Caught an early screening of the new Joker movie on Thursday but was mixed on what to write about it. Partly because of the Controversy, partly because I’m not sure how much I liked it. But I did like it… I like it a lot… except that it’s not a 100% cohesive film and trying to figure out what happened in the last act that lowered my opinion has been a challenge.
So Joker is the origin story of the Batman/DC Comics film villain of the same name (aka The Clown Prince of Crime). However, be assured, this is the least comic booky comic book movie ever released. This movie shares far more DNA with urban blight and modern day misery films like Taxi Driver, Seven, and Fight Club (and apparently The King of Comedy which I have not seen). It’s a depressing, dark, angry, dirty film… it’s the Feel Bad Movie of the Year, in fact. It’s not about heroes in tights, it’s not about super villains with super plots to take over the world. It’s about a depressed, mentally unstable, lonely man living in a depressed, unstable, and lonely city.
Arthur Fleck, the main character, is played impressively by a stick figure Joaquin Phoenix. He lost a lot of weight for the film and comes off as a skeleton with a coat of flesh draped over his gaunt body (not as distressing as Christian Bail in The Machinist, at least). It’s a masterful performance that presents an unstable, unreliable narrator (unreliable narrators are easier to present in books, less so in movies but this film manages it). He has a job as a rent-a-clown and wants to be a stand-up comedian (his mom asks him about it though… “don’t you have to be funny to be a stand-up?”). But life and the city keep pushing him down. He’s on a series of medications prescribed by the city’s uninterested social healthcare system. He seems to be a good – or at least decent – person trying to remain good… but it’s just going to take one bad day to put him over the edge.
But, no, this is not a superhero or villain film. This is a character study and, as such, it’s often a slow (angry) burn. It’s not an action film and it’s not about heroes and villains. It’s not going to be for everyone either because it’s closer to an art house picture than a mainstream blockbusters but also because it’s a tense film that wants to put you on edge. That’s not going to be a fun time at the theaters for everyone. There’s a scene (the one in the trailers) where three young men harass Fleck (dressed as a clown) on the subway. It’s a tension-filled scene where nobody on the train is a good guy… the young men because they are drunk bullies but also Fleck because you know he’s about to go off and it’s not going to be pretty. But also the subway and the audio mixing is a villain… the sound of the train, the camera work, it all comes together to make the train feel like a wound-up beast ready to strike. It’s a remarkable scene… one that had me on that edge.
But there’s a problem in that… well… the whole movie doesn’t ultimately click. All the great moments – including some great moments at the end – don’t ultimately gel. There’s something in the last act where the cohesion of the story fails. I’m not sure what it is, but the ratcheted up tension eases off and I’m sure that’s not intentional. Maybe it’s the unfortunately predictable final moments, maybe it’s the City on Fire sequence not really jibing with Arthur Fleck himself, maybe it’s the five or six separate endings.
It also could be that I’m not 100% sure the movie knows what it’s trying to say about the modern world. It sure thinks we treat each other shabbily and there’s great anger and resentment between the poor and the upper class. But I’m not sure a movie that seems to be trying to be smart and incisive is as smart and incisive on the final page as it thinks it is. One problem is that the movie, for most of its run time, trusts the audience to be smart… but in the final act, it tosses that aside and speechifies something that is accurate up to a point, but not really earned. And it’s a little too blatantly meant to be the movie’s thesis and stating it so bluntly is a disservice to the audience and how the film has presented itself up to that point.
Despite any flaws, this is still an excellent film for its first two acts and then only a good one its final act. It’s sadly uneven but the whole is still a very good film. Assuming you are the kind of person who can enjoy a bleak, depressing, anxiety-ridden time at the theater. I enjoy that myself so this is still worth seeing. Your results may vary.
Score: 88