By Brett Blake If you thought Christopher Nolan’s interpretation of Gotham City and the Batman characters was grounded, JOKER is operating on a whole other level of seriousness; it’s a stark, harsh, and extremely hard-hitting picture of a city in a state of utter decay, and one increasingly-deranged individual who wants to see it pushed over the edge. The film is not terribly dependent on an intricate plot, and is more concerned with painting a portrait of Joaquin Phoenix’s Arthur Fleck and the city in which he lives. Struggling with deep mental and emotional problems, Arthur envisions himself as a stand-up comic as a kind of means of escape from his daily problems (both at home and at work, where he is a “professional” rent-a-clown). When a subway confrontation involving Arthur turns violent, he soon discovers that his actions have kick-started a growing movement of dangerous unrest in Gotham... and have also opened the door to his latent madness. Joaquin Phoenix, it has to be said, is truly phenomenal here. From his emaciated appearance to his compulsive, almost painful laugh (which he has no control over), Phoenix fully inhabits this character in a striking way. Fundamentally, the movie is an origin story, so the bulk of the movie does not see Phoenix in full-on Joker mode, but once he gets there, he’s chilling and magnetic (though he’s really magnetic throughout). In a certain sense, I think a case could be made that JOKER is the ultimate presentation of the Joker character on film. Not because Phoenix’s performance is necessarily “definitive” (though, as I’ve said, he’s excellent), but because the movie itself has a sensibility about it that hits upon a key facet of the character that hasn’t really been explored on film before. Jack Nicholson got to play the “Clown Prince of Crime” angle, Heath Ledger got to do the “Joker as ideological/philosophical opponent of Batman” element, and here, Phoenix is playing the “Joker as cultural/societal provocateur” aspect. This movie is intentionally, deliberately provocative. It wants to elicit a reaction from you, and it pushes various buttons on order to do so... just as the Joker character himself so often has done in the comic books. There has been much hand-wringing in online circles about whether it’s “responsible” for the movie to depict its title character in a way that is utterly human and quite frank about mental illness (the concern tends to be that to do so necessarily will make an audience sympathetic towards a type of person who, in the opinion of those with such concerns, doesn’t deserve it); however, that is not what JOKER is about about at all. It’s a condemnation of callousness, not an excuse for extremism. The former does not require the latter. The film never shies away from the fact that it is an origin tale of a villain. Arthur is an extremely compelling character, and there’s something engrossing about his descent into utter madness and criminality, but at no point does it ask us to root for him; when the last act kicks into gear and Arthur’s Joker persona takes over in full force, his actions are depicted as evil and insane, albeit with a sort of “I can’t look away!” approach that is captivating. From a technical perspective, the film is quite well made. Writer/director Todd Phillips has reached deep within himself and emerged with a movie deserving of high marks in all craft categories. It’s strange to describe a film this unflinching and dour as “beautifully-shot,” but in JOKER’s case, it’s true; Lawrence Sher’s cinematography makes the movie look textured, and it sells the early 1980s setting effectively, as does the production design by Mark Friedberg. Additionally, the musical score by Hildur Guðnadóttir is terrifically unsettling, and it charts Arthur’s mental state very well. Now, JOKER is not without flaw. Though it runs only slightly more than two hours, the midsection sags considerably; the first act sets things up very efficiently, and the third act descends into the madness with appropriate visceral flair, yet there’s a chunk of the story -- after Arthur’s inciting incident in the subway, but before he goes full Joker -- where we see some variations on situations that start to get a touch repetitive. This middle act is also where a bit of plot involving the Wayne (as in Bruce Wayne) family comes into play, and the way some of this is handled might not sit right with some. It’s entirely subjective, but how Waynes are portrayed is not tremendously flattering, so depending on how much of a comic book purist you are, your mileage may vary in terms of how well this section of the movie works for you. By this point, though, it’s hopefully apparent that JOKER is not your typical comics blockbuster, nor is it your typical adaptation of this legendary villain. It’s dark, it’s sometimes uncomfortable to watch, but it’s ultimately thought-provoking (in a good way), and as a vehicle for Phoenix to deliver one of the performances of his career, the movie just works.
0 Comments
|
Archives
January 2023
Categories
All
|