Deepfocuslens
patreon
I watched JOKER for a second time...Now, get ready for my passionate Batman rant
🕑 Added 2024-07-08 16:00:10 +0000 UTCI hadn’t seen this one since its initial release, but felt I needed the refresher before the sequel comes out in October. Many of you know that I wasn’t a fan of the first film at all. But I liked it a lot more the second time. But I'll get my complaints out of the way first.
I’ve always thought the Joker as a character works better as an abstraction and as a symbol with no sympathy or background to draw from. The anti-hero angle here is obviously going for the TAXI DRIVER/KING OF COMEDY thing. For me it leans too heavily into that Scorsese nostalgic aesthetic, and feels watered down by comparison. Also the descent into hell for Arthur does not have the dimension or perspective that I crave. I don’t believe that someone like Arthur has the brains or bravura to one day become the legendary Joker, which is part of the problem as well. Seems more like a typical 1970s serial killer coming of age story, where the ties to Gotham felt a little too loose. OBSERVE AND REPORT serves as a more refreshing update of the anti-hero nihilism story than something like JOKER did for me, but that’s just my personal taste.
This is not to say that the film didn’t work for me. It was quite artful despite it feeling one-note at times. The victimization lacked some nuance for me. But more over…I struggle with the ending. So many people have told me that I am not smart enough to get the ending. I’m not sure what they mean. To me the whole dream insinuation is a cop out. A way to keep Joker in the abstract as if laying all that ground work for the social disarray he caused is meaningless. I think it would’ve been far more powerful had the film insinuated that many of the events are literal. The idea of blood on his hands as being a figment of the imagination potentially, makes the whole thing feel less impactful.
What I find the most interesting about the film, and just Batman in general, is how much they use these allegories as a reflection of the times. In the 1960s there was more a glamorization where Batman always gets the VIP tables at the clubs, shaking hands with the mayor at rope cutting ceremonies, and the like. Batman and Robin are accepted as heroes and as celebrities with all the perks at the front of the lunch line.
Nowadays times are different…Batman is viewed more as a rogue. He’s not trusted by the cops, or the politicians, or the people he saves. For me Nolan’s THE DARK KNIGHT always served as a great metaphor for the state of America socially/politically. Batman represents the powerful elite. He’s a man riddled with his own neurosis to such an extent…that he basically funds his own one-man military industrial complex as trauma therapy. He spends massive amounts of money to appear the rich excessive billionaire playboy in the public eye…and then doubles down, buying all these flashy gadgets and shit in the shadows so he feels like he’s personally contributing to society. In reality, a lot of that money he’s wasting would be better served through more humble endeavors. There are a million things he could’ve done to help his city if he really wanted to with less obnoxious implications. But no…Bruce Wayne is an egotist, elitist, hypocrite. He wants to be the hero out of selfishness and guilt because he can’t move on from guilt or face the fact that he is completely out of touch with the world. He's looking outwardly to fulfill his responsibilities instead of looking inward. All his bullshit existential angst only contributes to the increase in violence, chaos, and city damage in Gotham by my estimation. But the worst part of it is…he can’t even roll his sleeves up and take a life if he needs to, in the name of justice. As if there aren't many casualties during these huge car chases and explosions that were his fault to begin with. To try and begin an ambitious movement for change that involves violent implications, particularly when it comes to draining your own swamp… it will involve lives lost that you must learn to own up to. If you can’t handle that responsibility…then go to a therapist or go to a meditation retreat like a normal rich person. Leave the handy work to the people who have the stomach for it, who understand the world they are operating in, and the necessities for survival. Bruce Wayne has no idea what it means to get his hands dirty because he has never lived among the people he claims he wants to save. He will only go part of the way on his journey of self-actualization, which is why he doesn’t work as a character or hero for me. One terrible thing happens to him as a child, and he spends the rest of his life trying to prove to himself that he is noble, rather than just becoming noble out of obligation. He's a baffling and sad contradiction.
This is why we root for the Joker: the anarchist. The difference between Heath Ledger’s Joker and Batman, is that Joker is ultimate anti-establishment in his evil, which is why Batman cannot hurt him. The Joker has lived among the people plenty, and so he knows how to work things from the inside out. Batman is too busy running away from himself and what he really is, whereas the Joker knows exactly who they both are. He knows that Batman is almost no different from him, and he isn’t afraid of that fact. The only real difference is that Joker has been all the way through the seven circles of hell. He knows what it means to get chewed up and spit out by the world, and thus he has nothing left to lose. We never get a clear backstory, but enough is insinuated by his look/wardrobe and his behavior, that prove he was always working class. The way he carelessly and gleefully burns piles of money in front of the people beholden to it, only further establishes that transcendence beyond materialism. He is far less selfish in many ways, than Bruce Wayne. He has no fancy gadgets or cars and he doesn’t need them to make a point. He exposes the elites for what they are, before they can even analyze it within themselves…and he cannot be bought, cornered, intimidated, nothing. Hence the perfect abstraction and antagonist. Joker: anti-establishment, anarchy, and cynicism. Batman: weak, blind, elitist privilege, taking with one hand and giving with the other, all while lost in the savior complex. The Joker plays Batman like a goddamn fiddle. In THE DARK KNIGHT the winner is the Joker, and the loser is Batman.
