When I was 21… not the Sinatra song, but when I, Patricia, was 21, I followed 20th Century Fox to Los Angeles and watched movie previews almost every evening. Movie critics comprised the audience. After the lights came up, if I felt good and had enjoyed the film, the critics talked about their dislike of the movie. If I felt bad and didn’t like the movie, the critics would praise it to the heavens. Apparently, “Joker” is a movie they didn’t like – not that I would like to watch it, for it sounds gory, but it might, therefore – if critics hate it – have some redeeming, albeit dark, social value in terms of current events.
You might not want to support this movie. One commenter at VigilantCitizen.com wrote:
“I truly believe this movie was created to spark mass violence and create exactly what the movie portrays. Killing people and the byproduct of it creates attention for said killer. Evil. Pure evil.” Another commenter wrote,
“I’m sorry but I personally don’t think that Joker is a good movie despite what you wrote VC. The only good thing about the movie is Joaquin Phoenix’s performance, but story wise the movie is thin. And the most obvious thing, TOO MUCH unnecessary violence. I know the movie makers probably think all the violence depicted in the movie is justified to show the transformation of Arthur Pleck to become the Joker. But c’mon, when you have no solid story in your movie that you need to show all the violence to distract the audience, that is NOT good filmmaking. And I’m not the only one who thinks this way. A lot of my friends, even those who are suckers for violent action movies, also think that this Joker is TOO violent.
“That being said, I agree with some other users here in this forum that comment this movie is not anti-media. As a matter of fact, I personally believe this movie is actually 100% part of the agenda despite it’s anti-media persona. I believe there are 2 goals this movie is trying to accomplish:
1. It makes people become more tolerant and accepting towards violence esp. against other people. In these few years, we have seen how people have truly lost their kindness and compassion towards other human beings. A lot of people (sadly) rather choose animals over other fellow humans. In other words: we, as a society and human beings, have lost our love for other people. This movie only reinstates that violence against other human beings is not only justified or acceptable, but also necessary to “purge” society from the “bad people”.
2. As the media has pointed out, they’re afraid this movie will inspire more Joker-wannabe shooters in the future in a world where there has already been a lot of shootings happening lately. In other words: they’re trying to bring the gun violence issue again so that society will become more prone to accept gun control effort by the government.
“So no, I don’t buy for one sec that the media is giving this movie a backlash because they feel like this movie is a “threat” to them for going against the agenda. I believe the media is on this as well to make the movie reach more mass. You can see that due to so many backlash, people even become more interested and curious about this movie. The Joker has already broken so many box office records even before reaching its 2nd week, further proving that bad press = good press to them.”
Protect your mind and your children’s minds from suggestions this psy-op movie might hold. From VigilantCitizen.com:
In this day and age, mass media critics do not evaluate movies by their artistic merit, but by the direction of their political message. To be deemed “good”, a movie needs to check a list of “agenda” boxes. Well, Joker does not check any boxes and it also goes against the grain. It is an uncompromising piece of art that is more akin to a low-budget auteur film than a DC Comics blockbuster. And, through its deeply unsettling character study of a “loser” who turns into a famous murderer, the movie provides a scattering critique of mass media.
Apparently, media sources did not appreciate the subversive messages in the movie and were quick to deem Joker “problematic”. Even before the official release of the movie, countless news articles associated Joker with “angry white men” and feared it would inspire Joker-copycats who would perpetrate mass shootings. Judging by the insistence of these articles, it was as if mass media was actually looking to speak into existence such as shooter by guaranteeing immediate and worldwide coverage of such an event. Appropriately enough, the movie addresses this exact brand of mass media perversion.
Indeed, on several occasions, the movie highlights the role of mass media in the creation and the validation of the monster that is Joker. And, on a wider scale, the movie links this media coverage to an uprising of the masses who identify the Joker as their hero and leader. In fact, while Joker is a bad guy, the bigger bad guy in the movie is mass media.
And real-life mass media did not appreciate the critique…
Although “Joker” was praised by most “serious” movie critics, mass media sources bashed the movie in all ways possible, even deeming it “dangerous”. Is it because the movie is actually bad? Or because it goes against their [Luciferian] agenda?…