- Last post
- 46 Responses
Can you believe the money this thing made? $1 Billion + and they spent $67 Million on it.
I don't know if any of you guys have this kind of info, but I've always been fascinated to know how salaries and payments break down across every person involved in a movie. I mean, subtract $67 million from $1 Billion... Someone(s) got pAID.
- And, given it's Hollywood with its infamous accounting, you can bet your bottom dollar lots of people DIDN'T get properly compensated, including investors.Nairn
- Everyone I know that works in film gets paid very well. At least on the production sideGnash
- But like, in the hiearchy of the production side, where's the cutoff between the people making serious $ in the long run, vs those that don't?mg33
- I mean, there's no gaffer getting a windfall from this...mg33
- All the people like us don't get shit and get all the stress. Look at the behind the scenes of every movie...tank02
- ... you see the set designers, cameramen, graphics dept. tired as hell and director are mostly laughin: yeah we gave them 36 hours to come up somehitng new...tank02
- Kubrick in this sense was a monstertank02
- thing about film is that there's so much risk involved, that the people who put the most on the line reap the mostmonospaced
- Nairn is 100% correct. Hollywood accounting is a v.different beast to other industries.fadein11
- At least here, production crew does well. They’re not swimming in Malbec but everyone I know owns a home, cottage, toys like boats, and they holiday a lot.Gnash
- Even the gaffersGnash
- (Just going by people I know, this may not be universal)Gnash
- Lots lose big $$ or just break even. i think there are losses on a load, and very few hit paydirt. It's just those at the edges of the bellcurve we hear about.hardhat
- Producer friend of mine recently told me that boom operators and gaffers for TVCs here can earn my net monthly salary on a two day shoot. Ugh.Continuity
- ^ exactly. A friend of mine is a gaffer at TVO and he makes more than the shows producersGnash
- Still not interested in watching it.Maaku
- TV and cinema will destroy your soul. Very demanding jobs.Bennn
- Coincidently, was just browsing a high school friend's IG page. He's a camera operator, worked for Paramount for a while, has worked on shows likemg33
- Machete, Preacher, a new series called Briarpatch, a lot more. Camera and steadicam stuff.mg33
- The Production company/ studio got paid, that's who.NBQ00
- It's not trickling down to anyone except the prodco/ studio and excecsNBQ00
- @gnash, yep those on salary no doubt do okay. I'm talking about those higher up the chain, like 1st time directors, writers etc. who often foregofadein11
- decent payment for 'points' on box office. Miramax were the masters of this. So many indie directors/writers/ed... etc stitched up this way.fadein11
- Amazed more studios aren't fully investigated. They often move profits from one picture to cover costs of flops. So the huge hit didn't actually make any money.fadein11
- It's crazy.fadein11
Based on the reviews I was expecting something really shocking and controversial.
It really wasn't that... instead it was a solidly done film that tapped into the idea of rooting for the anti hero, which to be fair was pretty much the only way for a story like this to carry your interest. There's something inherently appealing about that but it's also a pretty common theme of films and TV of this era.
The biggest head scratcher was that Joker appeared to at least 45 while Bruce Wayne was about 10...you would have to imagine that once he finally becomes Batman Joker will not present much of a threat as a guy in his 60s or 70s.
- Some people reckon his character created the idea of the Joker, but wasn't the actual Joker from the comics.PhanLo
- Yeah I don't think it was much more complicated than that they just wanted Joaquin Phoenix for the role.yuekit
- ^ Hmm. Yea this makes sense as the person that killed his parents wasn't Joaquin.Hayzilla
- Who knows? There were a shit ton of Jokers by the end of the filmIanbolton
- I'm not a big comic book fan but doesn't Joker usually have a gang of clown mask wearing henchmen? I figured that's who those guys would become..yuekit
- He's a Joker but not The Joker.pango
- Could be the one 'joker' who went rogue and shot Bruce Wayne's parents becomes the actual Joker later?Akagiyama
- What Pango said ^^haga
- Wasn't orig Keaton Batman 40-ish and Nicholson Joker 60-ish? You could argue that JP Joker is in 30sprophetone
- You know the 1989 Batman movie... the only one that mattered?prophetone
- The Joker himself never was a physical threat to Batman. So yeah, a 65 year old Joker could totally threaten 25 year old Batman.jagara
- I mean, get some henchmen and go to work :)jagara
Also seeing young bruce wayne in this movie, and the fact that they are already making a batman movie is kind of hilarious. Just goes to show that DC is winging it with these movies. Not really a set plan because if there was, obviously these would tie together, but they cant now.
Problem is Joker is older in this movie. Mid-late 40s, and bruce is a young kid, so by the time bruce grew up to become batman, joker would be like 70 lmao. Timeline doesnt work out at all. Missed opportunity to do something cool mixing the 2 movies together for a sequel at some point.
- maybe. Young bruce could be 14, joker could be late 20s (he's had a hard life). So not that unreasonable to have a batman being 25 and Joker 37.Morning_star
- People who care about every little detail will never fully enjoy a film. Its a movie about a fictional character - enjoy it for what it is.desmo
- Is the movie really supposed to tie-in with the rest of the DC cinematic universe, or is it more of a one-off piece?ETM
- There is no way arthur is in his late 20s in this movie lmaoCygnusZero4
- Batmen age faster because of sciencenb
- Maybe the joker then inspires another generation of Jokers? I like how it left so much to interpretation and didn't treat the viewer as an idiot - unlike MarvelIanbolton
I thought one thing the movie really failed to do was show how Joker started a movement. There wasnt really any scenes showing people getting inspired by him or his actions. Just all of a sudden protesters start showing up in clown masks. It wasnt until the very end when they pick him up off that care and he stands above his followers. The movie needed to drive it home better what sort of impact he was making in the middle of the movie and it didnt try to at all.