But yeah…my point in brining all that up is…if Heath Ledgers Joker represented anti-establishment and Batman/Wayne represents the elites…then Joaquin Phoenix’s Joker fully represents the perspective of the American people pushed to the edge. The state of the world is such that the civilians become Joker out of desperation. That image of Phoenix lost in a crowd of identical clown masks ready to protest, where the cops cannot locate him...is a perfect metaphor.
JOKER is a blatant commentary on class structure, and the growing hate towards the rich in power. They are not subtle with the symbolism there. Obviously city riot images in the film touched a nerve for a reason…and echoed an eerie reality. Joker as Arthur in this film is a loser who no one cares about and no one listens to. The people like Arthur cannot pay for their own medications, their own rent, and the more they are gaslit by their leaders and by the media...the more they get destructive, angry and fight back for what they feel they deserve. When you’ve lost everything and you are morally compromised…who the fuck knows what you are capable of, for better and worse. The viscous cycle of oppression and mental illness becomes inescapable until you can learn to ride those waves. The way that was done in JOKER, I thought was quite well done. He made it down to the bottom, and then he relished in his newfound confidence as the city burned. He is finally home. They took the time to really take him there as a character, and thus his final dance at the end, is one of tragic liberation.
Again…it makes all the sense to me why this film emotionally hit the sweet spot with the public. I think it could’ve been a masterpiece with a better filmmaker/writer at the helm. But yeah…a bold but flawed movie. Looking forward to the new one.
Comments
Dan
I’m surprised nobody has thought of making a Neo-Noir Superman/Batman movie considering the time period they were made in
Herbert Baker
I don’t think there’s necessarily a wrong or right when interpreting art or its intent. I think you’re being to hard in bruce tho. He’s doing the best he can and we go to remember there’s mental issues there(what man dresses up as a bat). He’s also still dealing with his scared inner child. as well as the fact that his father tried pouring money directly into the city but was assassinated because the city was that corrupt. Not sure if the joker is the anti establishment but just pure evil or the devil himself
Deepfocuslens
Haha when I say people...I mean mainly Youtube viewers and commenters. Would be weird if my friends said that.
Scott
Been a while since I’ve seen it. But, anyone who says you’re not smart enough to “get the ending” of any movie (especially ones about grown men wearing capes) is not someone I want to spend any time with lol. The joker is an entertaining movie but not mindblowing. I like the class and mental health commentary, but there’s so much more you can do with the joker archetype. If you’re gonna glorify a school shooter, at least give him a sick manifesto shit lol
Wolfman Brandon
That's why I think Superman (1978) still works because it tries to be more innocent and family friendly without resorting to topical subjects. I don't get why some people dismiss it as corny unless they're talking about the sequels.
Stephen
I absolutely loved it when it came out, but have liked it less on repeat viewings. I think I gave it a little too much credit for being a revisionist take on the character along with the clear Scorsese influence bothering me more and more. Nonetheless, I’ll never forget the collective gasp in the theater at the conclusion of the talk show scene. Interestingly, though, I remember Sean Baker stating that it was probably Phillips most honest film as it’s “punk rock vision” was more in line with guy he knew at film school. One thing I liked that the movie played with was the idea that Thomas Wayne was an asshole. In pretty much all Batman adaptations up until that point the Waynes have always been good people who gave back to Gotham. Throughout Nolan’s trilogy Caine’s Alfred is constantly boasting about the Wayne family legacy even at one point in Batman Begins stating the bat cave was initially used as safe passage for the Underground Railroad… For once I’d like to see them portrayed as bad people and Battinson’s Batman comes close to that before copping out. It would actually give the character something to reckon with knowing that they are partially responsible for Gotham being a dystopia and possibly why they were murdered. Apparently there are comics that play with this idea but I’d actually like to see this in a film for once.
Deepfocuslens
I agree. I’ve never seen one capture the tone right. But some have come close
Deepfocuslens
Yeah. I did consider that. But yes something about it feels a bit off. But it makes sense. Todd said he had no interest in super heroes. But more making another taxi driver type story. The only reason joker is included is due to money. Selling point
Dan
I think the issue with both Batman and Superman is they were both originally made for children and are products of their times. Trying to apply them to modern-day adult sensibilities is always going to feel jarring.
Dan
I think the ending to Joker works better if you view it as literal with Arthur’s actions inspiring the next incarnation of the Joker (a more competent leader) who will end up taking on Batman 20 years later. However, this upcoming sequel seems to be poking a hole in that interpretation.
Wolfman Brandon
Thank you. You finally made me understand why I'm not a fan of the darker Batman portrayals and why I'll always prefer the more light hearted and fun Adam West version. I always knew there was something off about Wayne's character but I could never put my finger on it until now. Now I don't know if this issue has to do with the way the films portray him or if it's a root issue from the comics since I never was a comic book person. As for Joker, the red flag for me was the director of The Hangover films who I didn't think have the maturity and intelligence and was too commercial to handle a serious topic like mental illness and from the bits and pieces I've seen of the film, I was right. How people can say that Joaquin Phoenix's performance was more worthy of an Oscar than Her which was so much more subtle and relatable is a total mystery. That was the performance where he should've been celebrated by the public but I digress. There was too much of a reliance on gimmicks and being over the top emotionally instead of a genuine effort to tell the story which is exactly what I was expecting from Todd Phillips. I've said for years that Robert Redford's Ordinary People was an infinitely better alternative for a serious and mature take on mental health and that was a first time directorial effort.
