Poor choices doom confused Joker

Joaquin Phoenix in Joker. Image courtesy Warner Bros.

Little about Joker is truly remarkable besides Joaquin Phoenix's grueling performance in the eponymous role. Otherwise, the film is too wrapped up in social commentary to understand the topic of conversation. This film is lost in itself, selling itself to a disaffected group with a message as clear as mud. Joker is a mess, a tone-deaf, piece of work from a filmmaker trying to punch far above his weight class.

Joker stars Phoenix as Arthur Fleck, a lonely clown who lives with his delusional mother (Frances Conroy) and dreams of standing onstage with talk show host Murray Franklin (Robert De Niro). Stuck in a rut, Arthur is given a new look at life following an incident on a train, leading him down a path of self-discovery and into the atmosphere of single mother Sophie (Zazie Beetz) and wealthy Gotham magnate Thomas Wayne (Brett Cullen). As Arthur spirals into insanity and into his role as the Batman's greatest foe, he becomes an accidental symbol for a movement that will have immeasurable consequences on Gotham's future.

And it's all kind of dull. Phoenix is great in his role, but the character is not designed to be particularly engaging or interesting. Joker needs its star to be charismatic, to provide a reason why so many people devote their lives and livelihoods to a maniac. How the film explains it is a little too easy and a little too convenient, dashing the mystery from the character and scrubbing Joker's intelligence and dangerous spontaneity. Joker is a monster, yet the film's attempt to humanize him makes him predictable and simple, with nary a surprise to be seen. Instead, Arthur Fleck is a victim of an uncaring system, the kind of person who falls through every imaginable loophole until he finally snaps. Despite acts of cruelty and several moments of self-inflicted stupidity, Fleck is among the forgotten, a man abandoned by a system quickly tearing itself asunder. Even his first murder begins as an act of self defense that includes haphazard symbolic lighting effects because it seemed like something Scorsese would do. The sympathy belongs to a white man burdened by loneliness and the absence of a strong father figure. He is a victim because director Todd Phillips and co-writer Scott Silver view such a person deserving of sympathy while denying similar views for the women and people of color who populate this film. The biggest tragedy Joker depicts is society failing the poor white men, and the film never bothers to wonder why that is a problem.

Joker really wants to be one of those movies that has something important to say, but it's terrible at conveying anything with a modicum of clarity. This stems from Phillips and Silver lacking a clear perspective of what they want to convey with their film. This film wants to be taken so, so, so, seriously, screaming for somebody to hear the big important thing it has to say about how bad society is. Many movies like Falling Down, Taxi Driver, Fight Club, and a whole slew of others have done such messages before. Yet those films had clarity in their points and an understanding their protagonists are not decent human beings pushed too far, but delusional beings whose violent tendencies and bad choices make them more relatable than likable. Joker focuses so much on the societal failures it never engages with the faults of Arthur Fleck, painting his violent streaks with a sense of unearned catharsis.

The overarching issue is how far Phillips wanders out of his comfort area. He's a competent director within a certain genre, but is otherwise incapable of putting together a piece as complicated as Joker should be. It's clear he's seen the movies he's copying – tossing De Niro in as a talk show host is a clear nod to The King of Comedy – without understanding the message or the themes, let alone how to adequately light someone to reflect a destructive mental state. The films he wants to copy are subtle and pointed, never blaring out the message louder than it needs to be. Phillips doesn't do subtle, which infects the film score to a rather nasty degree. Joker is all over the place because its director cannot settle on what he wants his film to be. A good Joker film could happen, but it requires someone with greater talent than Phillips to do it.

Review: One and a half out of Five Stars

Click here to see the trailer.

Rating: R

Run time: 121 minutes

Genre: Drama

tl;dr

What Worked: Joaquin Phoenix

What Fell Short: Writing, directing, soundtrack, tone

What To Watch As Well: Taxi Driver, Fight Club

Deadpool 2 brings the noise, as well as the pathos

Ryan Reynolds in Deadpool 2. Image courtesy 20th Century Fox.

