In JOKER: FOLIE A DEUX, everyone’s favorite archvillain returns in a film I didn’t hate as much as some but could not appreciate.
I enjoyed the first film in 2019, though I’m not sure “enjoyed” is the right word, as I found it a good film but unpleasant and sometimes feeling a bit like work. I certainly admired its ambition, tone, and grit, how it took a comic book villain and threw him into the real world with a startling and surprising origin story. But I found it pretty cynical overall. Unlike in the excellent DARK KNIGHT, where the Joker was crazy but had a strong guiding philosophy that directly contrasted with Batman’s, in JOKER, the Joker is, well, just mentally ill, beaten down by the world so much he becomes a grandstanding narcissist who murders people he resents. The riot at the end of the movie teased that there might be more to it, as a lot of angry people in Gotham connect with his lashing out, suggesting the start of a movement celebrating chaos and the birth of a true supervillain. I thought, okay, that was the origin story, now we get the story of an archvillain.
Instead, we got, well, this.
First off, again I didn’t hate the movie, as I curbed my expectations before going into it. But after watching, I have to agree the film seemed to go out of its way to antagonize the first movie’s fans by not only subverting but curb stomping pretty much any hopeful expectation they might have had. Instead of a rampaging supervillain, we get a neutralized and neutered Joker, a tedious courtroom drama, and a musical (which I didn’t mind at first but thought should have been used as an accent instead of such a huge part of the runtime). Lady Gaga plays an intriguing Harley Quinn, and she acts as a catalyst for him to rediscover his inner Joker, only for there to be really almost no payoff for either character. Otherwise, the story pretty much stands for most of the movie, revisiting the events in the first film for most of its run and not really offering much that is new or interesting.
I caught a review on YouTube where I thought the reviewer really nailed how to fix it–tell the story from Harley’s point of view. She has a philosophy for the Joker’s chaos and uses Arthur Fleck to become the next Joker. Done this way, there would have been a real dynamic and engaging story instead of watching one where the story appears to retread its original material, leading some reviewers to wonder if the filmmakers were trolling their own work’s fans.
Anyway, if you liked the first movie, my guess is you probably won’t like the sequel. I don’t regret watching it, but I did find it a real failed opportunity.
I have always said Joker would have been better served if it was called “The Commedian” and been an inspiration to his successor as the actual Clown Prince of Crime.
The age difference between Bruce Wayne and Arthur Fleck was too much a suspension of disbelief but the decay of his defense mechanisms to his own mental illness was a perfect initial symptom to what would evolve as the Joker. (The One Bad Day Theory).
As usual, I agree on your assessment and do believe that Todd Phillip’s desire to tank the idea of a series was his guiding star.
It’s a shame but, I always root for something “different” over the standard paint by numbers the Superhero genre has become.