Joker 'JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX' (Phillips and Phoenix return for the sequel) General News & Discussion Thread

[Chip Chipperson]

This is the kind of stuff that occurs when a mega conglomerate is sold off every few years

You’re gonna have leftover crap that no one really wants and it either gets shelved for tax purposes or crapped out to die like this thing

Good thing WB is in the very safe and capable hands of a company led by David Zaslav

 

[The Shape]

I'm course to those who hate the ending, did you read spoilers of it or actually watched the movie?

To me the movie didn't get interesting thematically until it got to the end and explained what this version of the Joker really is.

Agreed, and it's honestly what many people predicted or theorized about after the first film.

 

[Kane52630]

Like I don't want to give Todd Philips any more credit than he deserves but I feel like that ending was the first thing they thought of and it was in reaction to the first Joker movie's discorse.

 

[Mr. Peanut]

That logical reasoning makes me laugh considerably less, so I’m gonna stick with incels being mad that even Arthur Fleck is somehow less of a loser than they are

I don't think Arthur getting a girlfriend would bother incels all that much, considering their whole philosophy is that women only want to date a-holes. The fact that Arthur only gets a girlfriend after becoming a violent criminal actually ties right into their mindset.

 

[RokMeAmadeus]

I think the reaction to this movie has made me understand how it feels to be a Snyder/Ayer fan because.... I think I actually like this??

I was going in expecting to hate it and idk.... I admire the balls on Phillips for pulling such a troll at the very least. Lady Gaga may also be my favorite live action Harley. I do agree there should've been more of her.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

And this was one of the fundemental problems from the start. The sequel made it even more obvious. I get that these things can be elseworlds, but we have a director who even stated that he couldn't get these made without the Joker name. Also, didn't Philips say that both him and Phoenix wanted no reference of DC or the comics in general on set when making them? Not to mention the long pauses, and pretentious/backhanded comments whenever Philips was asked about Batman or that larger world.

Stuff like that just rubs me the wrong way. And now you get this.

I feel like this is two different arguments.

What people loved about the first movie, was nearly completely divorced from the character known as the Joker. That was never the issue. The issue was making a sequel when no one actually wanted to.

This all said, reading summaries for this, I'm think this has cult status written all over it. It seems to be poking at the success of the first film in a manner that will definitely rub fans the wrong way. But then again, they were fans of that movie in the first place. So the joke was always on them.

 

[Joe Von Zombie]

I feel like this is two different arguments.

What people loved about the first movie, was nearly completely divorced from the character known as the Joker. That was never the issue. The issue was making a sequel when no one actually wanted to.

This all said, reading summaries for this, I'm think this has cult status written all over it. It seems to be poking at the success of the first film in a manner that will definitely rub fans the wrong way. But then again, they were fans of that movie in the first place. So the joke was always on them.

100% this. I haven’t seen it and probably won't until it hits max but the courtroom stuff seems like a blatant riff on how ****ty sequels regurgitate the plot of the first film.

 

[Matt.S99]

This movie is more Joker 1.5 than Joker 2. Remove the musical sequences and trim down the rest of the film, and it could have been stuck on at the end of the first film.
Probably would have worked better than being its own film.
OR they could have made the court drama the first and part of the second act, and do something more substantial with the third act.

I don’t think showing Arthur’s time in prison or the court case was necessarily bad, it just wasn’t enough to warrant a full film.

 

[Lasirius]

I’m not a huge fan of the first one and had zero interest in this one even after the trailers. I can’t quite place my finger on it but Phoenix as Joker annoys me. But I read the plot and the ending and frankly, I don’t see the outrage and has peaked my interest a little. If it wasn’t a musical though, I’d be checking it out in theaters soon but I’m open to watching it some time.

 

[Filmfreak]

For me it's the combination of this A) getting really bad reviews and word of mouth, B) having a long runtime and C) being a musical. A and B, B and C or A and C and I would still go see it in cinemas. But the combination of all three I don't think I can take so it's probably a skip for me, at least until home release.

 

[Art Vandelay]

I can’t quite place my finger on it but Phoenix as Joker annoys me.

I found his performance in the first one so joyless for what should be a fun character.

