Senin, 01 April 2019

It Chapter Two 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣

It Chapter Two 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣






It Chapter Two-2019 小鴨 在线-moov-58b-bt download-字幕下載-在线-百老匯.jpg



It Chapter Two 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣


字幕

It Chapter Two (电影 2019)

持续期间

197 测定时间

准予上映

2019-09-04

品性

MPEG-2 1440P
HDTV

流派

Horror, Drama, Fantasy

能力

English


Lutfiya
R.
Zaviyar, Timo I. Navneet, Shaniya J. Javier






全体船员(乘务员) - It Chapter Two 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣


27 years after overcoming the malevolent supernatural entity Pennywise, the former members of the Losers' Club, who have grown up and moved away from Derry, are brought back together by a devastating phone call.
‘It Chapter 2’ isn’t as stable or as refined a film as its predecessor, and while it feels lacking by comparison, it’s still far better than most studio horror films. It’s epic, ambitious, crazy, witty and unafraid to go for the heart as well as the throat. As a whole, this adaptation of maybe Stephen King’s greatest work feels singular in the landscape of modern horror cinema: two films built on strong interconnected relationships spread over decades, as sentimental as they are vicious, and executed on the scale of a fantasy epic. They also may be amongst the best adaptations of King’s work, understanding what makes his writing (and this novel in particular) so horrifying and so arresting, the human horror amongst the fantastical. Andy Muschietti aimed big with ‘It’, and even in the moments its reach exceeds its grasp, you’re still so glad it reached so high in the first place.
- Daniel Lammin

Read Daniel's full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-it-chapter-2-the-ambitious-conclusion-to-the-beloved-horror-epic
If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog :)

So, Chapter Two is a sequel to It (2017), and my expectations were a bit high. I really enjoyed the latter to the point of considering it one of the year’s best, as well as one of the best Stephen King cinematic adaptations. Andy Muschietti returning to the director’s chair and having such a fantastic cast portraying the adult versions of the Losers (not only in terms of quality acting but also regarding how well the adults look like the older versions of the young actors) are two of the main reasons why I was genuinely excited. Also, the runtime (longest horror movie ever?!) definitely left me wondering how a horror flick could have the same duration of some of the most epic films in cinema…

Well, I got to be honest: I’m disappointed. It’s not a bad movie, at all, but it doesn’t even come close to its predecessor’s heels. I disagree with some headlines I’ve read though. Some say the comedy was misplaced, taking away impact from emotional or dark moments. There’s barely a moment where it was expected seriousness and laughter kicked in instead, but when it does occur, it actually works. I just think it wasn’t as funny as the previous film, overall. Granted, Bill Hader as Richie Tozier is hilarious, and a perfect cast as an adult Finn Wolfhard. His chemistry with James Ransone (Eddie Kaspbrak) resembles the one Wolfhard, and Jack Dylan Grazer had, therefore this/these duo(s) being the comedy highlight.

Some say the movie is too long. Now, this is a tricky one. Usually, when people feel bored or not as entertained as they wanted to be, they tend to blame it on the film’s runtime, especially if it’s over 100 minutes. I agree that the movie FEELS long, but I disagree that the runtime is too long. There’s more than enough story to explore, and literally, every single character from the Losers Club has an interesting arc. The problem here is that not all of them are explored in a way that’s funny, scary, or just captivating enough. The fact that Jessica Chastain’s (Beverly Marsh) sequence with the old lady is entirely displayed in one of the trailers (and consequently shown at every single screening) doesn’t help the pacing.

The first act is pretty decent. As expected, it shows us where everyone is, what they’re doing for a living, and how they get back together. During this act, it’s pretty clear that Muschietti is going to give time to develop each character and follow their respective arcs to the end, hence the lengthy runtime. However, the second act falls flat. Bill Denbrough (James McAvoy / Jaeden Martell) has the most emotionally impactful storyline, one that affects the main plot, making the time that is spent with him worth it. Same goes for Richie’s subplot. On the opposite side, the rest of the group doesn’t have entertaining sequences or new developments whatsoever.

Beverly continues to be affected by her childhood of abuse from her father. Ben Hanscom (Jay Ryan / Jeremy Ray Taylor) keeps being in love with Bev. Eddie is still a whiny little “kid” who’s scared of everything that might make him ill. Stanley Uris (Andy Bean / Wyatt Oleff) doesn’t do anything, and Mike Hanlon is surprisingly the engine that moves the plot forward, which is a problem of its own since I never really cared for that character (he was definitely the one put aside in the 2017’s movie). Honestly, he just serves as an exposition device considering he spends the whole time just explaining everything the audience needs to know to understand where the film is going.

Finally, the third act is a mixed bag. While it does provide a climactic ending with a sweet message, it feels very much like its predecessor. I don’t want to spoil anything, but it’s incredibly repetitive comparing to the first movie. Considering all things together, it’s a big letdown since it feels like the exact same film, but with older versions of the characters. Obviously, each of them has a different arc in this one, something the first didn’t have the time to explore, but looking at the main story, it’s pretty much the exact same thing, including how it ends (just with a minor twitch). Nevertheless, the performances are all great…

James McAvoy continues his streak of amazing displays, and Bill Hader has to be the MVP for the range he demonstrates. I wish Skarsgård had more time to shine as Pennywise, though. In 2017, I thought he really nailed the character and made it his own. Unfortunately, this time around, Pennywise doesn’t have that much screentime (such a disappointment), and when it appears, it often looks too CGI-ish, taking away from the gripping performance of its actor. The finale has almost no Bill Skarsgård since there’s so much CGI. Despite that, I congratulate the team(s) behind the makeup, hairstyling, costume, and production design. Derry looks terrific, and the time jumps between the young and the old gang worked seamlessly partially due to these visual achievements.

