'Joker' REVIEW—Dark, Yet Incredible

From the director of The Hangover comes the newest film that seems like its only purpose is to reassure me in my fear/hatred of clowns. Because honestly, it seems like Hollywood felt as if It: Chapter Two couldn't do the job, so they should release this to really mess with me.

Here we go!

Joker is a psychological thriller written by Todd Phillips and Scott Silver and directed by Phillips. This film serves as an origin story for the iconic Batman villain known as the Joker, and it has Joaquin Phoenix stepping into the shoes of this famous role.

In our current day and age where comic book films are both widespread and appreciated, with Marvel's Avengers: Endgame becoming the #1 highest grossing film of all time this year, it is easy to simply throw all these films together as a genre of mindless blockbuster entertainment.

And a film about Batman's arch-nemesis can easily fail to distinguish itself from other films of its genre, as they could have fallen into the same supervillain origin tropes that we've grown accustomed to—from the science experiment gone wrong to the ambitious, evil man craving power.

However, with the Joker, a single backstory has not been established for him. His origin story tends to change from comic to comic, and sometimes, from the story the Joker tells his victims. It was the job of Phillips and Silver to give this character a backstory that could stand out over the comic book films we've seen recently from Marvel and DC.

Their idea? Make it a character study.

A film like Joker can be classified as a comic book film, but cannot be considered a "superhero film," as our protagonist is a man who has no superpowers and definitely isn't a hero. This is a comic book film, a psychological thriller, and a crime drama all in one, and it's one of the best films of the year.

The story of this film follows a formula that we have seen before in films such as Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy, two films where our main protagonist is not a hero, but an antihero who has good intentions but does not act on them in ways that typical heroes do.

Many have made the comparison with this film to those two, and while the similarity is notable, the idea to bring this type of story and apply it to a cackling comic book villain was great, and it pays off in the film, as we have a supervillain origin story that surprisingly feels very grounded in reality.

Joker is not your typical comic book film where the plot is driven forward by fight scenes, chases, and explosions. Instead, this film's story is a slow-moving drama about a man pushed to insanity by the events that occur around him, and I found this to be riveting and a breath of fresh air from the comic book films that have become almost formulaic in their execution.

This film is more focused on character than on flashiness, and a lot of the film is spent allowing us to learn about Arthur Fleck. From the first few scenes, we learn that he is a clown who is trying to be a stand-up comedian. He lives in a rusty apartment with his mother and he has a disorder that causes him to laugh uncontrollably at inappropriate times.

He carries a card with him that he lends to a stranger to explain his condition while he is in a laughing fit, and even though we know that he will eventually snap and become the Joker, we feel sympathy for him.

When Arthur is laughing, you hear pain in his voice, as you can tell he doesn't want to laugh, but is forced to because of his condition. And even though we are watching a man laugh, we see the misery that he goes through and the iconic maniacal Joker laugh evokes a sense of pity rather than fear over the audience.

Additionally, the environment that Arthur lives in is a driving force in what creates the Joker. In this film, Gotham City is filled with crime and poverty. The trains and streets are covered in graffiti, and the tragic events that happen to Arthur, both personal and in his environment, are what slowly pushes him to the edge.

This is what makes the film so well-written. We know what the end result of the film will be and we know that he will become a mass murderer, but we don't want it to happen because of how bad we feel for him, and because of this, we're consistently invested as Arthur's actions become darker and scarier.

Now, a lot of what made Arthur so compelling is the fact that he's portrayed masterfully by Joaquin Phoenix. For me, there are two types of great acting: the kind that makes you go, "Wow! That's great acting!" and the kind that makes you forget that you're watching someone pretend to be someone else.

And with Phoenix, he was very much the latter. He was able to make us both feel sympathetic toward him and later in the film, horrified by how disconnected with reality he becomes and how little he cares about anything.

The supporting characters are also portrayed very well. Robert De Niro is very convincing as a 1980s talk show host, and while Phoenix is very much in the spotlight, everyone feels very believable in their respective roles.

Phillips also directed this film superbly. There are certain scenes with revelations and emotional scenes that are shown to the audience in creative ways. Furthermore, Phillips did a good job of showing Arthur's loneliness and mood by having him dressed in dark clothes and having many shots of him alone, showing his isolation.

The film's musical score is also composed impeccably by Hildur Guðnadóttir, who was able to complement certain scenes with very dark, loud music that adds to certain scenes to create tension, and the cinematography in this film is also very dark, which matches the mood of this film.

Another shining attribute of this film is the production design. Gotham City feels very lived-in and run-down by crime, and the setting also sells the fact that the film takes place in the 1980s without it ever being explicitly stated.

I was also surprised by the way this film referenced Batman. I won't go into detail for those who have not seen the movie, but the story and the character tie itself to Batman in ways that may be surprising. Additionally, the Joker's origin feels nearly parallel to Batman's, which made their dynamic even more interesting than it has been in other incarnations.

Now, I want to give my two cents on the controversy that surrounded the film during its release, as many have criticized the film for "condoning violence" and some have speculated that the violent acts in this film could potentially inspire people to commit heinous crimes such as mass shootings.

And I want to be clear that I'm not saying this scenario would be impossible, but I'm saying that these feelings don't necessarily constitute whether Joker is a good or bad film. People will take this film and interpret it in their own way, and for a Joker origin story, I'd prefer a provocative film such as this over a film that felt sanitized and safe.

The Joker is a villainous murderer, and this movie didn't shy away from showing that. I don't think this movie "condones" violent behavior; it depicts it in a way that is both realistic and comic book-ish at the same time.

Many are upset by the fact that the film appears to paint criminals and mass murderers in a sympathetic light, but I think that's what makes this film more complex than a disposable comic book film; we sympathize with Arthur until he begins to perform despicable acts, and at that point, the audience is no longer supposed to support him.

Joker is a comic book film with some social commentary embedded into it. The film asks what part normal people like you and me play in creating horrible people such as the Joker. It also deals with how privileged people tend to look down on less fortunate people, along with the theme of mental illness and how it can affect people for the worse.

These are very mature ideas that aren't commonly explored in film today, and I feel like they accompanied the dark tone of this movie very well. The story of this film is really sad, and it's not really supposed to incite violence as much as it is to depict fictional events with some social commentary added to it as well.

If you watched this film and felt a bit disgusted by its portrayal of certain themes, I can understand that. Film is an art form that impacts every single one of us differently, and I think that's part of the beauty of what made Joker so interesting.

Now, I don't think this is a perfect film either. The film contains very few narrative twists that we haven't already seen before in other films. It feels very inspired by other films such as Taxi Driver, and because of that, most of the film is predictable.

And I feel like as they added depth to the character of the Joker, they also took away some of his mystery, as his identity doesn't appear to be a secret to the people of Gotham.

But overall, this was a great film. It's a surprisingly dark film for the comic book genre, and a much more mature take on the character than we've seen elsewhere *cough*Suicide Squad*cough*. The film is very well-shot and well-written, and Phoenix really delivers in this Oscar-worthy performance.

I'm gonna give 'Joker' a 9/10 (A).

Do I recommend this film? I definitely recommend it, but I know this film isn't for everyone. Some may be very put off by what happens in this movie, and others may simply be bored by its lack of action and slow-building drama.

But if you love the character, you want to see a great performance, and/or you're not bothered by what people in the media are saying about the film, then definitely check it out.

Thank you so much for reading!