The original Joker film captivated audiences and critics as a standout film in 2019, winning a Golden Globe for best score, with lead actor Joaquin Phoenix bringing home an Academy Award for Best Lead Actor. The first film’s gritty atmosphere and spot-on representation of a gloomy Gotham City was a recipe for success, and it was the first R-rated film to ever gross over 1 billion dollars. However, fans were met with some skepticism when the first trailer for “Joker: Folie à Deux” came out in April.
Framed as a musical film, Joker 2 focuses on Arthur Fleck, or “The Joker”, who is in a decreasing mental state and rotting in an asylum in Gotham. The story follows his court trial for a series of crimes and a romance with the infamous Harley Quinn (played by Lady Gaga). The trailer was more than a hit, accumulating over 30 million views on Youtube within a matter of days, but can a musical really match the standard set by its award-winning predecessor?
Pros:
“Joker: Folie à Deux” reestablishes Joaquin Phoenix’s role as the Joker, reminding audiences of Phoenix’s incredible acting talent. Throughout the film, Joaquin puts on a stellar performance and captures the same essence of horror and depression as seen in the first movie. Lady Gaga also puts on an excellent performance as Harley Quinn. While she lacks an extreme amount of screen time, her presence on the big screen is just as impactful as Phoenix’s. Her musical numbers are very well done, even if the scene is out of context and is just being used to drag a thin plotline. As reviewer Jay Y put it, “The acting was great from both Gaga and Joaquin, the supporting cast as well … that is the only positive I can say,” (Rotten Tomatoes). Gaga’s singing talents can make the scenes somewhat enjoyable, and the emotions she displays give her character depth, even if she lacks a good script.
The cinematography of the film is also stunning and envelops the viewer into the world of Joker. With Lawrence Sher reprising his role as cinematographer, “Joker: Folie à Deux’s scenes are captivating and drag viewers almost through the screen into the world of Gotham. His use of color in the film is done very well, especially in the scenes diving into the mind of Joker and his imaginary worlds. The tightness of shots and scenes matches the claustrophobia of the chaotic city and chaos of Arthurs own mind. However, cinematography was heavily restricted throughout the film. The movie’s setting is especially limited, with the film only focusing on three or so main locations, mainly being the aslyum Arthur is locked in, and the occasional scene in a Gothom courtroom. This led to a lot of mirrored shots, and a lack of room for creativity.
Cons:
Despite the best efforts of the cast to match the sequel to “Joker” with its predecessor, the expectations for the film were sadly far from reached. Turning a film about a murderous clown into a musical was a controversial choice, and either the film would turn into almost a cult claasic with its strange twist on the musical genre, or fall flat for audiences, The latter applied for the film.
The musical frame of the movie was always going to be harder to achieve, especially in this kind of film. It’s hard to fit the generally happy and giddy tone of a musical into a much darker frame which was seen in Joker 1. While some of the musical elements of the film were enjoyable to a point, the overall narrative suffers from its musical framing. A lot of the musical scenes seem forced, leaving you wondering why the moviemakers felt the need to put a song into this kind of scene. The scenes dragged the movie down especially considering the music itself. The movie had a lack of original pieces, but used a wide selection of songs and some recognizable hits to make some scenes fun to watch, but beneath the musical number, it’s easy to realize how the songs are just adding onto the film’s runtime.
Most musical scenes are unnecessary and add an element to the film nobody asked for. The original soundtrack for Joker 1 was incredible and won multiple awards, and there was no need for them to try and build off the musical element of its predecessor to the point they did. In the end, the film doesn’t give what you would expect from a sequel to the original, and it feels almost like a different series entirely. In Joker 1, you follow a dark story of a man made fun of by a flawed soceity due to something he can change, and you are genuinely intrigued in the mind and world of the Joker. They throw this away completely in “Joker: Folie à Duex”. The complex mind of Joker and his thoughts are lost in scenes of Lady Gaga singing musical numbers in the scenes which don’t need it, and it acts as more of an intermission than part of the narrative. In the middle of court, you don’t expect an accused murderer to break out in song and dance, but you see it here, and you can see why no other people have attempted something like it before. It’s because it does not fit. Reviewer Zain Z stated “It (Joker: Folie à Duex) is an underwhelming sequel for the rock solid first movie. Really should’ve stuck with the way ‘Joker’ was made, at the very least.”
The movie itself felt extremely repetitive. Its lack of different scenery makes some scenes feel as if you have already seen them. In one scene, Joker is in an insane asylum, and then the next he is off to court. Then he goes back to the asylum, and it rinses and repeats. The lack of difference between scenes and the general direction of the movie made it hard to sit through and stay invested in the film. It’s as if the film coulsnt choose a direction to take, and just stayed in the same lane through its entire runtime.
The most controversial aspect of the movie is its ending. The ending is one you won’t be able to predict, which is neither a good nor a bad thing. The finale comes out of left field, leaving the conclusion of the film a bit bleak. While this effect may be what the director is going for, it left me more displeased than curious. The buildup you wait two hours for across the movie crescendos and, in the end, barely pays off.
What do you get when you have a multi-million dollar award-winning movie and greedy Hollywood executives? You get the mess that is “Joker: Folie à Deux”. If I were to give a starred review, “Joker: Folie à Deux” would be 3.3 stars out of 5. The original Joker was never expected to have a sequel and was meant to be a stand-alone film. A lack of areas to explore, and throwing in random cameos like Harvey Dent from comics to try and make the movie more intriguing. In the end, it does quite the opposite, and shows the lack of effort put into the film and demonstrates how this was a film to make money, not to entertain. Die-hard fanswill get suck some happiness out of this film, but for your average Joe, “Joker: Folie à Deux” is a joke of a film.
