“Joker: Folie à Deux” arrived with high expectations, promising to delve deeper into the twisted psyche of Arthur Fleck and introduce a bold, musical twist to the narrative. Unfortunately, what unfolds is a disjointed and unnecessary sequel that struggles to justify its existence.
From the outset, the film feels aimless. The storyline meanders without a clear purpose, offering scenes that add little to Arthur’s character or the overarching plot. It seems content to rehash themes from the first film without providing new insights or developments. The result is a movie that feels more like a collection of loosely connected vignettes than a cohesive story.
One of the most baffling creative choices is the incorporation of musical numbers. While the idea of a dark musical set in Gotham City might sound intriguing on paper, the execution leaves much to be desired. The singing sequences often halt the narrative momentum, serving as unwelcome interruptions rather than enhancing the storytelling. At one point, Arthur himself exclaims, “Can you please stop with the singing,” and I found myself wholeheartedly agreeing same, bro, same.
The musical numbers not only disrupt the pacing but also fail to contribute meaningfully to character development or thematic exploration. Instead of offering a deeper look into Arthur’s fractured mind, they feel like a gimmick that doesn’t quite fit the tone established by the first film.
Visually, the film remains impressive. The cinematography is stellar, capturing the grim beauty of Gotham with striking compositions and a rich color palette. Each frame is meticulously crafted, showcasing the city’s decay and the characters’ inner turmoil. However, even these visual strengths cannot compensate for the weak narrative.
Joaquin Phoenix delivers another committed performance as Arthur Fleck, embodying his vulnerability and volatility with the same intensity as before. Yet, without a strong script to support him, his efforts feel undermined. Lady Gaga’s portrayal of Lee Quinzel (the future Harley Quinn) shows glimpses of potential, but her character is underwritten and doesn’t have the space to make a significant impact.
The supporting cast, including Brendan Gleeson and Catherine Keener, are given little to work with, their talents underutilized in roles that lack depth. The film introduces interesting ideas such as the exploration of Arthur’s sanity during his trial but fails to develop them in a satisfying way.
“Joker: Folie à Deux” ultimately feels like a missed opportunity. It attempts to replicate the success of its predecessor by mimicking its style without understanding what made the original so compelling. The first “Joker” was a gritty, unflinching character study that delved into themes of isolation, mental illness, and societal neglect. This sequel, however, lacks that emotional resonance and sharp commentary.
In trying to be bold and different, the film loses sight of its core narrative. The addition of musical elements could have offered a fresh perspective, but instead, it becomes a distraction that detracts from the story’s impact. The pacing suffers, and the emotional beats fail to land with the same weight.
In conclusion, “Joker: Folie à Deux” was a huge disappointment. It’s a sequel that didn’t need to be made, telling a story that feels largely pointless. The unnecessary singing slows down the pace and doesn’t bring anything meaningful to the table. While the visuals and cinematography are undeniably stellar, they can’t salvage a film that lacks a convincing story and compelling plot. The first “Joker” was miles better than this sequel, offering a haunting and thought-provoking experience that this follow-up fails to replicate.
For fans of the original, it might be best to consider “Folie à Deux” as an ambitious but flawed experiment one that doesn’t quite capture the chaotic brilliance of Arthur Fleck’s descent into madness.