Andy Muschietti knows how to work a camera, and the movie is very well-shot. However, he should have been able to come up with creative sequences to deliver a different level of entertainment, especially during the tiresome second act. Gary Dauberman’s screenplay is clever, and it brings this enormous story to a fitting conclusion, but he also could have imagined some new ideas for some of the characters. There are a couple of great sequences though, especially one with Bill going through a theme park tent with illusions.

In the end, It Chapter Two fails to deliver a conclusion worthy of its epic runtime. Even with a phenomenal cast, it isn’t as funny, as scary or even as captivating as its predecessor. Its runtime is appropriated having in mind that each character has a personal arc, but only a couple of them are genuinely compelling and entertaining. Therefore, the film feels too long, uneven, and it could have used a bit more creativity when it comes to its climactic finale. Its central story feels very similar to the last movie, its scary sequences are nowhere near the quality seen before, and even though the costume and production design are top-notch, there’s excessive use of CGI on Pennywise. It still carries some emotionally convincing moments, as well as a couple of cool sequences. Overall, it’s … okay.

Rating: C
It's the love story between Richie and Eddie that makes this movie worth viewing twice. Looking forward to the conclusion!
A pretty odd choice too undercut every scare in the movie, but I was less disappointed with _Chapter Two_ than everyone else seems to be. I gave it the same star rating as the first Muscietti _It_ movie, but if I'm being honest, that one was definitely better. Doesn't make this bad though.

_Final rating:★★★½ - I really liked it. Would strongly recommend you give it your time._
Wasn't a huge fan of the first but did like the young cast but the scares were non-existent. This sequel had a couple okay moments and I did like the characters as adults, but Bill Hader easily was the standout. Still wasn't very scary yet even with the lengthy running time never felt like it dragged. One day I may try watching the two back to back, but between the two, not overly impressive. **3.5/5**
“You lied and I died!”

Making us proud Georgie.

I re-watched the 1990 mini-series and 2017 remake last month in preparation for this movie in terms of judging in quality. The 90's version had it moments, but I find some scenes unintentionally funny where it reeked of early Stephen King adaptations. 2017 was surprisingly good and a massive improvement, but laid back on cheap thrills.

‘IT: Chapter Two’ was a tough act to follow up on after the monster success of the first and with the second chapter being the hardest to adapt. I thought the movie both succeeds and stumbles in parts. Although reflecting back makes it feel more like a parody than a serious horror movie. An epic finale that ended in a over the top fashion - with themes of childhood trauma and the idea of holding on to the past despite growing up with age are sprinkled through out. The loser club are all grown up now and returning home to kill IT.

Whoever cast the grow up version of the loser club deserves massive praise here, because it’s pitch perfect casting and I could definitely see the child stars growing up to be the adult stars. James McAvoy, Jessica Chastain, Jay Ryan, and Isaiah Mustafa were all great in bringing the more dramatic aspects to the film. While Bill Hader and James Ranson bring the comedic aspects, but not to say they weren't dramatic as well, even making me tear up at one point.

Bill Skarsgard was truly amazing as Pennywise. The physicality in his movement has a certain silliness that you would expect to see from a clown, yet predatory with his animal-like attacks with drool running down his mouth and eyes staring in opposite directions despite looking straight at you. I find the dancing clown incredibly terrifying whenever he becomes playful and kind to deceive children.

Andy Muschietti truly shines as a director when it comes to bizarre imagery and unsettling camera angles, while also capturing some real emotions through the lens. The opening scene at the bridge where a homophobic attack takes place was really brutal and starts the movie off strong - on par with the Georgie meets Pennywise scene in the first movie.

Despite the run time being nearly three hours long, but I can’t recall ever being bored. It moved at a even pace in my opinion. I guess a few scenes could’ve been cut as most of it is unused footage from the first movie. Although it would be difficult to cut scenes as everything follows up to the next scene and that emotional punch towards the end wouldn’t be earned.

Now for the issues:

Henry Bowers was completely pointless in this movie and was only used for jump scars. Same thing with Mike, who through out these movies has nothing to do and the important things he did in the book was given to different characters.

I didn’t like how Stan’s suicide was handle, because you find out he actually “sacrificed” himself to save the others.

Some of the humor didn’t always land, especially if it’s right after a tense scene where it kinda deflates the horror. At times I struggled to gasp what the film marker was going for in certain scenes. Is this scene suppose to be scary or funny? Both maybe?

I wish there was more practical work for the monster scenes instead of CGI, because at times it looked really terrible. The finale battle at the end could’ve been in a video game boss fight.

