You must log in or register to comment.

GetToSreppin t1_ja8j0vm wrote

I always see these articles about movies that are more relevant now than ever or how a movie predicted the future. It's always bullshit. These movies didn't read tea leaves it's just that the same bullshit that plagues us nowadays is still here and now people decide to pay attention to it.


Lost_city t1_ja8oeka wrote

Actually reading the article, the writer gets it all wrong. The movie is based on gatekeeping which was huge before the internet. In essence, gatekeeping was a process where a handful of people could make your career / make you famous / etc. Think Harvey Weinstein in the 90s. With the rise of the internet, people don't need gatekeepers anymore. If you are a model, you just go out and gain followers on instagram, etc.


zerg1980 t1_ja8qs42 wrote

This was my takeaway from the article as well. The entire plot of King of Comedy is reliant on pre-internet gatekeeping. Rupert concocts an insane kidnapping plot in order to bypass the gatekeepers and perform in front of a large audience.

Today, Rupert could just do his act on TikTok without committing any crimes, and millions of people could watch it if they wanted. It would be a lot easier than kidnapping Jimmy Kimmel to land a guest spot on a network show.


Equal_Feature_9065 t1_jad23hp wrote

You guys are missing the point. Rupert is A) a psychopath stalker and B) wants a free ride all the way to the top. One of the defining things about that character is that he’s never performed his standup before. Yes the gatekeepers are keeping him from getting on TV, but he’s never even thought about going to the clubs — where there is far less to no gatekeeping — and working on material. He wants to be famous for fames sake, not because he has talent or passion or anything


throwawaymamcadd t1_jad8unh wrote

Isn't there a part where he goes into a bar with people doing some kind of open mic comedy or am I confusing it with someone else? Ethier way I don't really buy the idea that it's some kind of metaphor for the modern era. YouTubers who have a big audience are usually really talented in a niche field and that comes from hard work rather than being delusional guys sitting around their mum's house all day.


Equal_Feature_9065 t1_jadampj wrote

Pretty sure you’re thinking of Joker but I could be wrong


throwawaymamcadd t1_jadbb05 wrote

It's quite possible- they could have merged into the same film in my memory somewhat. I actually went into watching the Joker with no preconceptions or hearing anything about it and I was surprised as to how blatantly it was a mix of Taxi Driver and King of Comedy.


SecondCityMeatball t1_ja9ax7v wrote

Which is also hysterical because if there's one industry that has benefitted from the internet, it is stand-up comedy. There's a ton of great comics doing the work themselves. So while it is still a great movie, if anything, it's as irrelevant as its ever been.


cbbuntz t1_ja9ae58 wrote

Somebody just posted that famous scene from Network saying they were surprised by how relevant it was. It's just a universal, evergreen sentiment about living in western society


Equal_Feature_9065 t1_jad2h8a wrote

Yeah it’s usually just that the trends have accelerated. Now every cable newscast is Network


FlashpointJ24 t1_ja9xj96 wrote

Someone said something similar about The Simpsons: it's not that the show predicted the future, it's just that we still have the same problems we had in the 80s because we haven't fixed any of them.


highdefrex t1_jaa2fgq wrote

> it's not that the show predicted the future, it's just that we still have the same problems we had in the 80s because we haven't fixed any of them.

Spot on. It's wild that "Homer's Enemy" aired in 1997, almost 26 years ago this May, where Frank Grimes hated Homer for the latter's ability to coast through life and still have it all -- a wife, multiple kids, a nice house, a stable job -- while Grimes, despite working hard in all aspects of his life, still struggled to make ends meet.

Flash forward 25 years later to the season 33 episode "Poorhouse Rock," which aired last May, and the show straight up confronts Bart with the reality that he'll never have what Homer has even if he works hard -- that the dream of owning a home and having a stable job and multiple kids that was at least possibly attainable when the show started has now evaporated for newer generations. Even though he obviously wasn't in the episode, it essentially proves Frank Grimes was right in the long-term, that even if he existed now, still did everything he was told he was supposed to do by society -- go to college, work hard, etc. -- he'd still be just as pissed, if not more so, at Homer for having such (what is now) miraculous luck.


