So, for people taking notes at the back, here is the original “astronauts discover decadent, all-female (or almost all-female) civilizations on other planets” (according to The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction). It’s a 1953 release that was shot in black-and-white and released in 3D, because the cycle of getting people to watch any old rot by bunging on a gimmick was strong back then and 3D is a trend that just won’t die (no matter how many times it shoots itself in the face). And, oh boy, is this a lesson in how things were different back then.
It’s difficult to write a review for a film like Joker, primarily because of the amount of hype that’s been built up around it. For over a year there have been announcements, stories and opinions flying around, from a multitude of camps. First up there are the DC fans, who have been excited at the idea of a villain-centric movie and of DC making two good movies in a row. Then there have been the naysayers, pulling it down because of uninspiring trailers and the habit of the more vocal Joker fans being screaming edgelords. Next up has been the marketing machine, keeping the film “a hot topic” and then, nearer release day, putting it on every bus in town. Finally, we have the director and star declaring it a piece of Art and a new dawn for comics movies. So, does it stand up to its hype?