Now Here's Something I Would Not Normally Say: Please Go Watch the 2019 Joker Movie

The Joker movie is not an incel movie or an "angry straight white male" movie. It's a film about class consciousness and alienation under capitalism, especially late stage capitalism. The fact that it is receiving a lot of backlash from Forbes (and other elite publications like it), "alt"-rightists, and 'social justice warriors' (sjw's) alike makes it all the more intriguing. It most definitely is not the "Hollywoke"-kind of film that is, figuratively speaking, force-fed to the masses. Examples of "Hollywoke" films include those found in the Disney-owned Marvel Cinematic Universe, the post-Lucas Star Wars films (also Disney-owned, and sans George Lucas' input), and the 2016 Ghostbusters movie. It also most certainly is not an appeal to white nationalists and/or hardline reactionaries. And so here we have a refreshing cinematic piece of art.

Watch Jason Unruhe's review of the film in the video above. (Warning: the review contains some spoilers.)

*

Addendum 10/06/2019: Although it is a well-known and established fact that the Joker character is a symbol of anarchy and chaos in the Batman/DC universe, it is nonetheless a tragedy that he did not go into a socialist direction instead of an anarchist one. As Daniel Ananda Pradipta sums it up:

"It is understandable to explain that all of Joker's atrocities against his designated enemies were blamed on the broken system that Gotham possesses against its citizens. Bruce (Batman), Thomas and rest of the Wayne family alike, represents the Gotham elite that supports neoliberal legislations, such as cutting aid to social services or broken waste system, which both contributed to much of Gotham inequality. It makes sense that in these environments, characters like Joker would appear and anarchy would flourish. Joker, which is clearly an anarchist and an anti-status quo person, understands well that Gotham City has a problem. But, as typical to the populists of these days, Joker does not know to solve those problems with civility, because he dislikes it. His reactionary lifestyle was later resulted from the burdens that he must endure as a poor citizen in Gotham. In real life, his behavior will not be justified, but it is understandable that people like Joker are really angry and confused of the situation. Above all, there's nothing wrong with the authenticity-of-self in Joker's character because he really is himself, which Arthur Fleck is his real name. Unlike Batman, whose he refused to open his mask as Bruce Wayne by the order of Joker in the Dark Knight."

Also, as Unruhe points out in his video, there seems to be a slight inconsistency in the timeline and with the character of the Joker; these flaws are not big or glaring enough to overshadow and take away from the overall message and quality of the film, however, and they can be easily forgiven. Namely, the fact that the Joker's real name is revealed in this film when he had always been very anonymous and his identity was always kept a mystery. Not only that, but there is also the age discrepancy: in the film, he is well into his 40's, which would mean that by the time Bruce Wayne (who was 8 years old at the time his parents were killed) turns 25 and becomes Batman, the Joker would be at around retirement age -- assuming that Arthur does indeed become the renowned arch-nemesis. Director Todd Philips himself said that he intentionally left it ambiguous as to whether or not Arthur is the very same Joker that an adult Bruce Wayne is at constant war with, or if he inspired a man younger than him to take on the Joker mantle, which would mean that it is possible that he might not be the same Joker. Thus, the film does not stray too far or too wildly from the DC canon, while at the same time still managing to curb critics' expectations and bring a "unique spin" that is otherwise hard to find in Hollywood.