So I saw this last night. Not read much of this thread. No idea what's been said and not said, but here's the Letterboxd review I wrote after seeing it:
This is a solid 2.5 out of 5 film.I’m trying to work out what it is people specifically liked about it, whether there's a wider point or aspect that I've missed.
Having seen countless hot takes on this film from critics and friends, I was conscious of going into the film with too many expectations. Either this was going to blow me away with a clever, multi-layered plot and a serious artistic twist on an old character, or it was going to be a highly insensitive piece of hackwork that treated Batman's greatest villain as a springboard for muddied views on mental health and societal violence...
So I was surprised to find that this film did neither. In effect, I came away feeling underwhelmed, mildly puzzled and with the feeling I'd seen something distinctly... average.
The Guardian-reading snowflake in me was all set to be triggered by its handling of mental health issues or isolated male aggression or gun violence or... something. I wasn’t.. Well not really. This is Gotham after all, a city that walks the tightrope between gritty reality and grim fantasy. So sure, have the Joker be a cracked dude from a background of child abuse, it’s not far fetched. Besides, you'd have to be a special kind of lily to be truly offended by something so milquetoast, or at least one who's never seen Psycho or Taxi Driver or Falling Down or any of the many other films about 'insecure loners' from which this film cribs (and pays tribute to) in spades.
I could see people with actual schizophrenia or severe depression taking umbrage at the idea that their condition is seen as something that could potentially trigger a murder spree. The vast majority of people I've met who are affected by mental health issues are brave and steadfast and trying to cope with things one day at a time. There are definitely questions to be raised about funding for mental health services, and indeed the question is raised in part in this film. There's also the incel issue too, which again this film goes part-way to referencing, and in many ways could be seen as a film about James Holmes, the Aurora Shooter, rather than the Joker himself.
You could read into it all you want and extrapolate all sorts, but I don't have the time or energy to expend on analysing these waters, mostly because the film only really dips its toes in them itself. It’s an action movie set in a fictional world at the end of the day. The Joker's affliction (as far as I know) doesn't exist in the real world, and the Joker’s story is supposed to be sensationalised and harrowing etc, so try as I might I couldn't find it in myself to get terribly upset about it.
The graphic novel-loving Alan Moore stan in me was expecting a rip-roaring intelligent origin story with maybe an underlying comment on society or the human condition that nevertheless didn’t get in the way of an incendiary plotline. Hmmm.. Maybe? Or maybe they set-out to make exactly this kind of film and then had to retro-fit the plot to the Joker character so that it made sense in the Nolan-esque world of Batman we've come to understand in recent years. As an origin story, it left me unfazed. I kept waiting for this incompetent drip to transgress into the infamous criminal mastermind we've come to know, but it never happens. Maybe that's not the idea? Maybe Joker never actually gets to fight Batman and it's all in his head, and actually he's just a mentally ill man living out a fantasy?
The film-buff in me was expecting amazing cinematography, of which I’d say this delivered to a good extent. I mean, nothing fantastic, but decent enough to keep the boring parts from looking tooooo boring.
I was also expecting great acting from Joaquin and indeed there was some GREAT acting from Joaquin and yes he acted his heart out. In fact there wasn't a moment in the film where I wasn't thinking: ‘Isn’t he good at acting, that actor, Joaquin Phoenix with all the acting he does wow what a splendid actor, and how!’. A real actor’s actor that Joaquin. And as a man born with an expression that makes him look like he's permanently about to shit his pants, Joaquin was perfectly cast in this role. Great actor that Joaquin. Five stars at acting.
So yes, good cinematography; good Joaquin being Joaquin; okay plot (if a bit cobbled together from things like V for Vendetta, Eyes Wide Shut, Psycho, Taxi Driver, Falling Down* and a few others); great Joaquin, I mean splendid Joaquin; not much of a point to make in and of itself, unless the point flew past me while I was being distracted by Joaquin; some good scenes and not really boring but a bit predictable and unrevelatory; oh and yes Joaquin acted his heart out didn’t he? Great Joaquin.
An okay film that I would recommend buying in a couple of years' time when the DVD goes on sale.
*PS I really really dislike Falling Down but I like the others.
― frame casual (dog latin), Tuesday, 22 October 2019 09:41 (four years ago) link