All they needed was some scenes of groups of people maybe talking about him, like they did in the dark knight, or watching him on tv but they never did any of that.
- *off that carCygnusZero4
- Almost felt like the joker himself wasnt special at all. Could have been anyone.CygnusZero4
- Dunno, I connected the dots. Thank fuck they didn't have some dumb scene explaining everything to the audience.inteliboy
- @Cyguns, I think that was pointvalentim
- Actually weren't there a BUNCH of news story (tv/paper) blips and commentary from 'media' characters about how the 'clown killer' was inspiring a movement?mantrakid
- seemed pretty obviousmantrakid
- they did do that, it was just that the mob was rendered too simplisticallycannonball1978
- early on in film the shrink said things were really 'tense' out there, people were desperate... if I recallprophetone
- already at a tipping pointprophetone
- Joker had a twitter account that they didnt mention. They all organized over twitter. Fuck twitter.Beeswax
- We don't see "others" POV. Just Arthur. This is why we see no one chatting about it, or him, or anyone else motivation.robthelad
- I think the fact it wasn't spelt out for the dumb dumbs made it better, treated the viewer with some intelligence.TOMMYxGUNN
that midget scene was great. lol
Quite refreshing to see a film reflecting current times, like the 1970's US cinema. Good or bad (I haven't seen yet) at least it's trying harder than 90% of the drivel coming out of Hollywood right now.
The other 10% has been encouraging though, perhaps we are entering a new era?
It was amazing. The fact it WASNT a super hero movie is actually what made it better. Broken people dealing with broken things.
If you didn’t like it, then, well maybe you went into the wrong cinema
- huh... it's the FUCKIN JOKER! He is a comic book villain! Based on what you said it just be John, Tom or Bob... why would i watch a movie about Bruce Wayne if..necromation
- if he doesn't become Batman? I'm lost man... i grew up reading these guy (dc & marvel) and hate this need to normalise this stories... just pisses over the fansnecromation
Finally saw it at the weekend, it was wonderful.
The first movie I've seen in a long time (last was there Will Be Blood, I think) where I could have happily started watching it again immediately after it finished.
Yeah, there were a couple of flaws milling around likelihood and logic, but it's the best comic book movie I've ever seen - probably because it wasn't in any way a comic book movie as we've come to know them (sorry, necromotion!). Actually, maybe Watchmen did too.
Partner wasn't too thrilled to watch it - she wanted something easy and light as she was in a bit of a grim mood, but given I always let her choose films, she said she was happy to give it a go. She spent much of the movie quietly murmering that perhaps we should've finished off the Mandolorian instead, whilst Mr Nairn was cackling at loads of innapropriate moments. Not sure I was supposed to find some of the bits I did funny... .
- It's usually me saying "Let's watch something 'easy'" with Mrs Nairn opting for something heavy or forin with subtitles or whatever it is I don't need Sat nightNairn
- if you havent seen it, i would suggest the HBO Watchmen series ... that and Joker, DC finally getting their act together for screen adaptations ...Bluejam
- Yeah, I finally watched the WM series over christmas and loved it. Like Joker, as much as I'd love more/ or a sequel to it.. I also don't. Perfect as-is.Nairn
This film has to be one of the best so far this year, especially from a superhero origin-style perspective. Even showing loose connections to how the media can play such an important role in the degradation of society, the disenfranchised class structures in which so-called 'normal' people feel so disconnected from political power. How easy it is for one man to be pushed further and further to his breaking point yet inadvertently starting a movement in which 'killing the rich' sometimes felt like a narrative which could play out today. Phoenix has to be one of the most unhinged character performers on screen at the moment and it's a great joy to see him in a film like this. It was so simple in its story, but did he imagine the relationship with his neighbour or is that open to interpretation, just like his mothers apparent delusional mentality?
- I thought it was pretty clear that he imagined the relationship...it was like a mini Fight Club style twist.yuekit
- Yeah, I agree, but then I didn't want to make those assumptions as his mothers' delusions could've been made up by Bruces father pushing his power about?Ianbolton
Thought it was alright, good performance from Phoenix.
The city/sets/environments were great.
And the score by Hildur Guðnadóttir is fantastic
It was good. Phoenix is one of the best actors around.
I felt my money was well spent. Saw Ad Astra the other week and wanted my fucking money back but this, this was a good movie.
Felt the music was great, didn't know whether the Gary Glitter track was purposefully controversial or not, i'm gonna guess that it was. And, when 'White Room' kicked in, well, RIP Ginger.
Cinematography was cool, and i liked that fact that we didn't need to see the abuse of young Arthur to give his mental health credibility.
As a comment on todays society?, i felt it captured some of the meetoo/anonymous spirit quite successfully. And it reflected the demise and insignificance of terrestrial TV through DeNiros ultimately cruelty.
Overall, better than your mum, not as good as your dad.
Finally got round to seeing in cinema last night. Great film
- very good. saw it yesterday. from what i heard and read i expected it to be much more subversive. "anarchy hollywood style"...renderedred
- I was expecting it to be more violent and graphic from some of the reactions I read... Maybe I'm just desensitiseddee-dubs
- that too. the violence was also "hollywood style"renderedred
THought this was an interesting take.
"Although Joker is a quintessential comic-book villain, the movie focused on his human side and portrayed him as a product of a toxic environment. The true villain in this movie is mass media which gave Joker all the praise and attention he always craved – but only after he murdered people.
Media turned Arthur – a nobody – into Joker – a somebody. And the gullible people, those who consume mass media with no discernment, turned that Joker into a political leader."
Did anyone laugh out loud at the jokes? I couldn't help it, such a funny movie.