‘Startlingly dull’: ‘Joker 2’ reviews clown on a sequel that shouldn’t have happened
Todd Phillips’ surprisingly impressive entrée into the comic book movie genre, Joker, laughed in the face of its skeptics. Early reviews of Joker: Folie à Deux hint that this time, the joke’s on Phillips as his sequel struggles to earn praise.
Fascinatingly enough, Phillips’ ability to focus on Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix) through the lens of character-driven storytelling provided more depth to the Joker’s uncomfortable origin story. Phillips’ approach to the reality of Fleck’s mental illness was portrayed with chilling honesty and uncomfortable psychological intimacy. Similar to Heath Ledger’s iconic performance as the Joker, Phoenix’s King of Comedy, Falling Down, and Taxi Driver-esque interpretation of the famed Batman villain nearly asked audiences for sympathy or understanding.
Unfortunately for Phillips and company, audiences may not have sympathy or understanding for Joker: Folie à Deux.
Longueurs abound. The denouement hits story beats that ought to wrap up act one. The film similarly flounders between genres. It’s a musical, a prison movie and, mostly, a plodding courtroom drama.
Tara Brady, Irish Times
Joker: Folie à Deux teased an incredibly unique angle and proudly declared that it would be a jukebox musical, which was a shock of a decision in itself. With the tone of Joker being so unforgivingly grim, it was anticipated that the sequel would dive deeper into depression (Or mania? Or both?) along with the Clown Prince of Crime. Lady Gaga landing the role Harley Quinn added another layer of intrigue to Phillips’ decision to incorporate musical elements, but reviews imply that Joker: Folie à Deux is less La La Land and more Law and Order.
Gets bogged down by a lengthy courtroom saga, which not only keeps the dazzling Lady Gaga away from the spotlight, but centers the movie entirely around its own predecessor, without doing or saying anything new.
Siddhant Adlakha, IGN
First reactions are pouring in from the 81st Venice International Film Festival, meaning that these less-than-enthusiastic reactions are drawn from a select pool of critics. That’s not to say that there aren’t positive accolades given to Joker: Folie à Deux; there are, yet only few of them support the idea that Joker really needed a sequel. Compelling and necessary sequels can be a challenge to champion. Phillips may have overestimated how far he could push his standalone Joker series while opting for the familiar route of turning to Harley Quinn for support.
It’s startlingly dull, a pointless procedural that seems to disdain its audience.
Richard Lawson, Vanity Fair
Phillips will forever be haunted by the missed opportunity of not collaborating with Matt Reeves, as The Batman was basically begging for Phoenix’s Joker to find himself locked away in Arkham Asylum instead of Barry Keoghan’s cackling crook. These two (inexplicably isolated) universes could have seamlessly overlapped, and could have allowed for Warner Bros. to explore a rich, untapped crossover opportunity ripe with potential. Instead, they’re bound to another Riddler, another Batman, another Harley Quinn, and two Jokers kept distinct in their own timelines.
Those who argue that Joker didn’t need a second solo film could be absolutely right. It’s entirely possible that Warner Bros. hopes to recapture the grim curiosity that bubbled around Joker upon its release, all while anticipating the same payday at the box office.
There’s also the aspect of market demand. Joker carried its own weight well when telling an outlying story that still garnered massive name recognition. Regardless of personal interpretation of Joker: Folie à Deux, every sequel automatically sets itself up to be compared to its predecessor. Sequels are expected to follow a standard (or sometimes, exceed them). If Phillips cannot follow the formula that permitted Joker to be such a success, perhaps he shouldn’t have sent in the clown.
Have a tip we should know? tips@themarysue.com
