Joker

Todd Phillips is a director who has made a name for himself with comedies (The Hangover, Road Trip, War Dogs), Joker was his first challenge and he succeeded brilliantly, though I can't do without minor criticisms. DC has its first non-mainstream movie. Joker is first and foremost a dense psychological drama about the transformation of a man into an absolute lunatic who goes on a crime spree, and it's a bit of a shame that we'll have to wait for the sequel to see a proper Joker's rampage. Joaquin Phoenix is utterly disarming and stomps his way to an Oscar, more or less the film stands solely on his perfect performance. The atmosphere of Gotham is also great, but the city and the crime there don’t get as much attention as I would have liked. There's hardly any action and only one person gets killed in a downright brutal way (I expected a grittier and more brutal film in that respect). The finale is quite shocking, but also short. I wouldn't have minded more build-up. So all in all, a solid film that's worth seeing in the theater, but due to the slower pace, I'm not too keen on a second viewing. 80% (10/10/2019)

A return to The Dark Knight in full glory. I haven't seen such a brutally depressing film in a really long time. Gotham is a city where no one would want to live, with the possible exception ofsome extras someone would pay to do so. At the same time, however, it is perfectly emulating what is probably supposed to be the1970s and is based on the equally beautifully gloomy New York. It’s giving off an incredibly powerful old-school feel, which is why, together with the practically perfect performance of Joaquin Phoenix and no less great music, it creates an absolutely epic atmosphere that has not been seen in similar films for a really long time. I like the way the character Joker is portrayed so that he is neither good nor bad. He has his issues and bad traits but also positive traits and an effort to create a better world… until he loses his marbles. Joaquin Phoenix was given free rein here, and this time I liked his performance immensely. It’s true that he plays one weirdo after another, but Joker is a phenomenon who has both a light and a dark side. So even though I wasn’t exactly rooting for him the entire film, my eyes were glued to the screen in every scene. Some scenes expressing human madness, evil or anarchy belong among the best I’ve ever seen. I won’t hesitate to say that it’s the highest level of filmmaking craft and an experience I will be processing for a long time. Who are we as people? Hasn’t Joker been born out of all the grief and evil we keep inside and try to not let it out so we don’t go crazy? (10/16/2019)

The autumn of film disappointments continues for me, unfortunately. If I were to take Joker as a comic book movie or even a DC movie, I would have to consider it exceptional. However, if I want to approach it as a more ambitious drama that takes the themes of madness, inability to fit into society, and human cruelty seriously, it's not so good already. Joaquin Phoenix is excellent in the lead role, especially in scenes where he can, shall we say, exhibit; when he's alone on the screen and he's just going nuts. But once he's supposed to be part of a larger story and plot, it turns out the film doesn't really have much to offer. All the twists and surprises are pretty banal and the whole descent into madness is actually terribly predictable. Joker looks great, has great music and a perfect lead actor, yet remains too ordinary and not very interesting at its core, as it just copies similar films and relies on similar techniques. Not to mention the fact that the Joker as a character is much more interesting to me as a nutter whose madness and the roots thereof cannot be defined. I find Alfred's "Some men just want to watch the world burn" from The Dark Knight more interesting as a probe into the mind of the Joker than this entire film. (09/28/2019)

Yes, it's basically trivial and in surprisingly many ways less sophisticated than it looks (apart from idea with laughter and the final “relativization"). Yes, its quoting/following of Scorsese’s examples in the form of Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy is too obvious and consistent to be considered a plus. It's not surprising in terms of its course or outcome. At the same time, however, it is undeniable that what Sher can do with the camera, Guðnadóttir with the droning (non-)music and especially Arthur Fle ... Um, Joke ... Um, Phoenix, together make a film that is disturbing, gets under your skin and won´t fade away when movie is over. Even without an apologetic excuse “in the context of a comic-book movie". Which means a lot. (10/04/2019)

As a part of DC good, very good actually. As a human transition drama, rather average. The movie failed to excite me. I felt like I was always waiting for something while watching it, and in the end I didn't get it. It felt like there was something more to come, a climax, because for me the movie just didn't have a climax. What was the point of the movie? The transformation into the Joker? The situation in the city that helped in the transformation? Did it really help? The film just feels incomplete to me. Sure, Joaquin was good, he lost weight nicely for it, he did a great dance when he was alone on set and drinking it in, so it was fine. Once someone else was there, it almost felt like he was blending into the background. To me, a perfectly ordinary film that didn't really bring anything new to the table except that it wanted to show us how the Joker was born, but is that really necessary with this character? Do we need to "understand" him? (10/04/2019)