Published on: 24 Nov 04:21

Some schmuck asks

Which Joker did you enjoy more, Joaquin Phoenix or Jared Leto?

Faisal Aswar answers

I'm no fan of Leto's Joker. For me it’s even about the image already at first place. I think they tried too hard to make him look so hip. I mean check out this guy. The outfits, the tattoos, the hair, the blinks, oh also the blink teeth.

And as if that's not enough, do they really need to put him shirtless? They even tried to make him look sexy. I mean there's nothing wrong with the idea and people can interpret sexiness in many ways. But for The Joker, I never expect to see it put literally.

Anyway that's appearance. On acting, I say Leto did a good job, not great just fairly good to the level. But still somehow it didn't click on me. It went to some direction I can't relate. It's like every movement and every word were made for pose. It was made to look cool and reached some points that it's not.

I mean seriously?

I understood this movie is for all age, I guess they wanted a standout character for the hype. But I think Leto's Joker would fit for some boss character in GTA game.

Ok to Joaquin's Joker now.

It's kinda funny because this is exactly the opposite of Leto's Joker to me. Now you may think my approach is biased because the reason has everything to do with the story but anyway.

It's a journey, a transformation. Arthur Fleck was a common guy, a nice guy who would never harm people. He's so easy to relate, he’s someone who could be sitting across your table now.

Who unfortunately just happened to have mental condition where the state eventually no longer have budget for the treatment program.

He can only do as much as he can to live, and receives so many shit from his surroundings.

At the very one shot to do what he has always dreamed to, they mocked him.

All those things made him into who he became and it gained him truly freedom and a new clear state of mind.

And eventually earned his place in the society.

Now Joaquin's Joker was a story of the Joker we never seen before and yet we can relate. We get it. Because it felt like under the same circumstances, some shitty circumstances, it can happen to us. And Joaquin acting was... nah you don't need to hear it from me, the awards have spoke it.

Of course I realized the two movies are on different genre and both actors deliver accordingly. But even with that base, between the two I would pick this guy at any day.

Oh wait, we're not finished yet. It's between the two. But to me this is the real thing. Aside from the fact that it's canon movie, this guy brought in all it should be for the character. A sick-minded, wicked-smart, clueless-evil and horribly funny, this Joker.

He's a time bomb.

My answer

Holy cow, man. You just blew my mind. Your post and talk of Jared Leto’s Joker triggered a flood of my memories.

You know heavy metal? The music genre? If you’re familiar with heavy metal, there’s one thing that’ll allegedly get any and every metalhead’s panties in a bunch. Posers.

I enjoy a bit of headbanging now and again, for years dipped and continue to dip my toe in the fandom and culture of heavy metal, and always there rumbled mutterings of “posers”. “No posers!” the cry goes up. “Posers unwelcome!”

But I could never figure out what “posers” actually were. For years I scratched my head at this.

But a mere glance at Jared Leto’s Joker has enlightened me. Ohhhh, right! A poser is someone who cares more about looking like they belong to a subculture than luxuriating in that subculture’s actual reason for existence, its foundation. Leto’s Joker cares more about being seen as some kind of generic edgelord: or, more to the point, he comes across as wishing to come across as that - than skilfully executing actual competent Jokering. Style over substance yo.

Being a metalhead in particular is to be a rebel, a renegade, an outsider, a desperado, all that good stuff, to let your heart and your soul and your sense of inner throbbing defiance lead you, as opposed to quote-unquote mainstream society.

To approach being a metalhead with outer look first and inner passion second, or not at all, is to do the opposite. It’s all icing and no cake. It’s to let your societal neighbours lead you and goad you and command you and dominate you, it’s to be needy and weak and malleable and pitiable and everything a competent metalhead despises.

I get it now! No posers!

(Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely get and agree that how one actually identifies specific individual posers in practice is a whole ‘nother horrendous universe of finger-pointy quagmire, but that’s an issue for another day.)

(Don’t get me wrong x2, I’ve got nothing against just simply the cultivation of a certain Look. Nothing wrong with fashion itself. Being a poser is the elevation of one’s outer Look over one’s inner drives and passions and identities, it's deciding they’re mutually exclusive, letting the latter squelch the former. That's a totally different phenom than just simply cultivating one's Look itself. Champion both at once? Awesome bro.)

Another example occurs: remember when the Matrix movies came out? You got a certain class of bloke who’d wander around in leather trenchcoats and katanas. They had no idea how to use the katanas, of course. Yeah. Posers.

Source: https://www.quora.com/Which-Joker-did-you-enjoy-mo...