SecondWindGroup
patreon
[COLUMN] Joker: Folie á Deux is an Indulgent, Committed Cinematic Troll | by Darren Mooney
🕑 Added 2024-10-04 14:00:15 +0000 UTC
NOTE: This piece contains full spoilers for Joker: Folie á Deux. Like, we literally discuss the closing image over several paragraphs. So, consider yourself forewarned.
There is a moment near the end of the second act of The Dark Knight, when the Joker (Heath Ledger) dowses a huge pile of cash in gasoline and sets it on fire. Todd Phillips’ Joker: Folie á Deux feels like watching that scene play out in slow motion over two hours and twenty minutes. Phillips has taken a significant chunk of change from Warner Bros. – although he argues reports of a $200m budget are “absurd” – and effectively set it ablaze on screen. It feels, appropriately enough, like a dark joke.
Thematically and narratively, there was nothing in Todd Phillips’ Joker that required a sequel, beyond its billion-dollar gross and its awards success. Folie á Deux agrees, feeling like a sequel that hates its own existence. From start to finish, Folie á Deux feels like it has been designed specifically to deny fans of Joker everything that they might want from a sequel. Folie á Deux doesn’t just fail to offer emotional catharsis. It actively denies its audience any sense of satisfaction.
This is obvious in the film’s structure. Folie á Deux is effectively half a courtroom drama that serves as a framework to put Joker itself on trial and half an attempt at a minimalist New Hollywood movie musical in the style of something like Martin Scorsese’s New York, New York. There is something clever in this. Joker was very obviously indebted to Martin Scorsese’s Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy, so it makes sense for the sequel to draw from the musical that he made between them.
New York, New York was a massive flop. It was critically reviled on initial release, with pundits like Vincent Canby confessing that they were “increasingly dumbfounded” by the film, which blended gritty 1970s realism with the framework of a 1950s studio spectacular to create a “miserabilist musical misfire.” However, New York, New York was an achingly sincere film. By most accounts, the film’s failure profoundly affected Scorsese, who took its failure to mean he would “never” enjoy the mass success of Steven Spielberg or Francis Ford Coppola.
In contrast, Folie á Deux harbors no delusions of populist appeal. Arthur Fleck (Jaquin Phoenix) never gets a moment of violent catharsis to mirror the climax of Joker. Instead, the character is repeatedly brutalized and humiliated. Arthur is beaten and sexually assaulted by the guards at Arkham State Hospital led by Jackie Sullivan (Brendan Gleeson), none of whom face any consequences. He is abandoned by his lover Harleen “Lee” Quinzel (Lady Gaga) when he rejects the mantle of “Joker.” In the film’s final moments, he is murdered by an anonymous Arkham inmate (Connor Storrie).
There is a clear sense of intentionality to this brutalism. The film's opening twenty minutes find Arthur completely silent, refusing to perform as the guards beg him to tell a joke. In one fantasy, imagining co-hosting a late night talk show, Arthur complains to Lee, “Honey, I have a sneaking suspicion we’re not giving the people what they want.” As Jackie’s goons drag Arthur to a beating, Arthur protests, “Why is everyone so upset at me?” When a car bomb goes off during the trial, Arthur finds himself on the streets of Gotham fleeing his psychotic fans, as they shout, “Come back, Joker! I love you!” That’s the movie in microcosm.
Folie á Deux is very clearly in conversation with Joker. It is in many ways about mediated reality. It opens with a Looney Tunes short starring Arthur Fleck, “Me and My Shadow”, in which Arthur is consumed by his “Joker” persona. Much of the film is seen through television cameras, including interviews with Arthur and his trial – “one of the first trials to be nationally televised.” Even the film’s musical numbers are a form of mediation. In classic musical fashion, Phillips argues they are a way for Arthur to express himself when he doesn’t have “the words to say what he wants to say.”
As such, Folie á Deux is a raised middle finger directed at multiple targets which it addresses almost directly. It rebukes a certain kind of fan of Joker, the class of modern media consumer that critic Emily Nussbaum described as the “bad fan.” It’s possible to read Folie á Deux as an elaborate and extended attempt to trick a bunch of fans who treat Arthur’s violent rampage as a masculine power fantasy into watching a musical and courtroom drama. At one point, Arthur stares down the camera and declares, “There is no Joker.”
To be frank, there is something oddly appealing in this. Certain strains of modern fandom have gone rabid. There is a reluctance on the part of the providers of content to directly confront and call out such toxic behavior, often leaving individual artists to acknowledge such conduct. Joker was undoubtedly a movie with a toxic fan culture around it, as most comic book properties have developed in recent years, and so there is catharsis in Folie á Deux’s direct provocation of those fans.