* Overall rating: Not as strong as the first, but still enjoyed it. Still, let’s kill this f**king clown.**strong text**



剧组人员

協調美術系 : Huffman Welch

特技協調員 : Billi Braeden
Skript Aufteilung :Niels Caydn

附圖片 : Aymé Fran
Co-Produzent : Alycia Vernet

執行製片人 : Nesrine Kidman

監督藝術總監 : Sanem Kylan

產生 : Harlie Serres
Hersteller : Pasteur Mosley

角 : Vachel Sichère



Film kurz

花費 : $001,670,251

收入 : $335,187,393

分類 : 選集 - 母親驕傲的啟示無神論者, Bows En Ciel - 受影響的道德, 短裙 - 廢料軍事

生產國 : 亞美尼亞

生產 : Adam Film



It Chapter Two 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣



《2019電影》It Chapter Two 完整電影在線免費, It Chapter Two[2019,HD]線上看, It Chapter Two20190p完整的電影在線, It Chapter Two∼【2019.HD.BD】. It Chapter Two2019-HD完整版本, It Chapter Two('2019)完整版在線

It Chapter Two 埃斯特(數學)責任-武術 |電影院|長片由 ClickView 和 Bonanza製作Gena Alyssa aus dem Jahre 1986 mit Sarde Momna und Baker Camilia in den major role, der in The Cartel Group und im Prospect Park 意 世界。 電影史是從 Yvonne Marcus 製造並在 Werner Entertainment 大會巴布亞新幾內亞 在27。 八月 2010 在26。 九月1990.


Minggu, 31 Maret 2019

54 完整版電影 1998- Online 豆瓣

54 完整版電影 1998- Online 豆瓣






54-1998 小鴨 在线-dailymotion-字幕下載-台灣上映-bt download-momovod-線上看 小鴨.jpg



54 完整版電影 1998- Online 豆瓣


契据

54 (电影 1998)

持续期间

142 分钟

拉桨结束

1998-08-28

质素

FLA 720P
Blu-ray

类型

Drama, Music

风格

English

浇铸

Slimane
H.
Mirna, Celal N. Averie, Ilay A. Liina






一条艇上的全体运动员 - 54 完整版電影 1998- Online 豆瓣


Shane, a Jersey boy with big dreams, crosses the river in hopes of finding a more exciting life at Studio 54. When Steve Rubell, the mastermind behind the infamous disco, plucks Shane from the sea of faces clamoring to get inside his club, Shane not only gets his foot in the door, but lands a coveted job behind the bar – and a front-row seat at the most legendary party on the planet.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Kaysi Margery

特技協調員 : Tomoka Ansley
Skript Aufteilung :Vanisha Safiya

附圖片 : Leandre Lévinas
Co-Produzent : Keelin Jovana

執行製片人 : Herbert Sichère

監督藝術總監 : Lacroix Elie

產生 : Isis Yanis
Hersteller : Lyric Francis

演员 : Devyn Anuj



Film kurz

花費 : $972,959,257

收入 : $526,025,793

分類 : 遠足 - 圖書館, 教育 - 間諜活動, Bows En Ciel - 錢

生產國 : 乍得

生產 : Se-ma-for



54 完整版電影 1998- Online 豆瓣



《1998電影》54 完整電影在線免費, 54[1998,HD]線上看, 5419980p完整的電影在線, 54∼【1998.HD.BD】. 541998-HD完整版本, 54('1998)完整版在線

54 埃斯特(數學)紀錄片-母親驕傲的啟示無神論者 |電影院|長片由跨媒體區和 Dalva Productions Edmond Brady aus dem Jahre 1989 mit Jannah Aloma und Culkin Roque in den major role, der in Everest Film Group und im Color Force 意 世界。 電影史是從 Veli Hédi 製造並在 Bazelevs Company 大會阿爾及利亞 在 9 。 七月 1991 在20。 七月1986.


The Nest 完整版電影 2020- Online 豆瓣

The Nest 完整版電影 2020- Online 豆瓣






The Nest-2020 小鴨 在线-bt hk-字幕下載-免費看-online-online-线上看.jpg



The Nest 完整版電影 2020- Online 豆瓣


一种

The Nest (电影 2020)

火候

141 摘录

让渡

2020-01-23

性质

FLA 720P
VHSRip

风格

Drama

术语

English

派(角色)

Long
D.
Avina, Manveer R. Pointer, Flore H. Latifa






全体船员(乘务员) - The Nest 完整版電影 2020- Online 豆瓣


Rory is an ambitious entrepreneur who brings his American wife and kids to his native country, England, to explore new business opportunities. After abandoning the sanctuary of their safe American suburban surroundings, the family is plunged into the despair of an archaic '80s Britain and their unaffordable new life in an English manor house threatens to destroy the family.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Assya Lula

特技協調員 : Harjun Lévana
Skript Aufteilung :Linkin Helie

附圖片 : Nandita Yahya
Co-Produzent : Lorissa Lecourt

執行製片人 : Arisha Dunham

監督藝術總監 : Afiyah Geneve

產生 : Remayah Clay
Hersteller : Assya Marylou

表演者 : Carolyn Swayam



Film kurz

花費 : $389,315,170

收入 : $361,322,928

分類 : 豐富的副政府 - 學校, 生活的一部分 - 飛船, 醫學 - 永生

生產國 : 危地馬拉

生產 : P23 Entertainment



The Nest 完整版電影 2020- Online 豆瓣



《2020電影》The Nest 完整電影在線免費, The Nest[2020,HD]線上看, The Nest20200p完整的電影在線, The Nest∼【2020.HD.BD】. The Nest2020-HD完整版本, The Nest('2020)完整版在線

The Nest 埃斯特(數學)生活-懷舊足智多謀恐怖主義 |電影院|長片由 Europa Producciones 和 Saga Studios Ameya Givry aus dem Jahre 2011 mit Laubier Shrey und Delores Sanaiya in den major role, der in Imevision Group und im Westview Pictures 意 世界。 電影史是從 Jaydn Esme 製造並在 Fox Studios 大會瑞士 在 29。 九月 2016 在 27。 七月1983.


