Can we talk about how incredibly tasteless the discourse around that Joker movie is?

[crimson5pheonix]

I know, I'm just pointing out your liberal bastion movie is about supporting an absolute monarchy, which is about as conservative as it gets.

Ok, things like this are sending off klaxons that this will be a fruitless conversation. It is not my movie. It is not my liberal bastion. I saw it as a movie.

Alright, fair point. This started as the OP calling Marvel movies generally conservative, someone else disagreed, I brought up the movie that is most considered progressive and pointed out how conservative it was, agreeing with the OP.

I think there's a minor difference between a strengthening serum and WMDs. Remember that a lot of BP's power comes from his suit.

You're right. A Strengthening Serum would be used more often. Soldiers that literally couldn't be hit by conventional soldiers can overtake a country in a frightful small time frame. And with the added bonus of keeping the resources pristine for the taking.

And, you're actually wrong.

The Heart-Shaped Herb [https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Black_Panther] gives the Black Panther power to lift a car, outrun a car, withstand an blast right next to him without his habit, enhanced reflexes and agility where he could catch one of Hawkeye's arrows out of the air barehanded, and he has a healing factor.

The Habit is impact proof, has communication, and has claws. Oh, and the restored energy blast.

I'm fairly certain it neither lets you outspeed a bullet, or survive a direct shot. Advantageous sure, but in a more generally useful way that would likely be beneficial for common citizens.

Yes, but he did have salient points and more importantly, was allowed to take the throne and impose his will on the nation (and the world if he wasn't stopped)

.

Ok. You're going to make me invoke Godwin's Law. One Powerful Nation should have used its power to instill it's will to the rest of the world. That is the point he was making. That Wakanda should have used its might to rule as THEY see fit. And since you and I are not from Wakanda, that means ruling us without our say so. For someone who seems to be against absolute rule, it's very weird that you're siding with someone who wants to absolutely rule via mysticism and technological might.

I'm not siding with him. I am saying that his observation that Wakanda withholding it's technology and touting it's societal progress is schizophrenic and toxic is correct.

And yes, Killmonger was allowed to sit on the throne. Because there was an electoral process that the Nation must adhere to.

I don't know if a duel qualifies as an 'election'.

Like, this is exactly why this argument feels like it's pointless. You're arguing both sides like they both prove your point. One man was given divine right to have complete rule over one powerful nation. And even though T'Challa was a just ruler, weird traditions allowed his position to be challenged.

You can't have both. Either T'Challa was installed by divine right, therefore no one can challenge his complete rule which is too much power. Or that the system allowed crappy people to be the monarch. Which is how all politics work. Sometimes, we will have crappy rulers. Whether elected or by birth. This world is rife with people who were elected who are doing horrible jobs.

It's a system where whoever wins ritual combat apparently has complete control over the nation, immune from opposition. Killmonger took over and nobody tried to stop him until T'chala came back as a legitimate heir to the throne. And it's not like the duel has any practical merit, as point of fact Killmonger won the ritual fight, but lost the real fight, so it's all pomp and circumstance. A chance to speak with the spirits and rule on their behalf.

But the truth is... as much as others might want to be blind to it, T'Chaka was right (GET IT ON A T-SHIRT). N'Jobu's actions got Wakandans killed. And Klaue sold the ill-gotten Vibranium to Ultron under distress, as it were. We all remember who Ultron is, right? So we know how bad it is. One misstep by one Prince almost destroyed the world. And his misstep was almost rectified by his son who deliberately sought war with the world. Massive Amounts of Deaths were assured.

Yeah, that's what happens when a lot of power is concentrated in the hands of a few people at the top. It's why the rest of the world has generally moved away from monarchies. Not that an oligarchy is much of an improvement, but it is better than Wakanda.

Tradition is a hard thing to overcome in an ultra-conservative nation. But is that implying that we should have a strong autocrat to override the will of the people when it's to the people's benefit?

Ask yourself that question, when you side with a man named Killmonger who you believe has salient points and who 'complained about it'. His war with the world was against the will of the people. Of all people.

Correct. Like I said up there, I only agree that he said some correct things, not that he was a good or capable ruler. However Wakanda's system could let people like that take over for life, but the movie's message is that the system is okay so long as the right guy is up there.