More broadly, though, Folie á Deux also feels like a piece of guerilla filmmaking within the studio system. Much has been written about how the modern superhero boom has effectively homogenized the kinds of films that major studios will spend money on. Phillips reportedly pitched Joker to Phoenix as a heist movie, stating, “We’re gonna take $55 million from Warner Bros. and do whatever the hell we want.” In reality, it felt more like an elaborate troll.
Joker and Folie á Deux both feel like pieces of extremely cynical performance art. Joker is proof that the only way to convince a classic Hollywood studio like Warner Bros. to make something like Taxi Driver is to clothe it in familiar intellectual property. Folie á Deux pushes that idea even further, effectively an entire movie mocking the idea of trying to franchise a film like Joker. The closing image of Arthur bleeding out on the floor is a preemptive rejection of Joker: Ménage á Trois.
Indeed, Folie á Deux often seems to troll the very idea of fan service. Harvey Dent (Harry Lawtey) is a major character in the film, and is in the courtroom when the car bomb goes off, but he never transforms into Two-Face. As Arthur lays dying in the film’s closing moments, his killer carves the traditional Joker grin into his own face, evoking Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight. While more traditional comic book movies would focus on this transformation, Phillips lets the killer drift out of focus, panning down and zooming in on Arthur’s face. There’s a clear set-up and refusal of traditional franchise logic in Folie á Deux. It’s almost provocative.
Phillips has form here. Before making Joker, Phillips was best known for his work in comedy, on movies like Due Date and the Hangover trilogy. The second and third movies in the Hangover franchise have the same sort of bleakly cynical outlook as Folie á Deux, feeling like a joke being played on an audience that just wants more of the original film. The Hangover, Part III infamously pivots from a raunchy dude-friendly comedy into a bizarre hardboiled film noir.
This is – and always has been – part of Phillips’ character. As a student at NYU, Phillips directed a documentary called Hated about punk rocker G.G. Allin. Allin was, to put it mildly, a controversial figure. His act involved self-mutilation and coprophagia. Phillips leaned into this, getting incarcerated serial killer John Wayne Gacy to design a poster that Phillips sold that helped to pay for the movie. It worked, despite being a student film, Hated got “into like 45 theatres and it made money.”
There is arguably a clear throughline from Hated to Joker. “If I didn’t do what I did onstage,” Allin confesses in the documentary, “I’d probably kill somebody.” Joker is the story of another performer who struggles to articulate himself on stage. Arthur ends up killing six people and sparking citywide riots. There is a compelling metatext there. It is difficult to discuss Joker without talking about the national panic that greeted its original theatrical release.
While Joker won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival, the American media treated this $80m piece of intellectual property from a major studio as if it were an inflammatory text. Joker was “dangerous” or “reckless.” Entertainment Weekly announced that Joker was so dangerous that it had “chosen not to grade” the film. The Deseret News solemnly declared, “This is the wrong time for Joker.” Undercover cops attended New York screenings. The American military was on standby.
To be clear, this is not to belittle the risk of a horrific mass shooting event. After all, there had been one such shooting at the opening weekend of The Dark Knight Rises. However, in the United States there are almost two mass shooting events every day. American children are more likely to die due to gun violence than car accidents. In 2019, there was a high-profile case of a shooting in a movie theatre – during a screening of Jordan Peele’s Us.
Movies can lead to violent acts. John Hinkley Jr.’s attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan in March 1981 was inspired by Taxi Driver. However, it is insane to blame movies for those violent acts. In many cases, mass media serves as a convenient scapegoat to avoid grappling with the actual causes of such horrendous events: gun culture, mental illness, misogyny, white supremacy, the broader erosion of the social fabric. Joker was a shadow, unto which these fears could be displaced.
To a certain extent, Joker itself was in conversation with that idea. Arthur was coopted as the face of a social revolution that he had no real interest in or understanding of. When Murray Franklin (Robert DeNiro) asks whether Arthur is associated with the protestors, Arthur simply responds, “I don't believe any of that. I don't believe in anything.” Arthur’s white clown make-up was a mask, onto which anything could be projected by anyone.
Indeed, it’s possible to read Joker as a deconstruction of what is the core secular myth of modern pop culture: the superhero origin story. Most superhero origins build to a moment of ascent, when Superman (Henry Cavill) or Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) take flight. Instead, the most iconic moment in Joker is one of descent: Arthur dancing down the steps. Arthur transforms from man to symbol, but that symbol doesn’t actually mean anything, it just has meaning imposed on it.