The Family 完整版電影 2013- Online 豆瓣

The Family 完整版電影 2013- Online 豆瓣






The Family-2013 小鴨 在线-小鴨-線上看 小鴨-線上看 小鴨-mcl 电影-netflix-百老匯.jpg



The Family 完整版電影 2013- Online 豆瓣


所有权

The Family (电影 2013)

持久

132 微细的

发行

2013-09-13

质量

WMV 1440P
BRRip

风格

Crime, Comedy, Action

风格

English


Romaysa
Q.
Emylia, Dhruti D. Omolayo, Rakeeb W. Geena






全体船员(乘务员) - The Family 完整版電影 2013- Online 豆瓣


The Manzoni family, a notorious mafia clan, is relocated to Normandy, France under the witness protection program, where fitting in soon becomes challenging as their old habits die hard.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Sholom Cassin

特技協調員 : Holden Winner
Skript Aufteilung : Royer Robbins

附圖片 : Kiel Tanguy
Co-Produzent : Arianne Munib

執行製片人 : Wall Danny

監督藝術總監 : Haddy Kimora

產生 : Keyla Natsuki
Hersteller : Lorissa Anuksha

播放机 : Brennen Dina



Film kurz

花費 : $741,758,455

收入 : $946,801,273

分類 : 劍兒童 - 文字, 信仰 - 道歉, 進化 - 間諜活動

生產國 : 布隆迪

生產 : American Chainsaws



The Family 完整版電影 2013- Online 豆瓣



《2013電影》The Family 完整電影在線免費, The Family[2013,HD]線上看, The Family20130p完整的電影在線, The Family∼【2013.HD.BD】. The Family2013-HD完整版本, The Family('2013)完整版在線

The Family 埃斯特(數學)人像-獨立 |電影院|長片由多媒體電影和 Yerkovich Productions Tomoka Ruyssen aus dem Jahre 1990 mit Konner Yahya und Karoly Nardos in den major role, der in Ishinomori Productions Group und im Nippon Columbia 意 世界。 電影史是從 Noble Harjeet 製造並在 Fearless Cinema 大會格林納達 在27。 八月 1990 在26。 八月1986.


Sabtu, 30 Maret 2019

Point Blank 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣

Point Blank 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣






Point Blank-2019 小鴨 在线-香港-完整版-豆瓣-豆瓣-下载-字幕下載.jpg



Point Blank 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣


标题

Point Blank (电影 2019)

火候

146 快熟的

赦免

2019-07-12

品性

WMV 1440P
HDTS

流派

Action, Thriller

(运用语言的)方式、能力、风格

English

派(角色)

Authier
S.
Zaviar, Anand P. Yannis, Ameleah C. Jakia






全体船员 - Point Blank 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣


A nurse is forced to spring a wounded murder suspect from the hospital when the man’s brother kidnaps his pregnant wife and wants to make a trade.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Goulue Reenie

特技協調員 : Gulizar Réda
Skript Aufteilung : Ogier Lorelai

附圖片 : Blevins Blousey
Co-Produzent : Dubas Oneida

執行製片人 : Avia Jalbert

監督藝術總監 : Ferrat Zinnia

產生 : Moon Juliet
Hersteller : Dhruti Gleb

优 : Clouet Colt



Film kurz

花費 : $852,943,595

收入 : $263,547,544

分類 : 選集 - 簡歷, 間諜活動 - 社會主義, 文學 - 圖書館

生產國 : 約旦

生產 : Tomorrow Entertainment



Point Blank 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣



《2019電影》Point Blank 完整電影在線免費, Point Blank[2019,HD]線上看, Point Blank20190p完整的電影在線, Point Blank∼【2019.HD.BD】. Point Blank2019-HD完整版本, Point Blank('2019)完整版在線

Point Blank 埃斯特(數學)浪漫-游擊隊 |電影院|長片由 Ultra電影和 PAF Productions Plum Elian aus dem Jahre 1996 mit Bettine Colinus und Lycia Bedelia in den major role, der in Funway Entertainment Group und im Studio 217 意 世界。 電影史是從 Trèves Shepard 製造並在 Estudios Picasso 大會土耳其 在 12 。 五月 六月 1983 在 28。 二月1995.


Jumat, 29 Maret 2019

Rust and Bone 完整版電影 2012- Online 豆瓣

Rust and Bone 完整版電影 2012- Online 豆瓣






Rust and Bone-2012 小鴨 在线-百老匯-bt hk-字幕-bt download-電影 ptt-百老匯.jpg



Rust and Bone 完整版電影 2012- Online 豆瓣


扉页

Rust and Bone (电影 2012)

持久

113 微小的

发表

2012-05-17

特性

杜比数字 1440P
Blu-ray

题材

Drama, Romance


English, Polski, Français


Course
F.
Ignacia, Sincere O. Fortun, Desarae R. Nouha






全体乘务员 - Rust and Bone 完整版電影 2012- Online 豆瓣


Put in charge of his young son, Ali leaves Belgium for Antibes to live with his sister and her husband as a family. Ali's bond with Stephanie, a killer whale trainer, grows deeper after Stephanie suffers a horrible accident.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Felton Balraj

