Exactly five years after the movie “Joker“ was released, its successor, “Joker: Folie à Deux,” turned out to be a confusing disappointment thanks to its focus on too much flair and its neglect for character development.
Joaquin Phoenix reprises his role as Arthur Fleck and his performance was the strongest point of the first and second movie.
However, Phoenix was not given the opportunity to show off his acting chops in “Joker: Folie à Deux” the same way because of the film’s lack of dramatic moments.
The same can be said about Lady Gaga’s performance as Harleen “Lee” Quinzel.
“Joker: Folie à Deux” did not necessarily advertise itself as a musical, but the movie uses music sung by Phoenix and Gaga to tell its story.
At the beginning of the movie, these musical performances added an interesting element that the previous film did not have, but by the middle, the performances were getting very old, very quickly.
The singing served to tell the story in a way that was very different from the original film, but this change felt random and confusing, instead of being a creative decision from director Todd Phillips.
On top of that, I didn’t think the score was very good, as most of the songs were covers. I also wasn’t impressed by the performances.
The performances were not hindered by the actors’ singing abilities, but the tone they used while singing felt like they were trying to mimic how their character might sing.
Staying in character while singing is important, but it felt like Gaga and Phoenix weren’t given the chance to put their all into their performances.
These songs didn’t add much to the story. They mostly showed how the characters were feeling when it was already obvious in the first place, or when something had already been explained.
Many of the songs were also simply about Arthur and Harleen falling or later being in love, but the audience doesn’t need that to be reiterated when it’s already been made clear.
“Joker: Folie à Deux” had nearly four times the amount of money for its budget than its first movie, and it does not hesitate to use that money for unnecessary musical flair.
This movie could have been made without the music. Actually, it probably would have been a better, more enjoyable movie.
Another point of confusion for this movie was its lackluster character development. Quinzel’s character development was puzzling from her lack of clear motive for anything she does in the film.
A primary factor of her actions in the film is that she is obsessed with the Joker, but the real reasoning behind her obsession is never clarified when certain details about her life are revealed.
The first film was a departure from the original concept of the Joker, but it seemed to be setting up the sequel for Arthur Fleck to become Batman’s archnemesis that is familiar with so many fans.
Without the crafty storytelling that Arthur instilled as the Joker at his core, his character development is flat as a villain with no motive or plan. “Joker: Folie à Deux” also barely addresses one interesting concept from the first movie: Arthur’s condition that makes him laugh uncontrollably.
There are a few scenes where Arthur can be seen laughing at inappropriate times, but they’re hardly a noteworthy part of any of the scenes. It’s not a really interesting part of his character anymore.
What was once an interesting element of his character became a gimmick for Phillips to utilize when it was convenient.
My last point of contention of the film was the ending. The ending didn’t seem justified, especially for what the previous film worked to do in building his character to becoming the Joker.
The Joker committed atrocities in the first film, but audiences sympathized with Arthur because they knew what drove him to the path of madness.
However, unlike the first film, the second film made no effort to make you feel any empathy toward Arthur.Many of the crimes and villains in the film also went unpunished, leaving a sour taste in my mouth.
Overall, “Joker: Folie à Deux” was not a good movie. It lacked the same vigor that the first installment of the franchise had previously.
The movie wasn’t necessarily boring, but it would have been nice to see more out of this film than what was given to the audience.
After watching this disaster of a film, it may have been a better choice to not make a sequel for the first movie.