 

[Joe Von Zombie]

I found his performance in the first one so joyless for what should be a fun character.

Not to be that guy, but that's kind of the point.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Not to be that guy, but that's kind of the point.

No, I understand that's the point of the movie, but I just find his performance doesn't have any spark to it until the very end of the movie. His Joker is a joyless character.

 

[psylockolussus]

The D cinemascore and Rotten Tomatoes.... yikes. WB is really having it with their DC movies lately. Those are just dismal results.

 

[TheVileOne]

I don't think the movie is that clever or self-aware.

 

[RokMeAmadeus]

This is exactly what I took out of it.

 

[Matt.S99]

Yeah honestly, I think a lot of the reviews are really just a result of feeding into the “mob mentality” that we witness a LOT these days.
Not saying the film deserves high praise or anything, but I do think it’s a lot of following what’s “popular” to do.

Even as dull as it is, I really don’t think it’s worse than films like Shazam 2, Aquaman 2, Black Adam, Antman Quantumania etc etc

The production value, cinematography, and acting alone beats those.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

IMO the story is great, but the musical aspects were just so poorly integrated making for a grueling and often cringe inducing experience. And I love musicals.

It wasn’t the raw amateur singing. That can be an effective choice in a musical. It was simply the lack of narrative function.

Annette with Adam Driver is sort of what I was hoping this would be more like. Wild, raw, weird.

 

[TheVileOne]

Dan Murrell's spoiler review of the film. I think he points out some very good criticisms but he also praises the film in many respects. Worth a look, especially if you did enjoy the film. IMHO nothing wrong if you did. The movie is taking a beating right now, but all power to those who did like it.

 

[TheVileOne]

IMO the story is great, but the musical aspects were just so poorly integrated making for a grueling and often cringe inducing experience. And I love musicals.

It wasn’t the raw amateur singing. That can be an effective choice in a musical. It was simply the lack of narrative function.

Annette with Adam Driver is sort of what I was hoping this would be more like. Wild, raw, weird.

IMHO considering most of the musical numbers are like fantasy sequences happening in the characters' imaginations, they should've been bolder and better done.

Now, also I think Phoenix probably should've been dubbed over for his lyrics. His voice did not sound good. These are fantasy imagination sequences, it's OK if his voice sounds more bombastic. It's clearly not him singing Burt Bacharach in the opening for example.

 

[KaijuDude1992]

This movie would have been way better without any of the musical element's IMO. Anytime I caught myself enjoying it or appreciating what they were doing with the Arthur character they would break into a musical number, and not only did I find it jarring but I also got really annoyed by it after a while.

Those sequences added absolutely nothing to this movie IMO outside of being some random/forced artistic choice by Phillips or the studio and it pretty much backfired on them entirely.

I definitely don't think this is one of the worst sequels ever of anything but then again, I'm not one of those people who loved the first movie although even I can admit that's a better film overall.

It's just crazy to me to see a studio like Warner Bros completely mishandle a property like this after how successful the first movie was and spending so much money to go with this direction.

Them not test screening this in advance explains a lot though.

 

[Joe Von Zombie]

No, I understand that's the point of the movie, but I just find his performance doesn't have any spark to it until the very end of the movie. His Joker is a joyless character.

You're blaming the actor for the material. The performance that's given is exactly what the script calls for. The world Fleck lives in is so cartoonishly cruel to him, there's no joy to be found.

 

[OrbOfConfusion]

Well, that was fun. Nice, packed Friday showing and everyone looked to be having a good time. Wonder what all the discourse on the internet is abo-

Sheesh. All this hostility, anger, and divisiveness? It's like the reactions to the first Joker all over again, and I gotta ask-

Look, long story short, I dug the hell out of this movie and I'm not sure if everyone else just accidentally walked out of Borderlands or their sixth showing of Megalopolis by accident. Nor am I interested in finding out. Everything that was aces in that first film is present here, whether it's the direction, lead performances, and score. If anything, it's nice that Phillips, who probably didn't even want to make a sequel, took this in different directions compared to that first one.