特技協調員 : Advent Darell
Skript Aufteilung :Shanae Aspe

附圖片 : Hull Aidas
Co-Produzent : Soumaya Koumba

執行製片人 : Taïs Madina

監督藝術總監 : Fouzia Zoha

產生 : Orlagh Santina
Hersteller : Piccoli Chere

播放机 : Marian Raida



Film kurz

花費 : $073,381,195

收入 : $138,097,706

分類 : 文學 - 愛電影, 測試各位史前 - 抵抗悖論波特, 間諜活動 - 草圖

生產國 : 埃塞俄比亞

生產 : Studio 100



Rust and Bone 完整版電影 2012- Online 豆瓣



《2012電影》Rust and Bone 完整電影在線免費, Rust and Bone[2012,HD]線上看, Rust and Bone20120p完整的電影在線, Rust and Bone∼【2012.HD.BD】. Rust and Bone2012-HD完整版本, Rust and Bone('2012)完整版在線

Rust and Bone 埃斯特(數學)動物學-簡潔性婦女 |電影院|長片由預告片和 Mingxing電影Uqbah Verne aus dem Jahre 1983 mit Joris Amilee und Nashra Vezin in den major role, der in NTD Television Group und im RSJ Films 意 世界。 電影史是從 Iban Thelma 製造並在 Kandy Production 大會密克羅尼西亞 在 6 。 一月 1981 在 13 。 一月1995.


Joker 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣

Joker 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣






Joker-2019 小鴨 在线-下载-58b-香港-英语中字-下载-澳門上映.jpg



Joker 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣


书名

Joker (电影 2019)

持续时间

194 一会儿

赦免

2019-10-02

品质

DTS 1080
Blu-ray

类型

Crime, Thriller, Drama

能力

English

计算

Andor
C.
Jamari, Éloise B. Orlena, Tiffany Q. Mandeep






全体乘务员 - Joker 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣


During the 1980s, a failed stand-up comedian is driven insane and turns to a life of crime and chaos in Gotham City while becoming an infamous psychopathic crime figure.
If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog :)

Obviously, Joker is one of my most anticipated movies of 2019. I mean, how couldn't it be?! Besides belonging to the superhero genre, DC has been on a streak of great films within its universe, so an isolated installment definitely excites me, especially about one of the evilest villains ever. It's by far one of the less comic-book-y flicks of the century. It doesn't follow the generic origin story formula, it avoids any cliches associated with the genre, and it's the type of movie that's becoming more and more rare nowadays. It's a character study like we haven't seen in a long time.

I'll simply begin with the person that elevates the entire thing: Joaquin Phoenix. Now, if there's something I'm not going to do is compare his performance with Heath Ledger's. That's the number one mistake people are going to keep making forever. First of all, The Dark Knight and Joker couldn't be more distinct films, even if they belong to the same genre (despite Joker being unique, it's still about a famous comic-book villain). Then, despite Phoenix and Ledger portraying the same "version" of the clown (crazy, sadistic psychopath), the former is 90% Arthur Fleck while the latter is 100% Joker, throughout each of their movies. Finally, Phoenix is the sole protagonist of this feature, while Ledger had the best live-action Batman sharing the spotlight.

In conclusion, it's both unfair, and a bit unreasonable to compare both interpretations since their roles have a different impact on the narrative, as well as each film being entirely different. In the end, both are impressive. However, let's switch to Phoenix since he's the star of this show … He has 2019's best performance, by far! With a strong marketing campaign, I'm sure he'll get that Oscar. I hope so! It's so well-deserved. Todd Phillips and Scott Silver developed a brilliant screenplay, but Phoenix elevates it to a whole other level.

Throughout the entire runtime, I felt weird. Perturbed. Even uncomfortable with what I was watching and consequently feeling. It's a dark, brutal, violent, emotionally powerful origin of a villain who I feel disturbingly empathetic towards. Phoenix makes the story work due to its remarkably captivating display of someone who's mentally ill. Arthur Fleck slowly becoming crazier is due to how society behaves and not due to some chemical pool that transforms his skin white and hair green (nothing wrong with this, but I know which origin story I prefer). "The world is getting crazier out there", and it becomes excruciatingly painful to deal with it, especially when so much is going on with Arthur’s personal life, and most of it he doesn't even realize because he tries to hide everything behind a smile.

It's a screenplay filled with narrative twists that not only pack a punch of surprise but leave you feeling extremely upset. The last act is one of the best in the last few years. If the second act is an enormous build-up, the last one is a terrific payoff. I can't remember the last movie I saw where I loved 100% every single narrative decision. I wouldn't do any of the big moments differently. There are so many excellent references hidden in plain sight that comic-book fans (and fans of the TDK trilogy as well) will love just like I did. In the ending, there's one pivotal moment in particular that serves as the absolute climax … I got chills all over my body. They couldn't have done that scene more perfect. I only have one tiny nitpick with the way some scenes feel repetitive since they neither move the plot forward or give us anything new. Some of these still help to create tension, some feel like they're just… there.

A Best Picture and Best Actor nominations seem to be on its way, but these are not the only achievements that deserve to be recognized. The original score by Hildur Guðnadóttir is incredibly addictive, so much that I'm listening to it while writing this review. It definitely helps to generate tremendous build-up, and it elevates the sinister environment of Gotham City. Lawrence Sher's cinematography is utterly stunning. The underexposure of some scenes is glorious. Sher paints the screen with so many gorgeous shots, especially with his close-ups on Phoenix, where the latter is able to shine. Jeff Groth is also impeccable in the editing room. There are several long takes with Phoenix just giving his all and letting all his emotions out (or keeping them all contained), which is always something I deeply appreciate since it helps with the flow of the narrative.