The interesting thing about Deadpool 2 is the darkness behind the jokes. Although it doesn’t quite qualify as a black comedy, the subject matter for the irreverent sequel is bleak for a movie featuring a plethora of crotch shots and lewd behavior from its eponymous figure. Lurking underneath all the fun and sight gags is a strong debate concerning how much control a person has over their faith, along with the existential tragedy of a being who cannot die. No matter how much the movie tries to avoid those topics, it’s the seriousness of the underlying subject matter that holds the movie together.

Deadpool 2 is about what a viewer would expect a sequel to the impressively popular Deadpool would be. Ryan Reynolds comes back as the eponymous hero-ish figure, trying to get in the good graces of the random X-Men he comes across. The film expands its cinematic universe with the addition of a few new characters (Josh Brolin as the time traveling mutant Cable, Zazie Beetz as Domino, Julian Dennison as Russell) and blends them in with a few characters from the original (Morena Baccarin’s Vanessa, Leslie Uggams as Blind Al, Brianna Hildebrand as Negasonic Teenage Warhead, Karan Soni as Dopinder, and T.J. Miller as Weasel). And the mix, for the most part, works. Cable and Domino are great additions to the franchise, with both serving as strong, necessary foils to Deadpool’s shenanigans. The plot is less reliant on the superhero tropes that drove the original, and the action sequences are engaging and shot well enough. 

 

There are holes to be found (Miller being one of them), but Deadpool as a franchise is inherently difficult to criticize, as the plethora of fourth-wall breaks serves as its own meta-criticism. Deadpool 2 is aware of, and actively points to, the clichés it indulges in and the holes that plague many superhero movies. Essentially, it means the decision to have a character comment on a problem the viewer picked up on as well means there is an intent to having that issue in the first place. It's difficult to call something a flaw when it is ultimately turned into a joke. But at the same time, the need to have that joke is something of a problem itself, reflecting minimal creativity from the writers. If the joke is about how the filmmakers are in on the joke, it doesn't make it that good of a joke in the first place. 

 

Even with that somewhat existential problem, the humor in Deadpool 2 is pretty good for viewers who are in on the joke. The movie targets everything, from Logan and star Hugh Jackman, to the continued absence of a majority of the X-Men, to Deadpool's comic creator's inability to draw feet. The humor the movie has going for it is equal parts sharp and silly, hitting very easy targets and some more interesting ones along the way. The humor, both meta and visual, are often brutal and gory, but never truly mean-spirited or cruel. For all the potshots and woodchipper incidents, the film's tone is more often than not goofy.

The overarching silliness masks the movie’s underlying pain and tragedy. Deadpool 2 has an unexpected philosophical bite, with a notable strong debate about fatalism. On the one hand is Cable, who has the ability to travel through time and alter history, making it appear as if he is in control. Yet then there’s Domino, a character whose superpower is good fortune, allowing fate to have full control over her actions. Deadpool is trapped between those two forces, controlled by the time traveler’s actions and Domino’s reliance on fate. There is a logic to an embodiment of chaos lacking control over his fate, and the lack of control often comes at the expense of his happiness. No matter how close he comes to some level of joy, fate pulls him away.

When the sadness hits, it hits really hard, and it ultimately keeps Deadpool 2 from sinking into self reference. The movie knows when to drop the schtick and allow the necessary emotionally heavy scenes to shine. The number of opportunities for the movie to be heartfelt are minimal, but the few that do show up are granted the solemnity they require to at least allow for some growth for the titular mercenary. Even if the motivation for the introspection is a little weak (and, again, something the film makes fun of), the emotional payoff in the third act is worthwhile and deserved. Viewers see just enough of Deadpool's arc without the jokes to respect the moment when it comes to fruition.

Review: Four out of Five Stars

Click here to see the trailer.

Rating: R

Run time: 119 minutes

Genre: Action

Ask Away
 
Target audience: The unending onslaught of superhero fans, especially those who are really in love with Deadpool.

Take the whole family?: Oh lord no.

Theater or Netflix?: It's good enough for a theater trip.

Watch this as well?: The original Deadpool is pretty fun, if somewhat slight in comparison. The X-Men franchise is hit or miss, with X-Men 2 and Days of Future Past the highlights. Also worth watching is last year’s Logan, which fits more in line with the Wolverine spin-offs.