Fokker_Snek t1_ja9ku25 wrote

Yeah I was watching a YouTuber talk about reading through 16th Century religious polemics and kept seeing them making comments that weren’t any different than him saying “I can already hear some of you commenting in the chat…” which is hilarious. Also in my own historical research I did about communists and nihilists in the 19th Century, I couldn’t help but imagine them getting into “you’re not a real fan unless…” kind of arguments based on the impression I got from some of them.


MadeByTango t1_ja9p1x7 wrote

As I’ve gotten older I’ve realized that a great many articles, like this one, are about thebaithor’s growth as a person, not the movie. So I read them for that, to see what in the film was transformative for the author. That used to be a common thing to read, it’s what built the New Yorker, but we get less of that now and not as well written. Still, these kind of articles have their place, even if thebaithornisbstill in a naive place about what it is they’re actually writing.


AloneCan9661 t1_jabc192 wrote

The amount of times I’ve had to explain that The Joker was simply a mixture of this movie and Taxi Driver to my friends….


Good_old_Marshmallow t1_jaanocu wrote

Yup, these media properties weren’t predicting the future they were satirizing their present and problems unaddressed eventually progressed to the point of satire


AlanMorlock t1_ja98p1r wrote

Some things that were previously more niche concerns become more mainstream behaviors and problems. And a movie becoming more relevant is t bullshit, thst just, you know, happens sometimes.


Wonderful-Owl7663 t1_ja8ishm wrote

Classic that everyone should see, Joker and Nightcrawler lift from it heavily and it eloquently says something really basic and important about what you see in show business, politics, or any stage like that, while at the same time just being effective on the level of psychological thriller or cringe comedy.


niceguybadboy t1_ja8n21i wrote

>it eloquently says something really basic and important about what you see in show business, politics, or any stage like that,

Which is?


Bunraku_Master_2021 t1_ja94cpo wrote

Think about Showgirls and how exploiting or corrupting yourself either by internal or external actors is how you get ahead in business, politics, and/or entertainment of any kind.


stumpcity t1_ja91ppv wrote

The King of Comedy was basically about YouTube "Content Creators" about 30 years before such a thing existed.

But that's more or less what it is.


TonyBermuda t1_jaa1kh9 wrote

Grossly under appreciated masterpiece.


dtudeski t1_jaaz05x wrote

My favourite Scorsese flick and De Niro performance, he’s utterly mesmerising.


ap0phis t1_jab3uqq wrote

The author called Goodfellas “gauche”. I stopped there.


BananaSoprano t1_jacr2ft wrote

I've noticed it's becoming a thing now that weirdos try to downplay Goodfellas and how incredible it is.


KiIgore-Trout t1_jab6sx6 wrote

>Since Joker leaned on its story to borrow a bit of gravitas, it’s been the connoisseur’s choice of favourite Scorsese film too. (Goodfellas is a bit gauche, and Taxi Driver implies you own a black leather trenchcoat.)

Almost threw up in my mouth


Flowchart83 t1_jadagae wrote

I'd love to see a list of his favourite films. They must be great if Goodfellas and Taxi Driver don't make the list. /s


GTOdriver04 t1_ja97mzg wrote

I didn’t have a problem with Joker riffing on this film. When I finally saw KoC, it was the hardest, cringiest thing I had ever seen. Then I realized that such was the point.

I’m not a big fan of De Niro, but that was a good performance. Also, Jerry Lewis acting like a tool seemed to be a little too good for it just to be an act.


philhealthcaremuth t1_ja9tfit wrote

When I see someone say “I’m not a big fan of De Niro,” I must ask why? Is it a lack of range in characters? Thus, you like his unusually quirky performance in The King of Comedy. Or do you just not believe that he pulls off his usually tough guy character?

I’m not asking because I think your opinion is wrong. Everyone has different tastes. For example, I’m not a fan of Ryan Reynolds because I find his humor to be annoying and feel that he is unable to bring any realism to any of his characters.


cbbuntz t1_ja9b076 wrote

I've heard Joker compared to Taxi Driver too. Also De Niro/Scorsese


SteveBorden t1_jac1op7 wrote

The whole ‘hating everyone earth and wanting to bring change while losing his mind’ is straight from taxi driver and the whole comedian being obsessed with talk show host is almost a carbon copy of king of comedy.


thedailyfootinass t1_ja9mq82 wrote

A tad off-topic, but I feel like Joker was essentially Taxi Driver and KoC. I saw the film and didn’t get anything new from it aside from wrapping it in comic book characters.