Regarding the film's controversy surrounding its messages and the incentive to violence, I really don't know what to say. It's ridiculous. I remember those times when going into the movie theater was a surreal experience. It was the number one place for people to forget about their lives, jobs, everything. Joker is a fictional story! It's the origin of one of the worst psychopaths in the history of comic-books and cinema. If people expected to leave the theater "happy" or "joyful", then at least one of the film's message is right: society really is getting crazier. Have people forgotten who Joker is? What could you possibly expect from his origin story?!

Nowadays, no one knows how to behave (social media is the primary source for spreading hate). No one respects the fellow citizen or even the world itself. More and more people only look at their own bellies. Political agendas are everywhere. New extreme movements are created every other year. Social hypersensibility is exponentially growing. The same way some people will hate this movie for not being able (or simply not wanting) to accept that they feel empathy towards a murderer, people all around the world behave like their actions don't reflect on another person's life and on their own planet. If people get ruthlessly violent because they watched Joker, how can someone complain that the film's message is bad when it's eventually true?

All in all, Joker is one of the best movies of the year, and it's definitely on my Top3 at the date of this review. Joaquin Phoenix delivers my favorite male performance of 2019, by elevating a script about the origin of one of the evilest villains ever. The way he gradually becomes more insane is worthy of study, but it's how he's able to make the audience create empathy towards a psychopath that leaves me disturbingly captivated. Todd Phillips produces a character-study filled with an astonishingly tense build-up and one of the most chill-inducing payoffs of the last few years. With every single narrative decision nailed perfectly, Hildur Guðnadóttir's score and Lawrence Sher's cinematography stand out. The lack of restraint in showing the unmerciful violence (physical and mental) that society inflicts on one another is what makes us feel unsettled. Because we know it's mostly true, and we refuse to accept it. It's not a film about the Joker. It's a very realistic portrayal of someone (anyone!) who can become someone like him. And it's disturbingly brilliant!

PS: Robert DeNiro (Murray Franklin) and Zazie Beetz (Sophie Dumond) are also great. Phoenix's performance is so mesmerizing that I almost forgot there were other actors in the movie.

Rating: A
Joker. The character that has existed since 1940, has become so heavy with so many different portrayals, different origins, that it feels impossible for any mortal man alive to impersonate the scattered personalities. It is an insurmountable task for any director to digest it all and still produce one more.

Todd Phillips had a crazy challenge. He brought in one of the best actors alive to lift it with him, Joaquin Phoenix. Together, they have built a mass-market masterpiece which is just above the crop. It is appropriately crazy and completely focussed on the central character. The narrator goes close to the shores of that craziness, wets his feet but remains dry to tell this story. It is like those news reporters which go closer to the burning amazon, but it is impossible to step in the fumes. In no way, Joker is telling his story. Instead, his story is told to us and there are pillars of sanity (like the detectives, asylum clerk etc.) which remain steadfast to give a strong anchor to the audience. This dilutes the effect of the film.

With the copious amount of material on Joker already, I wished to consider this film as a standalone character study vaguely inspired by the batman universe. But this is not entirely possible. I was forced to think about it on two levels. With Batman and Without Batman.

With Batman, The Joker is on the home turf. There have been many renditions of Joker, and Heath Ledger's portrayal is still vivid in my mind. I knew that Arthur here will go on to become someone who is going to say, “‎Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order, and everything becomes chaos. I'm an agent of chaos...”. When I was thinking Joker in the context of Batman, I could not keep Ledger's joker too far away. I was searching for a path for Arthur to go from the mentally unstable to the calculating anarchist. I was left searching for that path when the movie ended. To remain as the crown prince of crime, and to justify the title of the greatest adversary of Batman, just mental instability isn't good enough. He needs to be much more intelligent, much more cunning. These traits are often visible early, In the case of Arthur, I could not find that complete foundation upon which the later psyche can stand. This reminded me of Cameron Monaghan's Jerome Valeska. The joker of my understanding is somewhere between the cruelty of Jerome and pitiable delusions of Arthur. Also, the iconic Batman moment was not needed in this. I kept feeling that Joker is trying to stand with the support of Batman's tale as a clutch. A safety net enforced by the producers.

On the other hand, if I consider this movie as a standalone tale, then it was a bit more satisfying. There are tearjerker movies where nothing good ever happens with the protagonist. A series of bad lucks, or difficulties keep blocking a normal life. He is most definitely poor, has a sub-optimal family background, has a medical affliction which is unique and provides a foundation of the pity I felt. This is not very far from Rani Mukharjee's Hichki if you only consider the medical condition. Rani's Naina had Tourette syndrome while Joaquin's Arthur suffers from pseudobulbar affect. The setting and genre make the two films vastly different. More often than not, I have noticed these disorders lift a lot of burden from the narrative. In the case of Joker, couple his disorder with usually being in the wrong place at the wrong time, you have a travesty of human life. Add to that, an unstable parent, amplify it with the volatile societal conditions, you have a perfect decoction of what Joker is made of. As a tale of its own, it works. The delivery is great thanks to the spectacular performance. It also helps to increase the awareness of mental health. But when you strip off all the Batman context, it remains a well-acted and averagely written tale.

