...:One viewing later:...
No. No it was not worth it. Nor is really worth going to see.
Amongst the other ways Phillips has been pissing people off to the point that he had to be just plain stopped from doing the press tour, was a statement about how Joker was a "Real Movie smuggled in as a comic book movie", which has the makers of Black Panther, Captain Marvel, the original 1978 Superman, the Dark Knight trilogy, and quite a few others giving this some hard stares. You know what "real movies" generally tend to have though? Points. Meanings. Things to actually say. Joker tries to make out that it is this hugely important statement of a film, and yet when you actually look at the story, the only thing you might take as a statement in the whole thing is "this is a bit grittier than a Marvel movie." Although not quite as gritty as some of the Netflix comment to be honest.
In many ways, it's the film's own fault. It seems to want to borrow a lot of ideas from current events, like anger against the 1% and such (which really don't fit the 80s time setting), but it refuses to really take a side on them. It's making the same mistake that South Park has done for a while now, acting as though painting both sides as idiots, refusing to say if one side is right or wrong, is somehow being better, above it all, like that's not really taking a political view, even though it is. Joker even actually says at one point he's not for any side. And yet they still want to make it seem like he's some "inevitable product of society", when that's totally not the story we've seen up until now. In fact, the thing that seems to push Arthur Fleck into becoming the Joker when it's revealed makes the film very misogynistic, alongside another bloody obvious plot twist we see too. Oh, and the whole not taking sides thing sort of falls apart, because by portraying those wanting to stand against the rich as being entirely a bloodthirsty mob ready to cheer on a murderer and actively become his accomplices, it's clear what the creator's own biases are. Well, as if him decrying "woke culture" wasn't enough of a clue!
I mentioned the film's story; well that's being kind of generous, as it doesn't really have much of one. It really does feel like Arthur just wanders from beat to beat, with his personality shifting from scene to scene, depending on the director's whims or whatever Martin Scorsese reference they want to do at that point (BTW, I'm not getting drawn into that whole thing about his comments about the MCU... again). Phoenix is doing a good performance, but as a bad character. In fact, I really don't see him as The Joker at all to be honest. He's got no real cunning that the character has, no ego, not a lot of what makes the comics character interesting, he's just a common or garden film psychotic. You could argue that it's an origin story, so he's growing into that role, but he's still not really that much like the character as we know him to be honest. Even the crimes he commits over the course of the film are just... well kind of boring, nothing that special. I'll give some credit in that he's no Jared Leto Joker, but that's a bar so low it's being stepped over by Peter Cushing and Doug McClure!
I've been going on about story, mentioning theme and such, mainly to make the point that there are none. As just a film, it's not that good either. It's well made, good effort for the eighties Gotham, but the main crime is that it's just kind of dull. Seriously, how do you make a Taxi Driver pastiche, and not even have the acts of violence be exciting or shocking? Todd Phillips really can't direct action well, moments that could have been jawdropping acts just sort of... happen. I think that's the film in a nutshell, it can't even do transgressive, violent moments properly, so even quite a few of the sort of people that thought Fight Club was an empowering tale of masculinity (you know, people who didn't understand Fight Club) will be bored by this. In fact, in my screening, there were some teenage boys behind me, and even they were very underwhelmed, despite how obviously the marketing was pandering to them.
So it's got no real message, no likeable characters, nothing truly shocking, no real similarity to the comics bar the names (and an obvious hook to have Phoenix back for follow-ups or new DCEU films, despite the time difference meaning that would make no sense), no interesting plot, no point to the 80s timesetting bar the Scorsese reference, no resolution to a few major threads... and yet it's being held up as this huge profound thing. Seriously, how did this thing win the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival? Oh, right, because terrible people attend that thing. You know, there's a popular story in the comics called Emperor Joker, and that title can sort of apply to this film too. No, this story doesn't have Joaquin Phoenix's version getting the powers of 5th dimensional imp wizard Mr. Mxyzptlk, as cool as that would be; by Emperor, in this case I'm referring to the one with the New Clothes.
No comments:
Post a Comment