 

[Silvanus]

Correct. Like I said up there, I only agree that he said some correct things, not that he was a good or capable ruler. However Wakanda's system could let people like that take over for life, but the movie's message is that the system is okay so long as the right guy is up there.

Did the film actually send that message? I remember it portraying that system, but not offering any particular value judgement on it.

Hell, the events of the film could be interpreted as an implicit criticism of the system.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Correct. Like I said up there, I only agree that he said some correct things, not that he was a good or capable ruler. However Wakanda's system could let people like that take over for life, but the movie's message is that the system is okay so long as the right guy is up there.

Did the film actually send that message? I remember it portraying that system, but not offering any particular value judgement on it.

Hell, the events of the film could be interpreted as an implicit criticism of the system.

It'd be the most subtle of criticisms, because an actual criticism of the system would be a popular uprising against Killmonger without a royal figure spearheading it, along with a reform to a more democratic form of government. They don't even bring up constitutional monarchism, by all accounts T'chala goes back to being an absolute monarch and nothing is ever shown to make it seem like this isn't the ideal solution.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

*snips*

This is a longer derail than I intended. If we want to continue, we should start up a thread. Apologies to the OP.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

*snips*

This is a longer derail than I intended. If we want to continue, we should start up a thread. Apologies to the OP.

Fair enough.

Must suck for WB that any conversation about their movies turns to Marvel instead.

 

[Marik2]

Mexican Joker

 

[Marik2]

https://www.escapistmagazine.com/v2/2019/10/01/joker-film-outrage-wrong-reasons-the-big-picture/

 

[Silvanus]

It'd be the most subtle of criticisms, because an actual criticism of the system would be a popular uprising against Killmonger without a royal figure spearheading it, along with a reform to a more democratic form of government. They don't even bring up constitutional monarchism, by all accounts T'chala goes back to being an absolute monarch and nothing is ever shown to make it seem like this isn't the ideal solution.

That would be some very heavy-handed commentary. It's not a film about governmental systems.

Nothing is ever shown to make it seem like the system of government is great, either-- it's just being portrayed, and portrayal isn't advocacy.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

It'd be the most subtle of criticisms, because an actual criticism of the system would be a popular uprising against Killmonger without a royal figure spearheading it, along with a reform to a more democratic form of government. They don't even bring up constitutional monarchism, by all accounts T'chala goes back to being an absolute monarch and nothing is ever shown to make it seem like this isn't the ideal solution.

That would be some very heavy-handed commentary. It's not a film about governmental systems.

Nothing is ever shown to make it seem like the system of government is great, either-- it's just being portrayed, and portrayal isn't advocacy.

I do doubt the film makers set out to defend monarchism, but it's just a result of the overall conservative bent the Marvel movies have. Black Panther is the starkest one, but it's what happens when your movies are usually about 'dark reflections' of the hero.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

This is a longer derail than I intended. If we want to continue, we should start up a thread. Apologies to the OP.

Meh, Black Panther's pretty much the perfect juxtaposition to Joker, at least in terms of how shit contemporary criticism and film analysis has become. But, I read the movie as just as strong, if not stronger, a deconstruction and criticism of "wokeness" and the contemporary social justice movement as it was the opposite. I'm not sure how intentional that was, but it's hard to not read the movie for that when the protagonist is a well-meaning but ultimately privilege-blind monarchist with all the performative trappings of social justice, and the antagonist is a (tremendously well-acted) walking activist stereotype which the movie low-key states to be a Western useful idiot.

Frankly, given the last few years' worth of "audience versus critic" controversies with regards to film and television with strong social and political themes, I can't help but wonder if the movie would still have low critic ratings if everything else in the movie had been the same, but Joker had been portrayed by a black man.

Which, funny enough. In the course of writing this post I tried to think of a black actor of comparable age and career path to Joaquin Phoenix, who I thought could bring something really unique and interesting to the role, I could name drop. All the ones I could easily think of were already in the MCU, and I was left with three: Omar Epps, Malcom-Jamal Warner, and Wayne Brady. And I'm not gonna lie, I think Wayne Brady as Joker would be a hell of a take on the role.