsubstantiated post.

I can’t find any legitimate news sources saying that. There have been a few instances of audiences leaving because of the behavior of a movie goer. 

[kiddo82]

Honestly, I didn't think the violence was anything we haven't already seen elsewhere.  And to be frank, there was nothing about the murder scenes that really stuck with me after I left the theater.  It was graphic for sure, but not necessarily anything that really upset me.  (Outside of the normal, you know, watching people get murdered and stuff.  But some movies just affect you more than others.)  I think all the reviews had me guarded so nothing really shook me.  Even the riot and his cult like followers, which I was expecting to upset me more than anything, didn't quite get under my skin.

I for one can't wait for the gritty, raw, origin story of the Penguin.

[BitterApple]

On 10/8/2019 at 1:39 PM, Silver Raven said:

I just saw something about people walking out of the theater because of the "excessive violence".  Is this really happening?  I haven't heard of it till this unsubstantiated post.

I saw it last night. The theater was packed and everyone was glued to the screen. It's definitely violent, but not anything traumatizing or worse than the average video game or war movie.

With that said, I thought it was an absolute masterpiece. The grimy, gritty backdrop of Gotham City underscored the despair of Arthur's life. Phoenix gave an incredible performance, DeNeiro was solid and the soundtrack kept me on the edge of my seat. I'd give it a 9/10.

[kiddo82]

Anyone else get a Network vibe while watching?  Taxi Driver for sure but the pull out shot of all the different TV broadcasts covering Marty's murder was straight out of Network.  Also you have Arthur, who is clearly emotionally unstable, as a mad prophet character (he's mad as hell and he's not going to take this anymore) and the folk hero/sensationalization of it all.  And Marty getting murdered on live TV?  Diana Christensen was somewhere needing to be hosed down after that.

Edited October 13, 2019 by kiddo82

[shanndee]

On 10/8/2019 at 9:35 PM, slf said:

I was bored with it. The violence was overhyped; I've seen far worse on tv. Deconstructing the Joker in a way isn't a bad idea and I don't have a problem with this new approach to filming superhero movies where they're filmed more like character dramas than shiny big blockbusters. I just wish it wasn't producing such overwrought and "intentionally hammy" acting. Phoenix must be desperate for an Oscar. I wish I'd gone to see Judy instead.

Yes, I was bored too. I liked the *idea* of this movie much better than its execution. It was trying far too hard to be Taxi Driver or Network, and to me it failed. 

It was an ok movie, but it was over hyped (in my opinion).

[Blissfool]

On 10/4/2019 at 11:19 PM, ApathyMonger said:

I liked the De Niro bits, but I didn’t think the clips of Arthur’s stand-up were bad enough to go viral in the way the movie shows. He’s awkward and bad, but the clips shown on TV are so short that you can’t really tell how bad and awkward the full set was.

I agree. Im sure bad comedic acts are a dime a dozen. Who cares that one flopped on open mic nite! Besides, there were no cellphones so who filmed those clips anyway? And there was no internet so it would have been very difficult to go viral. I think his appearance on the Murray Show was in his imagination. 

[AimingforYoko]

2 hours ago, Blissfool said:

Who cares that one flopped on open mic nite!

It wasn't that he was a flop, it was that he appeared to be having a mental breakdown while he was flopping. If you don't understand that it's a neurological condition, the laugh just comes off as crazy.

[BooBear]

On 10/10/2019 at 8:44 PM, BitterApple said:

With that said, I thought it was an absolute masterpiece. The grimy, gritty backdrop of Gotham City underscored the despair of Arthur's life. Phoenix gave an incredible performance, DeNeiro was solid and the soundtrack kept me on the edge of my seat. I'd give it a 9/10.

I thought it was amazing too. When "the end" came up I was like, omg, it's over? I was glued to the screen for the entire thing that never happens. 

I was totally spoiled but one part I had managed not to know about.. gut punch.

Arthur's speech on the show was perfect and sadly a scathing indictment of modern media.  I really got me when he was talking about how everyone is terrible and there is no way to get away from people these days - it is enough to make one crazy.  Yup.

I thought it was possible it was all in Arthur's head as in the first scene with the therapist the wall clock says the same time as it does in the flash to Arkham.