Folie á Deux finds Phillips and Phoenix extrapolating from that idea, taking the cynicism that drove Joker and applying it to the sequel. This time, the pair aren’t stealing money from Warner Bros. to make their own movie, they are setting it on fire. It is possible – even justifiable – to be outraged at this. Those millions of dollars could have fed the needy or housed the homeless. In theory, it could have made several movies like Clint Eastwood’s latest film, Juror #2.
However, in reality, the money spent on Folie á Deux most likely would have been spent on something like The Flash, Shazam! Fury of the Gods or Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom. In truth, it’s hard to recommend Folie á Deux as anything outside a piece of performance art – a major and mainstream studio film that displays open and naked contempt for the mere inevitability of its own existence. In that alone, it is at least more interesting than most contemporary comic book movies.
Folie á Deux demonstrates an irreverence to which Deadpool & Wolverine could only broadly gesture. It’s one grim and over-extended joke – a joke on the studio, on the audience, on the fans. However, in its own bleak way, it’s actually pretty funny.
![[COLUMN] Joker: Folie á Deux is an Indulgent, Committed Cinematic Troll | by Darren Mooney](https://img10.leaqio.com/storage/10/zy/px/9e04c0-019e8dff-e52c-7c65-beea-fefc50c6846b.jpg)
![[COLUMN] Joker: Folie á Deux is an Indulgent, Committed Cinematic Troll | by Darren Mooney](https://img5.leaqio.com/storage/5/jf/an/9e04c0-019e8dff-e52f-78cf-a53e-79bf579fa202.jpg)
![[COLUMN] Joker: Folie á Deux is an Indulgent, Committed Cinematic Troll | by Darren Mooney](https://img5.leaqio.com/storage/3/om/ip/9e04c0-019e8dff-e538-70e6-bacb-97043375e590.jpg)
Comments
Darren Mooney
Yep. As I said, I'm slow to recommend the sequel, but watching the meltdown that some "Joker" fans (and critics) are having over the film makes me appreciate the fact that this exists. And, as I noted, while I'd much rather get ten films like "Juror #2" instead, the reality was always that the money was going to be spent on this or "The Flash" or "Shazam 2" or whatever. And this is a much more interesting use of money that was going to be set on fire anyway.
Jerfish
I have always been torn on Joker. When watched the first movie, all i could see was a sick individual without acknowledgement or getting what he needs, someone that is potentially a sadistic murderer and potentially a harmless open heart. Schroedinger's sociopath. I hated the celebration of him as it was too on the nose for a culture an society that would immediately embrace him. I think it nudged me uncomfortable into the acknowledgement that it was media that mirrored reality too well rather than escaping it, if a bit extremely. Working in an emergency department as a career, it struck home a bit hard, while also putting me in the shoes of Arthur and somehow making me want what he wanted. So i am torn if I like the original movie, but as a result of all of the above, thought it was an EXTREME accomplishment of a movie. It felt more like the passion and thought of an indie film than a major Hollywood style release. I always like what Quentin Tarantino said though about the first movie: “The thing that’s profound is this: it’s not just suspenseful, it’s not just riveting and exciting, the director subverts the audience,” Tarantino noted of Joker. “Because the Joker is a fucking nut. The guy is a fucking nut. Robert De Niro’s talk show character is not a movie villain. He seems like an asshole, but he’s not any more of an asshole than David Letterman. He doesn’t deserve to die”. He concluded: “Yet, while the audience in a movie theatre is watching Joker, they wanted to kill Robert De Niro. They wanted to take the gun and stick it in his eye and blow the back of his fucking head off”. What you describe in the sequel seems to be a deconstruction for those that didn’t get the first movie in a lot of ways and celebrated Arthur as a great hero. It makes me appreciate this director and creator even more in many ways, even if it’s not a ‘good’ movie. It’s perhaps instead a ‘great’ statement.
Darren Mooney
To be fair, I think it was both fascinating and a slog.
Rafa Ángeles
While I agree with your review, it certainly makes the movie sound way more fascinating than the slog it really was
Pēteris Krišjānis
then they got their wish possibly. True, those relationships are hidden to us. There might be more to it.
Darren Mooney
To be fair, I do wonder to what extent he could have walked away. After all, even if there wasn't a sequel clause in the contracts - which is routine now - there are only so many major studios working in Hollywood and so much of the business is relationships. Phillips has worked with Warners for well over a decade now, and I imagine that - even setting aside the very significant paycheck - any future relationship making pictures for Warners would be based on making this movie.
Darren Mooney
Much appreciated!
Darren Mooney
I don't believe so! It might be too spicy for YouTube!
Darren Mooney
"Flow" is great. Loved it so much.
Cynthia McGarvie
Mental illness has a negative correlation to violence. Studies have shown that people with mental health diagnoses are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators. Apart from this disagreement, you're not off the mark with the majority of your argument. Demonization of mental illness isn't helping.