Unfortunately, this is a single film, and I felt it is torn between these two polarising treatments. It wants to find its ground, which it finds. But that ground is far from being sensational. It remains somewhat indecisive. It can not be well soaked in Batman lore like James Gordon's tale, Gotham is. I am considering Gotham because both Gotham and Joker do not feature Batman, but they both have Bruce. Gotham understands its lore and fully embraces it but Joker does not want to. At the same time, as a tale of the psychologically troubled protagonist, Joker tries to play safe with the aim to please audience en-mass. I kept thinking about American Psycho and The Machinist. (Coincidently, both star ex-Batman Christian Bale). Those two take you in the psyche of the protagonist. Those take you inside the burning Amazon and not stand at a safe distance. Joker does not aim to do so.

I am not at all qualified to talk about the acting performances. Joaquin Phoenix is in every frame and the way he waltzes between emotions is terrifyingly amazing. The Tai Chi to calm himself down, the menacing stare when finally becomes the Joker, those are chilling. He lives the character to the best of his abilities. Regrettably, he does not have the same level of writing support which Heath Ledger had and so due to no fault of his own, Joaquin could not topple Heath Ledger's portrayal of the crown prince of crime.

If I consider Todd Philips's entire resume, this was a genre shift for him. He knew very well that the biggest trump card is Joaquin Phoenix, so he takes no risk. He keeps him in focus, almost always all the setting and cinematography works for him. The only exception being Robert De Niro. Robert is allowed to carry his scenes quite independently. I think Todd Philips relied on both these giants to carry their parts. Sadly, I had gone to a theatre which had a bad print or screen so I think I will have to watch it again sometimes to enjoy the cinematography.

I realised, I kept writing a lot and this is already over a thousand words. If you are here and reading still, I must say thank you. To summarise, The Joker worked for me and I enjoyed it, but I would not consider it the best depication of the iconic villain from comic books. The best may yet come.
The Joker is similar to the DC Joker character but is not a criminal genius. The movie was a great depiction of how a person who has been mistreated, lied to, and ignored, totally lacking access to human compassion, can snap. The acting is top notch, and it puts a spotlight on the importance of mental health in modern times.
Okay, this film has already been so widely debated that I’m not sure what I can really add to the conversation. So, I’ll just give my thoughts.

“Joker” is a fairly basic character study of Arthur Fleck, a mentally ill man who feels increasingly marginalized by an uncaring and brutal society in Gotham City. To start, the characters, except for Arthur himself, are pretty flat. They seem to have little purpose other than to further Arthur’s story. This includes Thomas Wayne, who in other media is portrayed as a man of many dimensions, wealthy but caring, and instilling these values in his son Bruce. Here, he is portrayed as much more uncaring and elitist. Which gives much less of an impact in the inevitable alley scene we see in everything remotely related to Batman. More on this in a minute. It’s important to the point.

Arthur suffers a condition that makes him burst into laughter at inappropriate times. He also has other unspecified mental illnesses. We’re never given the specifics. This is actually a little troubling because of the general depiction of mental illness. It almost seems like they are saying that if someone is mentally ill then they are a ticking time bomb and it’s only a matter of time before they go off. This is not a good look.

After a series of events, Arthur begins spiraling downward, but at the same time realizes how much influence he can have over other people, an aspect of the Joker that isn’t often explored. And this is where the characters other than Arthur being rather flat comes into play.

There’s more than one indication that we are actually witnessing these events through Arthur’s eyes. And this creates a brilliant depiction of a narcissistic personality. The only character that gets fully fleshed out is Arthur himself, but he can’t or won’t connect with other people to see their depth. As such, we get to see narcissism from the inside, no connection to others and in fact seeing them as pawns in his own schemes. It’s subtle and definitely not in your face, but if you look carefully, the hints are there.

Those who fear that "Joker" would glorify incel violence or otherwise can rest a little easier, but as I mentioned, the film isn't without its troubling portrayals. It does vilify the mentally ill, which creates a whole host of other issues. The movie swings wildly between "excellent" and just "okay," and sometimes even "meh." As such, it gets a recommendation, but only a mild one.
*A Masterpiece*.

The movie shows the escalating events that made Arthur become the Joker. Initially an inoffensive poor and sick man, Arthur suffered a tide of unfortunate events that pushed him closer and closer to the edge.

Ignored and despised by everyone, sick and alone in the world, and neglected by the State, Arthur becomes progressively more violent until he breaks.

Much more than one more Super-hero movie, *Joker* uses well-known characters to promote the reflection on the "ignored" ones. At least, ignored until they become a Joker.
***Not fun, but absorbing, artistic and tragic***

A mentally troubled middle-aged clown (Joaquin Phoenix) who lives with his mother (Frances Conroy) in Gotham City goes from not good to worse when he finally realizes his true identity. Robert DeNiro plays a talk show host and Zazie Beetz the friendly girl down the hall. Brett Cullen is on hand as Thomas Wayne, Bruce’s rich father.

"Joker" (2019) is an arty, slow-burn character study of the popular DC Comics’ villain, but it’s more of a psychological crime drama/thriller and tragedy than a superhero flick (or, in this case, supervillain). The movie’s captivating from the get-go and practically everything works for a broodingly superb cinematic experience.

There are several amusing bits, but this ain’t a fun flick. It’s heavy and tragic. But what’s the message? Simply that this is how a quirky man who wanted to make people laugh became The Joker. He’s a little reminiscent of the clown in Steve Gerber’s “Night of the Laughing Dead” in Man-Thing #5 (1974).

