MovieChat Forums > WeeChips > Replies
WeeChips's Replies
It is certainly a possibility, It is an interpretation I’ve seen a few times now since starting this thread. One interpretation I found interesting that ties in with yours is that, if some of the events in the movie were ‘real’ it was Arthur who ended up inspiring the ‘real’ Joker in the future that fights Batman. Arthur’s Joker doesn’t really seem like the genius that is Batman’s foe.
The boss obviously hears that he had a gun at the children’s hospital which is why he was fired. The Randall part, if we are to take the alternative version that I put forward, Randall might have just mentioned it to the boss as a concern since it was said that workmates were thought he was strange or a freak etc. Could just be a concerned work mate. Remember, all the boss says is that Randall told him that he asked if he could buy a gun from him.
When Arthur brings it up when he’s leaving, this could just be because his workmates bring it up first because they’ve heard about him having a gun.
I think it could easily be either, 1) as we saw it all on-screen OR 2) that Arthus acquires the gun elsewhere but brought Randall’s name into it all because of his delusions.
I’m not sure where the cut off would be, as someone else pointed out, there seems to be many scenes where the ‘reality’ of it could be questioned and I’m realising that the more I think about the film.
Another part that just came back to me that makes me question just what really happened are the scenes with his work mate Randall(?). When Arthur is fired, his boss said that he was trying to buy a gun from Randall. When Arthur is leaving his work and he brings up Randall giving the gun to him, Randall’s reaction seems very indignant and in disbelief at the accusation. Obviously it could just be Randall lying and covering his ass. However, the whole sequence leads me to think that Arthur maybe acquired the gun in a different way from what was shown on screen.
Thanks, I’ll need to find foxcatchers post and have a read.
I know that in standard Batman canon, Bruce’s parents die but the way this film was edited, can we be sure that happened in this story? I know it’s still Gotham but not convinced that this universe would end up containing Batman. I think it would be more likely that young Bruce would end up as Mayor for better or worse.
Yeah I agree, I was saying that to my wife after it that I liked the way that due to the delusional nature of the character and things being open to doubt that it still left the Jokers origin story as an enigma which I thought was a clever way of handling this character and movie.
Thanks for your replies. I was pretty sure that there was a lot of ambiguity open to interpretation but nobody seemed to be mentioning it on this forum, it’s all shitposting about incels. I thought it was a very well made film with amazing acting from Phoenix. I think I’ll definitely need to watch a few more times to catch all the nuances of it.
I thought I only made one point. What do you agree with? That it’s ambiguous? And/or that what we saw in the film was all a twisted fantasy in Arthur’s mind?