I agree with KoC. I was really turned off by his acting at first but I agree that it was good.


i-got-a-jar-of-rum t1_jaayn3y wrote

That’s essentially what it is and I feel like I'm in the minority when I say Joker wasn’t all that good. It got the two Oscars it most deserved but beyond that it’s not that compelling. It is an aesthetic copy of Scorsese thrillers with a shiny comic book movie cover and an overly-edgy fanbase whose only prior knowledge of the Joker character comes from Heath Ledger’s performance in The Dark Knight, and then they think the character is “deep” and “meaningful” in ways that comics and movies don’t even portray him.

Also people like to praise this film for its writing but people forget like half the movie is this weird amateur detective subplot that accomplishes nothing other than comic book nods to characters like Bruce Wayne and Alfred and locations like Arkham Asylum.


KiIgore-Trout t1_jab628v wrote

Not to nitpick, but The Killing Joke was 1988, so that dark gritty tragic joker has been around for 35 years at least in comics


i-got-a-jar-of-rum t1_jab83t7 wrote

I won’t deny the impact that has had on the character’s depiction in the years since, including Ledger and Phoenix, but in this case it feels like an “over-representation” of the character, that he is and has always been this tragic figure trying to prove a point, rather than an elemental force of chaos that destroys because it amuses him. Besides, the Joker as portrayed by Phoenix is vastly different to the one in Killing Joke, where Arthur was always troubled and mentally disturbed even before he killed anyone, whereas in the graphic novel the character starts out as sane but massively depressed about life.


Jedi_Council_Worker t1_jab8spt wrote

The performance of Joaquin Phoenix as well as the score and cinematography are the only compelling parts of Joker. It's tackling of mental health was so on the nose and lacked substance. I honestly hate the way edge lords look to the Joker character as a poster boy for mental illness.


refreshify96 t1_ja9gd3l wrote

What’s your pleasure, Jerry?


Odd_Vampire t1_jaaapis wrote

That whole dialogue in that scene was improvised, I heard.

One of my favorite Scorsese movies and also, IMO, one of his most underrated.


madtoad t1_jabb1rz wrote

Can anyone explain what this means?

...the Oscar win for The Departed was the Hollywood equivalent of getting your own pop a spot on a track day at Silverstone...


deebasr t1_jacyp2t wrote

> a spot on a track day at Silverstone

Silverstone is a racetrack and a "track day" is a non-raceday where the public can drive the course. The author's metaphor still doesn't make a damn bit of sense though. I think the author is trying to say that Scorcese didn't deserve an Oscar for the Departed or that he's well past his ability to be an honest contender, but he's not clever enough to stick the landing.

edit: Or maybe auocorrect made a mess of the article and the editor didn't give a shit about this clickbait.


madtoad t1_jadb3hn wrote

Thank you for at least giving me some hope that I haven't just gone insane. :D


Hammerheadhunter t1_jac8j8g wrote

I love this movie but I have to say, I’m always a bit baffled when people say this is their favourite Scorsese movie. You seen the options at the buffet?


ThomasKLY t1_jacvj8j wrote

I think this is the equivalent of people saying Interstellar is their favourite Nolan movie, sure some of Scorsese's other works are better but somehow KOC just resonates with them more.


Nivekian13 t1_jaclytm wrote

Like how Todd Phillips ripped it off to make his INO Joker flick?


More-Escape3704 t1_jab6wea wrote

It's a really underrated movie and it was a character no one else but Robert De Niro could pull off


Empty_Ad_8303 t1_jacxpi1 wrote

Gatekeepers part is correct but it is also about the obsession with being famous for being famous which is tik tok and all the other social media


YeaItsBig4L t1_ja925ft wrote

the steve harvey bernie mac version is the kings of comedy


Worth-Price9141 t1_ja8c74n wrote

The hipster's choice for best Scorsese movie


modest811 t1_ja9sulg wrote

Nah, that would be After hours.

And both are well deserved choices.