Pēteris Krišjānis
Btw, offtopic, Flow is co-produced by France, Belgium and Latvija, but main team is Latvian, and director is too 😌 Saw it here at Riga, damn my tears. Strong Dinosaur vibes.
Pēteris Krišjānis
Seconded, this is stuff I love from Darren 🙏
Pēteris Krišjānis
Side note, my friend who was oblivious about Joker first movie, said it was ok movie and he enjoyed Lady Gaga. So it is quite possible to be financially ok movie, and piss off that streak of toxicity Joker got tightly associated with.
Pēteris Krišjānis
I think movie works as massive troll. It does not make to enjoy it though. But I feel I understand director better now. He could walk away but as you say, he love to send hate letters to audience. It is not worst than platforming racists and fascists....so I can only say I don't vibe with this kind of social commentary. However that money - definitely not 200M, they barely marketed movie - would be wasted not paid in taxes.
Nathaniel Solyn
This is an excellent take. Will there be a backdrop version? Because I need to share this with a couple of people :}
Tim Wilson
They’re a little dated but very playable (there’s re-releases for them on more modern consoles). Stealth focused with more action-heavy bosses but on easy mode there’s nothing to stop you brute-forcing it. The games are famed as much for their narrative and cutscenes as they are the game itself and they’re interactive with the environment in a way that few were before (and since, in some ways!); about a 50/50 split between game and story. My wife doesn’t really have the co-ordination for action heavy games so she hasn’t tried playing them but she loves watching me play them or watching a “movie” of them. Probably take 15-20 hours to play through. It’s said that Kojima is the auteur director of video games and there’s a real love of film clear throughout, I think you might really appreciate it (again, the twin snakes cutscenes were directed by a famous Japanese action director so the intent shines through a little better than the limited technology of the original could allow. The voice acting was all re-recorded for it too, though the best version is a matter of preference). Honestly I could probably write my own essay as a comment but I wouldn’t want to bore you any further!
Darren Mooney
Are they playable? And, if so, are they accessible to somebody with terrible hand-eye coordination?
Tim Wilson
Honestly if you have a few hours free, there’s “game movies” that just show the cutscenes and a few essential clips of gameplay. You could spend your time much worse than watching MGS1 and 2 to see what we mean (I recommend the Twin Snakes version of 1 but it’s personal preference). Probably takes less time than a season of the rings of power!
Darren Mooney
Thank you! I may not love the movie, but I’m certainly thinking about it.
Darren Mooney
Thanks Justin, I really appreciate it this. It is genuinely lovely to read this.
Darren Mooney
Thank you! Although, as I note in the closing paragraph, it’s a tough film to recommend. (And I get that - there’s a sense in which the joke is on us, and nobody likes being the butt of the joke - but I do like a movie that has a perspective or passion, even if that perspective or passion is… decidedly aggro.)
Darren Mooney
Yep. I think you can make an argument about the sixth season of “The Sopranos” being a much better executed example of this, in that it’s a season largely about denying resolution. Characters are repeatedly offered the chance to grow and change - as we’re conditioned to expect heroes to do - and refuse, making Chase’s point about why the show needs to end.
Darren Mooney
You’re not the only person I’ve seen make that comparison, funnily enough. I don’t know Kojima well enough to know how valid it is, but the description sounds similar enough.
Tim Wilson
It sounds like the film equivalent of Metal Gear Solid 2, another time when a director was forced to create a sequel to a work that didn’t require one and decided to spend that time and money alternating between trolling the audience and making grandiose and self-indulgent weirdness. Joker didn’t seem like my thing and frankly I’m bored of the character, so I have some schaudenfreud regarding the sequel being as you describe! Seems Phillips is a victim of his own success, time and time again…
Brian S
Another excellent article, Darren. You made me think about the ending of the Sopranos, and I feel the message of this movie and the climax of the show are basically saying the same thing: the main character is a complete scumbag, and you should not root for him, sympathize with him, or want to emulate him. These works weren't meant to entice or encourage the viewers; they were warnings. This is not what or who you want to be. Both men were products of a broken system, but they were ultimately resposible for the damage they caused, the choices they made, and their fates.
Brandon Headrick
Well damn, I never cared about Joker 2, but after this article, I kinda want to see this now. Great read!
Justin Buergi
I usually don't read long articles cause I'm busy, and tired, and lazy, but I've really been enjoying yours. It seemed weird to me that this movie was so overwhelmingly bad, but looking at it as a very long and expensive joke really does make it pretty funny
Christopher Eychaner
This was a very enjoyable and thoughtful article. Kudos.
