I didn’t care for the musical nature of it. That aside:
The first ‘Joker’ clearly established that the main character was Arthur Fleck. Clearly suffering from mental illness as a result of abuse growing up, and the people he murdered were abusing him in some way. To me, as a long time Batman fan, this ‘Joker’ was anything but Joker.
- He didn’t take pleasure in chaos.
- He wasn’t anti-batman in anyway.
- A clear back story that lined up with his behaviors.
- Clearly a dude pushed too far (kind of like Killing Joke, but it didn’t line up with that character’s style).
However, when he was in the ‘Joker’ role, he became clear headed and focused. So now the ‘Joker’ clearly isn’t Joker but the beginning of Joker?
In Folie A Deux, we see him continue to be abused, still having strange fantasies, a system failing around him, and noticably the ‘Joker’ character is resonating with people fed up with all sorts of bullshit. The collective desire to burn it down and restart - very common theme within the Batman comics and joker. We see Harley Quinzel introduced, and as we discover throughout the movie - this is the actual Harley Quinn Psychiatry, brilliance, obsessed with Joker to the point that when Arthur says it was just something he made up to do what he thought he needed, she quit him. The last parts of the movie tie is completely together. Ricky, who is killed by the only guard that is sometimes nice, breaks Arthur, realizing murder happens to those undeserving by those who ‘shouldnt’ be doing it.
Joker escapes after the court room explosion (with a burned Harvey Dent, that was badass). He’s rescued by enthusiasts, who he escapes from. He encounters Quinn and she says that his “fantasy was all that mattered, and it’s gone.”
When the Joker is murdered at the end by the psychopath, he starts it with a retelling of the joke Arthur told Murray. Albeit, one that was significantly better delivered. He also notably uses a knife, and is laughing the whole time, and gives himself a scarred smile. This man, (if Warner Bros could ever finish a good DC series) would likely continue to be an evolution of ‘Joker’.
This all works because:
- Joker rarely has a back story, and famously is stated to prefer his origin to be “Multiple Choice.”
- Several comics and media (Notably the Arkham series of video games) explore how Joker is not confined to a single person. Unlike Batman who has very specic goals, values, and traumatic origin, Joker is a shared ‘idea’ between these individuals that reject the value of civilization at all.
- Harley Quinzel was only introduced in the 90s, but her main obsession with Joker evolved over time as he abused her, or burned things she learned to care for, but seemingly remained obsessed because of some ‘fantasy’ she provided him, UNTIL he broke that fantasy and she quit him abruptly just like in the movie.
I don’t think it was a great movie. But it actually reimagined the same Joker story in a new way that I did thoroughly enjoy. And it left it plenty open for more stories from it, just as all good DC stories do.
I saw it last night. As a huge fan of the first one, I guess my hopes were high.
It looks, cinematically speaking, really good.
But as a musical? WTF? I had to force myself to watch it to completion. If it wasn’t a continuation of the first one, I wouldn’t have even bothered.
In fairness, I generally can’t stand musicals. And even if they featured my favourite movie characters, I’d still struggle to sit through them.
I think they could have a fantastic movie if they just continued with the same style as the first.
I’ve never been big on DC Movies, but I really liked Joker 2 as well.
Lady Gaga was the absolute perfect casting choice for Harley, and I absolutely loved how accurate the whole “very high highs, very low lows” dynamic of their relationship was.
Overall the movie was extremely disappointing, but in a way that is a realistic representation of what it actually feels like to be struggling mentally and being failed by the system again and again. I think that’s the point that people don’t get, because they go “I feel bad -> the movie was bad”.
Honestly, I was very surprised she played the way more nuanced aspect of Harley so well.
She didn’t kill a single person, but she absolutely didn’t give two fucks about everyone else. She was in it for herself and the fantasy, and absolutely nuts in the crazy ex girlfriend no one really sees until it’s too late kind of way.
I haven’t watched it yet, so I only read the title.
Pls no spoilers, just commenting to say I saw Quentin Tarantino agrees with you somewhere on YT.
I hate musicals which is the only reason I haven’t seen it yet. Why the fuck is it a musical
To piss off everyone people who misinterpreted the first one. I’m like 99% sure that was the reason.
Yeah, my brother is right there along with you. It is worth a watch, but maybe wait until you can see it without paying more than you already do/do not.
Thanks, I actually wanted to make the same post. But I even liked the musical parts. They fit in well as a continuation of the dancing in the first one.
I just didn’t like the ending and Joker cult (already in the first one) that much because it was already done in Gotham relatively recently for much the same reason of not really showing a Joker origin when Bruce was too young to be Batman.
