I am expected to give my political view here. For various reasons ... An art platform that promotes, in addition to your works, content written about art. I have everything prepared, but I didn't publish it.

In the meantime, I was fascinated by the new Joker movie. To the point of going to watch it, alone, on Friday. And, why not talk about a new film, if this is an art platform? Everyone wants to talk about the Joker. In the review aggregator that I follow, the average score among professional critics is 56 at the moment, and among viewers, it is 92.

I haven't watched many films. Following the Joker I packed Mystery in the Mediterranean and I realized why I haven't seen many in the last few years. But let's get back to the Joker.

If mr. or mrs. did not watch the film, it is better to stop reading here. I reserve the right to reveal spoilers, or parts of the films, only to those who watched it.

Joker, in my opinion, is a very good film. In many ways. I, alone in the cinema, was stuck and moved from the beginning. Rare were the times that any type of art aroused so much emotion. Perhaps because of the character's history, which also includes Heath Ledger, who committed suicide. Perhaps because of the film's brilliance, now pruned by media outlets and professional critics.

I researched all the material a lot before going to watch. He even knew that there could be an attack while watching. And it was a little tense, yes ... But no, humanity is smarter than that. It is even the motto of the film. I will no longer obey the ruling class, media, or agenda. An attempt on a Joker debut, perhaps, is what those in power expect from us, ants, or mere mortals.

Besides emotion, what is so great about the film? Well, the subway scene is something that makes us think about cinema photography. Here, I say, before watching the other Oscar candidates, that if Joker doesn't win the Oscar for photography, there is something wrong in Hollywood.

Cinema is made of clichés, to make us identify with the characters. The Joker does such a task so masterfully that most of us only remember it for days after watching it.

Good, but the film is not perfect. What's bad? The references… The film is heavily influenced by The King of Comedystarring Robert De Niro. AND Taxi Driver, both by Martin Scorcese. Ok friend, it was influenced, all right, but I didn't need to copy the scenes or make references so obvious, like Arthur Fleck's standup act rehearsal, or Joker.

Furthermore, the most vehement criticism on my part is that yes, the film does glorify crime. The character reaches the acceptance of the people through his crimes. As a feminist, she empowers herself as she escalates her infractions in the Penal Code. And, the film shows and gets us used to the naturalness of a homicide. The Joker simply kills some people, and that's it. Nothing that hasn't happened in Hollywood before, "Nature Killers" comes the mind. But in Joker, we feel like the killer. And it’s not cool, it’s not normal. I left the theater with the sounds of gunshots reverberating in my head.

Again, it is a very good film. Of the fool at the beginning, little remains, and in the end we really wish the Joker did not exist. The transition between the wronged good guy and the bad guy is not subtle, but it is exciting. The trivialization of violence is regrettable. Todd Philips was so creative in making an antihero movie with so little, but it could have been even more innovative if he had left the villain a little more innocent until the end.