Joker Folie a Deux follows Joker, played by Jaoquin Phoenix, and Harley Quinn, played by Lady Gaga, as they try to clear Joker’s name in the aftermath of the first film. Simply put, this movie is not good. I’m sure many of us were skeptical about the film since it was revealed to be a musical, but there are other astoundingly bad aspects.
Let’s begin with the positives: the acting is top notch. Lady Gaga really carries her weight and as someone who has never seen her in a film, I was pleasantly surprised. Joaquin Phoenix was also brilliant, unsurprisingly. I’d even say that the first fifteen minutes are actually pretty good, showing Joker’s (whose real name is Arthur Fleck) prison life and expanding on ideas established in the first film. Regardless, the negatives are so overwhelming that they completely undermine the experience altogether.
Director Todd Philips never planned to make a Joker sequel and it really shows. What made the first film as good as it was is its clear message: lend a helping hand to those who need it. The first film ends with Arthur Fleck abandoning who he was and embracing his true self, Joker. This idea is what made the first film so powerful. But in the second movie, this growth is completely gone. Arthur instead pines for Harley Quinn, constantly seeking validation. Adding Harley Quinn was a reasonable decision but it was poorly executed, as it completely disregards Arthur’s growth in the first film. It would have been nice seeing both characters interact with one another in a way that honored both of their respective character arcs. Instead of Joker just doing what Harley says, which is the film’s biggest issue. The musical segments were well shot and well made, but they were placed in weird parts of the film. It felt as though the film was paused at times.
I will say that Joaquin Phoenix’s singing was really good, despite some people’s complaints about it. Truthfully, anybody would sound terrible singing alongside Lady Gaga. The choice to make this film a musical was a very interesting one, but it’s a good way to go further into Arthur and Harley’s head, and further into their madness. Unfortunately, the genre isn’t well utilized. This could be because there weren’t any original songs and instead Phillips opted to go for the jukebox musical route.
Finally, while the first film posed an interesting question—is the Joker who Arthur really is or is he a personality formed by a broken child to protect himself?—the same question does not work in the sequel because it was already answered in the first film, and it was answered in an effective, conclusive way. To conclude, what makes this sequel so bad is that instead of expanding on the ideas from Joker 1 in a way that is meaningful and tells a unique story, it instead replaces them with something that has no message and in turn, diminishes the impact of the first film. I guess you could say that the joke was on us in the end.
This article also appears in our October 2024 print edition.
