Joker: A folie deux

Visually appealing. Clever message. Lacking fan-service. Minimal plot.

Joker: A Folie Deux is a bit of a paradox in that its overwhelmingly negative reviews are understandable and mostly accurate, yet at the same time miss what makes the film good. The negative criticism simply proves the point that Todd Phillips is making about fanaticism. The strength of the film lies in its analogy and metaphor, while its lack of plot and overuse of music is the weakest.

The central premise of the movie is a criticism of society's relentless ability to turn tragedy into entertainment. This is highlighted by Arthur's trial being televised, drawing comparisons to the OJ Simpson murder case. Perhaps the most powerful image is when we finally see Joker in full regalia in the courtroom after Arthur opts to fire his lawyer and defend himself, a decision that draws huge applause from his "fans" despite being an objectively awful decision for his future. Joker's antics in the courtroom are playful as we would expect using a drawling southern accent and mocking witnesses. However, if you look beyond the surface, he does not hold the power. He is the court jester, the sad clown in the circus dancing for the camera. 

Throughout the film we get fantasy scenes of Harley and Joker hosting what looks like an evening TV show. This is a visually appealing metaphor for the spectacle that Joker has become. Joker thinks he is entertaining the audience, when in reality he is the entertainment. When the crowd cheers after he gets shot on stage it becomes clear they were laughing at him not with him all along. 

A particularly standout scene for me was when he is running away from his rescuers from the court room and Arthur is being chased by someone dressed as Joker while running past grimy theatres advertising peep and gore shows. Arthur/Joker was providing those shows for us, his fans, and now as he runs away the fans turn their back.

Mixed in with a general criticism of tragedy glorification is an unsubtle criticism of fanaticism that is pointedly directed at Joker fans. It is a message I agree with, fanatacism is unhealthy and out of control particularly around celebrities and sports teams. However, criticizing your own fanbase is pretty hypocritical given a director is only in the position to take creative risks because of previous positive fan reception. There is also the question about whether this is the right medium with which to send this message. The film industry profits from tragedy storytelling more than most and many, possibly most, people do not watch a film with an introspective intention as to why they are there in the first place.

A lot of criticism has been aimed at how this film "destroyed Joker's backstory" by showing Arthur Fleck as a weak and pathetic human being. This contrasts with the chaotically confident Joker we are so used to seeing on our screens, and people have trouble reconciling the two opposite representations. However, the point these critics miss is that Joker is an idea, not an individual. If Joker is a person then he must have a human backstory and ordinary humanity will never live up to the idea. Every movement has an originator that it eventually outgrows and that is what we see in Joker 2. Rather than destroying Joker's backstory, Arthur's murder at the end of the film actually confirms the immortality of Joker. He is replaced by a new Joker that carves the scars onto his own face. Joker does not die with Arthur because Arthur was never Joker. Nobody can be Joker. Joker is an intangible agent of chaos, it doesn't matter who is beneath the makeup.

That being said, I get why the reviews are bad. People expect a certain shock factor and escapism from fantasy movies and this doesn't provide that. From a plot perspective nothing really happens and the world is in the same state as it was at the end of the first movie.  There was also too much singing which seems to be a recurring theme in film at the moment. Overall I actually liked it given my agreement with the underlying message and my preference for analogy over action on screen, but it is understandably divisive.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Federer vs Nadal vs Djokovic

Image
Over the past few years I have repeatedly had the "Who is the tennis GOAT?" debate with a friend of mine, Joe. A lifelong tennis fan, Joe preferes Federer while I, a relatively new convert to the sport, have been most impressed by Djokovic. With little tennis experience at my disposal I don't have a lot of evidence to support either player. However, thanks to Jeff Sackmann, who maintains a publicly available tennis database , what I do have is the result of every ATP Tour match since 1968. So here goes my attempt to leave bias at the door and answer this question once and for all with my good friend (better than Joe), statistics.  Stuff we already know Engaging in this debate generally starts with a list of the grand slams each player has won. This isn't enough to make a comparison on relative abilities though because these impressive tallies were racked up across different time periods, against different crops of players and on different surfaces. Nadal's dominan...
Read more

A Narrow Escape

I really shouldn’t have had all those vodka and cokes. I usually know my limits but last night it seemed as though there was a voice in my head insisting I continue drinking. Then I noticed the shape next to me and groaned inwardly, maybe it wasn’t my imagination. My head screamed in protest as I carefully turned to see who had accompanied me home last night. That’s when I was blinded by a golden laser that burned straight through my retinas and set my brain on fire. Instinctively I burrowed my chin into my chest and sought shelter beneath the quilt. It was then that I decided a scouting mission was called for. No more rash decisions were to be made until I had some understanding of my surroundings. Raising a protective arm to block the morning sunlight piercing through the gap in the curtains I slowly emerged into reality once again. I blinked a few times as my eyes gradually adjusted to the murky half-light in the room. I took several deep breaths in an attempt to calm my raging he...
Read more

My Introduction to Modern Art

Image
 In September 2022 I was in New York for work and one weekend I paid a visit to the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA). I am not an art fan, in fact I think the only previous time I was in a gallery was a school tour in Dublin when I was 10. However, museums are a great place to kill a few hours alone in a city so off I went to MoMA armed only with the knowledge that Jackson Pollock seemed to regularly be an answer in the art round of University Challenge. The exhibition started on the fifth floor with work from the mid 1800's and descended in chronological order until you reach contemporary art (works done by living artists) on the first floor. Initially I liked some of what I saw and was indifferent about a lot. One part that stood out to me was how Picasso's abstract cubism style influenced more modern works that focused on shapes and symmetry without depicting an image.  I do not know if my interpretation is correct, but as I descended through the galleries I got the impression t...
Read more