My only issue with the movie is that this is a great movie but, it isn't Joker. Not in the DC sense. So... that is a bit disappointing to me.  But I suppose it wouldn't be doing as good as it is if it was named "Arthur Fleck". 

[kiddo82]

Nailed it.

[WritinMan]

6 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

Nailed it.

I would watch the hell out of this movie.

[MarkHB]

Quote

He was always such a happy boy....

[Lantern7]

I watched. I liked. I will say that any group that watches it should head to the nearest diner and talk about it for at least ninety minutes, because I feel that was a lot of stuff to go through.

Sometimes, I think that I should wean myself away from blockbusters. Well, ironically, Joker might be a good start. It was an uncomfortable two hours, but you can go in clean. Not too many references to canon (though the bit with a diminutive sex therapist -- a Dr. Ruth expy --  made me chuckle, since that happened in The Dark Knight Returns). Phoenix was good . . . since I'm not a cinephile, I can't say if he deserves consideration for awards . . . but holy shit, he went for it. Gaunt, spooky, scary motherfucker. I do figure that him and Heath Ledger's performances of the same character (or character with the same basic title) is an apple/oranges thing.

Art Fleck = A. Fleck = Affleck = Ben Affleck? Or am I free-associating too hard?

And I know this was an Eighties-looking set-piece . . . but who the hell just grabs a tape from a local comedy club, runs it on air, and then uses it for cheap laughs? For that alone, Murray deserved a bullet to the head.

[One4Sorrow2TooBad]

[MarkHB]

On 10/14/2019 at 5:19 PM, Lantern7 said:

Art Fleck = A. Fleck = Affleck = Ben Affleck? Or am I free-associating too hard?

If you are, you're about the 1000th person to do so.

[Lantern7]

8 hours ago, MarkHB said:

If you are, you're about the 1000th person to do so.

Aw, damn. I thought I was  unique. I don't really scrutinize over stuff before watching a movie. On a scale of 0-10, with zero being the Frank Costanza approach, I'm usually about a 4.

[benteen]

I saw it and I enjoyed it.  There were plenty of flaws and this movie wasn't any ground-breaking or revealing.  The whole Bruce Wayne/Thomas Wayne stuff felt tacked on.  But I'm glad I saw it.

They did a great job with capturing the grit of 1970s/1980d New York City, er...Gotham City.  A strong performance by Phoenix (I agree though, WTF was up with all the dancing) and more humor than I expected.

Edited October 17, 2019 by benteen

[Scarlett45]

I thought the movie had some aspects that were executed really well- the set decoration, the camera work (the shots above and below Arthur were really effective), the use of stairwells etc. Joaquin- I’m not a fan of his per se, but I loved him last in “Her” and that a completely different type of role/movie than this, his performance was captivating. I wouldn’t say I loved the movie as it’s not one I want to see again but I think as a cinematic exercise the creators should be praised. 
 

Until I came here I never thought that half of the movie could’ve just been a delusion of his. I did assume that his relationship with the neighbor was imagined, because I don’t know many single mothers that would start kissing a random stranger and invite him IN with their child in the apartment. Also a woman isn’t likely to think it was charming you were following her. Again, especially as a single mom living in a rough neighborhood. 

[MarkHB]

DC Daily had an interview with Joker cinematographer Lawrence Sher where he talked about things like the Joker being the shadow within Arthur, so that as he starts becoming the Joker the shadows in the film are more prominent.  It's not on Youtube but it may be Google-able.

Also, Joker has passed Deadpool and is now the highest-grossing R-rated film of all time...

[CletusMusashi]

[Sarah 103]

On 10/10/2019 at 10:14 PM, kiddo82 said:

Anyone else get a Network vibe while watching?  Taxi Driver for sure but the pull out shot of all the different TV broadcasts covering Marty's murder was straight out of Network.  Also you have Arthur, who is clearly emotionally unstable, as a mad prophet character (he's mad as hell and he's not going to take this anymore) and the folk hero/sensationalization of it all.  And Marty getting murdered on live TV?  Diana Christensen was somewhere needing to be hosed down after that.

