Joker: Folie à Deux is a sequel that distances itself visually from much of the successful, divisive and radical (in terms of the superhero genre) original, however, what holds the film back is the few ties that constantly tie it to its predecessor. The film sees the return of Joaquin Phoenix’s Arthur Fleck after his euphoric rise to the chaotic messiah of Gotham’s troubled status, Joker. The film’s opening aims to show the difference in tone and style, a Looney Tunes cartoon of the Joker and his shadow, two competing bodies vying for control. Whilst Todd Phillips’s choice to open in this manner is audacious and fantastical, I couldn’t help nudge the fact that this was a jarring way to introduce a film whose predecessor was so dark and brooding.
Folie à Deux follows the events of Joker, with Arthur now imprisoned in Arkham Asylum, his body returned to the skinny shell Phoenix adopted in the original. As he meets his lawyer, she suggests that Arthur did not commit the atrocities of the first film, but rather a second persona, Joker. Throughout the opening act, Arthur is quiet and absent, no longer laughing and joking around, until he comes across Lee, played by Lady Gaga, who aims to bring the Joker out of him. Whilst the Assistant District Attorney, a young Harvey Dent, aims to punish Arthur with the death penalty, Lee’s presence brightens his mood, as he enters into a fantastical world through musical numbers.
The film attempts to show, as one of the teachers in Arkham states, how music makes us whole. This thesis statement is a compelling one. Following the film’s suggestion of Arthur having a split personality, the idea that music can unite his fractured mind acts as a bridge between the aim of the film, for Arthur to become one, and the power of music. However, Phillips is unsuccessful in fusing these ideas, with little development of Arthur’s persona throughout the film, perhaps until its conclusion.
Phillips also struggles to detach himself from his previous work with the use of music. Early on in the film, there is a scene which is overlaid with ‘That’s Life’ in a bizarre choice, providing no context or catharsis for anything that happens on the screen. I can only suggest that this decision was only to remind the audience that the song was used in the original film to great effect. Hildur Guðnadóttir’s score suffers a similar fate. Reusing similar leitmotifs without the same actions or context as the original. Whereas the first film showed Arthur’s over-the-top emotions, in this film he is quiet and controlled, in a bleaker setting. Thus, Guðnadóttir’s score becomes jarring and takes you out of the film.
Yet, the musical numbers mostly work surprisingly well. The opening number “For Once in My Life” is a particular highlight, set within the prison setting, it does not feel out of place, whilst Phoenix embraces the musical genre within the scene. Another great number is “Close to You” which perfectly fits the emotions of the characters and embodies musicals at their best, as a projection of internal voice. Likewise, the numbers between Joker and Lee provide much-needed romance, particularly as their relationship is underbaked. Not only did the numbers not feel out of place, but at times, they were the highlight of the film, from brilliant fantastical moments to set pieces that are set in the real world. However, Phillips still pays homage to films prior, for example, early on in the film, he recreates a shot from Jacques Demy’s The Umbrellas of Cherbourg that has no resonance to the film other than the scene involves umbrellas. These moments of homage don’t pay respect for the film or aim to provide a subtle connection but rather just take you out of the film.
The film has nothing in particular it wants to say. There is little to no advancement of Fleck’s character throughout the film (most of it happens between the two films) and likewise, Gaga’s Lee is significantly unwritten and not given enough screentime to develop what could be an interesting character, even though she tries to inject as much life into the character, in another role that places her in an upper echelon of actresses working today. Instead, like Fleck, the film is thirsty to leech on the fame of the first film. Throughout there is a meta-narrative discussing a film about the Joker, one can only suggest this is Phillips gloating at the success of the first film; with significant portions of the film involving discussions of scenes from the previous film, or providing flashbacks like a sitcom that has run out of ideas so provides highlights reels of the show’s best moments. It is a film that is unable to stand alone and instead attempts to remind the audience of scenes in the much more interesting original. Likewise, the inclusion of Harvey Dent only serves as a recognisable character name and provides no take on the character, it could easily be anyone else, but Phillips revels in the idea of misusing another iconic character.
The film attempts to show what it means to be Joker, whether Arthur is still the Joker, or whether the Joker persona has transcended beyond him and been adopted by the people. Whilst I admired the way Todd Phillips concluded his film, there was little to no form of catharsis, ending with a whimper rather than the crescendo the film feels like it’s building towards.
Whilst Joker: Folie à Deux looks stunning and is perhaps more ambitious than its predecessor, it struggles to provide a progression of the Arthur Fleck character. It is a film that tries to detach itself from the past, but yet, gets caught up in its own desire for callbacks. A film that cannot stand on its own two feet and is solely made due to the success of the original. Whilst I admire some of the swings Phillips takes, particularly the musical elements, I can’t help but feel that the film fails to combine the many ideas it has in its head.
Comments