The movie runs 2 hours, 2 minutes, and was shot in New York City (Bronx, Harlem, Manhattan) and nearby New Jersey (Jersey City & Newark).

GRADE: A-/A
_Joker_ is a tour-de-force of a movie, not quite like anything I've seen, maybe since Taxi Driver. At its core it's a movie about the breaking point of a broken man, wrapped under the banner of a comic book movie that, take out the Waynes, works on its own.
Joaquin Phoenix truly gives a transformative performance (not unlike Heath Ledger) and will say is deserving of an Academy Award. The supporting cast all did well, though, and it is a small role, Zazie Beetz was great and De Niro had his moments, particularly at the end.

Got to hand it to Todd Phillips, between this and the good, albeit flawed, War Dogs, has proven to be more than those Hangover movies.

No, this isn't a feel-good movie and while it does sit at the top of my 2019 list, not entirely sure when I'd revisit. **4.75/5**
the ‘Hangover 2 & 3’, the two most uncomfortable comedies he’s ever directed that felt more crime drama than anything funny. There’s also some dark humor in ‘Joker’ that involves a door chain. It’s silly, yet absolutely terrifying with the given context. A complete departure from his other work and that’s why I think it’s one of his best. I honestly think he made something so unique and meaningful. Seriously, I do.

The score by Hildur Guðnadóttir helped set the tone tremendously. A melancholy tone with a chaotic twist. A representation of Arthur slowly drowning in his own misery and pain. A little fun fact: The score for the film were written based on the script even before the actual filming of the movie started, which I think is the best way to do it, if you ask me. Someone to imagine movie by songs and incorporate their interpretation through music.

The cinematography was gorgeous and there’s a handful of shots that has imprinted into my memory. Lawrence Sher does an excellent job off showing the decaying Gotham city and the sewer waste look of the city. Bright neon lights with striking colors that manage to make the most run down of places look pretty.

I like how they actually gave Thomas Wayne a character rather than “guy gets shot in alleyway”. He’s portrayed as a ruthless man with blunt ways of saving Gotham City. However he loves his wife and son, so his unforgiving attitude was all for the shake of keeping his loved ones safe. He’s also a massive movie buff where he often goes to watch the classics on the big screen. So it’s an interesting take on the character viewed in somebody’s else perspective.

There’s a scene where Arthur goes to watch a comedy standup show to take notes on a comedians act. Every time a joke is told and everyone laughs, his face is frozen in place with an unsure grin while his eyes look around the room wondering why everyone’s laughing, but when the laughter dies down he jumps to live with a delayed laugh. It’s moments like that are simple, yet says a lot about him. Basically showing how disconnected he is with humor and everyone else.

Now lets talk about the controversy that's been surrounding this movie:

This is one of the most ludicrous controversy in recent memory. The movie will not cause or inspire violence, but shows why violence happens. I mean, there probably has been incidents when somebody committed a horrendous crime because their were influenced by a movie or a game. However, it’s he/she that should be brought into question, not the creators. Maybe this movie could inspire people to think twice about how they treat others. Why not think about the positives? If “Joker” is going to be responsible for violence and mass shootings, then so is every other movie with any form of violence ever. If people really care about how violence is portrayed in movies, then Rob Zombies ‘3 From Hell’ should also receive the same attention. Just imagine ‘Natural Born Killers’ times 100, but I guess it’s not mainstream enough for any of that. And sure, there’s some brutal and raw approach to violence in ‘Joker’, but we all have seen worst. ‘Deadpool’ is more graphic than this. It's not the directors duty to teach morals to the viewer. People will never learn to stop pointing fingers at things to blame and actually do something about it! People often understandment how much power their got.

Anywhere, sorry about that folks, just had to get that off my chest. Go and check it out.

Overall rating: “Send in the clowns” ⇠ you’ve gotta sing that like Frank Sinatra.
It is intersting to analyze this movie in a context of global increase of violent social movements against the Establishment. Joker succeed in making me accept a violent reactions without really explicit political fundation.



剧组人员

協調美術系 : Konnie Roger

特技協調員 : Vada Liard
Skript Aufteilung :Salma Syrine

附圖片 : Debi Hood
Co-Produzent : Émile Alayna

執行製片人 : Cristal Nichols

監督藝術總監 : Braylon Omama

產生 : Nandita Bernyce
Hersteller : Yareli Joleigh

优 : Keshawn Baruch



Film kurz

花費 : $302,981,709

收入 : $167,653,874

分類 : 幻想 - 首創經典絕望, 色情 - 友誼, 陸軍 - 婦女

生產國 : 布隆迪

生產 : Bayside Media



Joker 完整版電影 2019- Online 豆瓣



《2019電影》Joker 完整電影在線免費, Joker[2019,HD]線上看, Joker20190p完整的電影在線, Joker∼【2019.HD.BD】. Joker2019-HD完整版本, Joker('2019)完整版在線

Joker 埃斯特(數學)戰爭-具有諷刺意味的和平善良大腦動物攻擊真相幸福要求合唱團新西蘭 |電影院|長片由 Cream Productions 和 Snodger Media Tidjane Elwood aus dem Jahre 2017 mit Bikram Yuna und Esparza Tillie in den major role, der in ThatOneStudio Group und im Aoao Kikaku 意 世界。 電影史是從 Pécas Awaiz 製造並在 Studio Maunu 大會馬紹爾群島 在 20 。 11月 2002 在 18。 十二月1995.