Yes, it did feel more like an epilogue instead of needing to be its own film, but Phoenix and Gaga had this chaotic chemistry that made me want to see more of them. If my negative is that I wanted to see more of the characters, then I don't see that as a problem. Even appreciated the slight nods to her origin. I didn't mind the songs and sure, at one or two instances the characters could've just talked instead of sang (which I appreciate Arthur calls attention to at one point), but helped the film feel as distinct as the first one. Again, more Black Label DC stuff like this, please.

Not sure what people were expecting, and at times I think Phoenix's performance at times is better than the first one, especially in the prison scenes. I don't think it ruins or lessens the first film at all. Even with the critical lashing this one has gotten, I very much enjoyed it. Then again, I did just see Megalopolis last weekend, I don't think Eternals is nearly as bad as some critics made it out to be (certainly better than Love and Thunder or Guardians Vo. 2), and my favorite DCEU film is Man of Steel- all with rotten scores. So I'm past the point of paying mind to what the peanut gallery thinks.

I'd probably give Folie a Deux a 8 out of 10, if I had to rate it. Hopefully it proves profitable, even though it appears that might be a struggle. But I very much enjoyed this movie and will happily purchase it once it gets a physical release. It did need more puddles, though.

And I suppose-

 

[J.Drangal]

I still haven't seen the film, so I can't judge the form yet...
But being inevitably spoiled on various aspects of it, I have to say that the direction Phillips has taken seems... to make sense?

The talk about how Arthur can never completely become the Joker we know and how he's more of a vehicle to show something else, all of that was already clear to me in the first film.

I mean, this guy was introduced as a joke to everyone: a joke to his mother, who manipulated him, a joke to the medical community and the administration, who take his illness too lightly, a joke to those around him, who don't take him seriously, and so on...
All this to end up in the worst joke of all: being taken as a symbol of emancipation, and worse as an endorsement of violence, by the most desperate people.

I never saw Philips' approach as a demonstration against incels (or whatever the buzzword is), or as an anti-rich pugilism (which at this point is a gag when it comes to artwork analysis/layground), but as a way larger and pessimistic picture of modern decaying societies, even if it sounds like the infamous meme. A story about how absolutely everyone is wrong about Arthur Fleck, turning him into kind of a pathetic catalyst of decline and violence, with the ultimate film's strength to eventually fool part of the audience into cheering for a massacre.

So seeing the sequel continue to explore how Fleck will inevitably be consumed by the (fake) symbol he's taken as only makes perfect sense to me.
I know this isn't the case now, but I was 99.5% expecting the film ending with Harley killing him, thus also falling into the trap of that “Joker” and pursuing the "cycle of violence" in what was probably always the only logical outcome for this particular take.

The D cinemascore and Rotten Tomatoes.... yikes. WB is really having it with their DC movies lately. Those are just dismal results.

That's... really a disaster. Damn.

 

[Matt.S99]

My thoughts on the ending. Spoilers, of course


It was kind of an “edgy” ending for the sake of being edgy, but I honestly didn’t mind it.

Arthur never felt like “Joker” to me anyway. But I get why people say the ending makes it feel like it makes the first film and this film basically pointless. And I do agree to a certain extent.

I think it probably would have made more sense if it happened in the first film tbh. And this film dealing with the aftermath of that. But it is what it is.

I’m guessing that they wanted to show that the guy who killed Arthur is the “true” embodiment of the Joker and a result of the craziness Arthur brought out.

He was probably someone that was inspired by the Joker movement, but even more unstable than Arthur. A true psychopath.

But I think the “real Joker” of the story is Harley.


The one that is actually manipulating the narrative and the one who is the true villain. There was a lot left unsaid, but I’m going to take it that she somehow manipulated the crazy dude into killing Arthur. Somehow knew him already and pushed him to kill Arthur after he denounced the Joker identity at the trial.

If this story were to go on, I think Harley would be the main character of the two, and this new “Joker” would be her sidekick. Basically what they did in the Telltale games.

I could see her becoming a true menace to Gotham. So twisted that all the Arthur followers would realize this is not just a case of a down on his luck guy being pushed around too many times. It’s now evolved into something much more sinister, and Harley is that symbol.



In a way, going down a more “comic book” path, but with the roles of the characters reversed