On 10/12/2019 at 9:24 PM, shanndee said:

Yes, I was bored too. I liked the *idea* of this movie much better than its execution. It was trying far too hard to be Taxi Driver or Network, and to me it failed. 

It was an ok movie, but it was over hyped (in my opinion).

I agree with all of this. Also, I would add in a dash of Bonnie and Clyde due to the economics of it. The idea of the lower class going against the upper class and becoming heroes for it struck me as vintage 1967 Bonnie and Clyde, only the 1967 version did it better. Part of my problem with the movie was that is was covering the same territory as Taxi Driver and Network, but the earlier movies did it better. This just felt like a third rate warmed over version. (I do like the remakes of True Grit and Ocean's 11 better than the originals. I also think 1997 Titanic is far better than A Night to Remember, so it isn't that I always think older movies are better than more recent movies)

As for people leaving because they thought it was too violent, that should be up to the individual. If someone wants to leave because they can't handle the movie, that should be up to their own personal judgement. To me, it only becomes a problem if the person says because it was too intense for them, the movie needs to be pulled and no one should be allowed to see it. 

[Shannon L.]

I finally saw this and "meh"?  I don't know.  It was technically beautiful film.  It's not surprising that Joaquin would give a strong performance, and, while I liked it (the last part, from the time he dyed his hair and put on the make up till the end being my favorite part of the movie), a lot of it, imo, was a little over the top.  But, seriously, could they pile on anymore problems for this man?  He had a neurological condition, his mother had mental problems and ended up in an institution, he was adopted, but was never told, his mother allowed her boyfriends to abuse him horribly, he was beat up more than once.......seriously?  It was just way too much for me from the beginning.  I also found it a bit boring.

[Lantern7]

How It Should Have Ended covers Joker.

And if you need a little more entertainment, Epic Rap Battles of History pits Joker (more canon-friendly) against Pennywise.

[Ambrosefolly]

On 11/24/2019 at 9:44 AM, Shannon L. said:

I finally saw this and "meh"?  I don't know.  It was technically beautiful film.  It's not surprising that Joaquin would give a strong performance, and, while I liked it (the last part, from the time he dyed his hair and put on the make up till the end being my favorite part of the movie), a lot of it, imo, was a little over the top.  But, seriously, could they pile on anymore problems for this man?  He had a neurological condition, his mother had mental problems and ended up in an institution, he was adopted, but was never told, his mother allowed her boyfriends to abuse him horribly, he was beat up more than once.......seriously?  It was just way too much for me from the beginning.  I also found it a bit boring.

White men love this movie because they think they are fucking oppressed so they think they are Arthur Fleck. Now I am more sympathetic to them than most (amazing considering I am Asian Indian), but come on. One thing I hated was the change of Thomas Wayne from vibrant,idealistic, kind hearted young (or at least youngish doctor) to Trump-like senior citizen chasing politics that

Spoiler

 may or may not be the father of Arthur Fleck.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Critics' Choice Award nominations:

Best Picture

Best Actor – Joaquin Phoenix

Best Adapted Screenplay – Todd Phillips, Scott Silver

Best Cinematography – Lawrence Sher

Best Production Design – Mark Friedberg, Kris Moran

Best Hair and Makeup

Best Score – Hildur Guðnadóttir

[ElectricBoogaloo]

SAG Award nominations:

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role - Joaquin Phoenix

Outstanding Action Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Motion Picture

Edited December 12, 2019 by ElectricBoogaloo

[RealHousewife]

I hope JP wins the Oscar for best actor. He was incredible. 

[MarkHB]

The shooting script for Joker has been legit released as part of the awards campaign. Link to the PDF is at the bottom of the linked article.

[MarkHB]

Another article...

Quote

The idea for the film — a $60 million character study focusing on an isolated and bullied professional clown who descends into madness — came to Phillips at the premiere of his 2016 movie, War Dogs, which seemed destined for a lackluster opening. While the director was pacing outside the screening, he looked up and saw a billboard for a comic book movie and surmised that maybe the only way to make the sort of gritty Martin Scorsese-like drama he wanted to was by disguising it as a superhero story

Welcome to Hollywood 2020....