I finally saw this film last night. There’s been so much controversy about this film, that I deliberately avoided it to gain some distance, and now the timing was right. After seeing it, I read this whole thread.
This film is hated or loved. I fall firmly within the camp of “LOVED IT!”. This is easily in the top 5 movies of the past few years, and along some axis - very important axis - it goes into my hall of fame along masterpieces like Taxi Driver.
I suppose before I focus on the flawless aspects, I should mention that it’s not a perfect movie and those imperfections are centered around the story, or as Batutta put it “the reach of this film exceeds its grasp” - I don’t think it quite manages to convince that the responsibilty for Joker’s mind rests completely on society… reality is too complicated for such easy diagnosis. In other words, it lacks subtlety. The plot is a bit Johnny One Note and the narrative is too straightforward in a cavalcade of one “hard done by” after another befalling Joker in a steady drumbeat with no variation. It’s a bit simplistic. That said, it’s not quite the pearl-clutching ‘collapse of culture and our way of life’ that Barry G. sees here (in my words). I’ll say more about this later.
But onto the masterpiece aspects. First and foremost the performances, specifically Joaquin Phoenix - absolutely riveting and some of the best acting onscreen of any era. Absolutely spectacular. I’m a big fan of the legendary performance of Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight, but this is on another level. This is such an over the top role, that it’s easy to play it too broadly and very, very, very difficult to make the character believable. Joaquin plumbs such depths of psychology in the Joker, is so convincing, that you cannot tear yourself away - a monumental achievement.
The second masterpiece aspect is one that is so rare nowadays, that just that rarity by itself is worthy of writing paens about. Many here have remarked upon the cinematography, which is indeed spectacular - but what absolutely blew me away, had me practically on my knees sobbing with gratitude was that rarest of directing skills these days… camera placement, framing, movement and blocking. This is so, so, so, so rarely done well. Here it is on such a high level, that I honestly cannot think off the top of my head of any movie that can match it in the last few decades - we’d have to go back to something like The Godfather. Look at the closeups on the Joker’s face - the angles picked and the way it’s framed (plus the lighting of course!), and really practically every shot in the film is spectacular without it feeling studied the way some of Hitchcock’s films can sometimes feel, where the camera is brilliantly deployed, but also done in a “look at me” way - here, the camera is invisible to the viewer, but yet so extraordinarily effective and done at the very edge of what’s possible. From this point of view, it is an absolutely stellar masterpiece, bar none.
I have often complained about camera placement, blocking and framing in films, where there simply is no skill displayed and in fact a kind of anti-skill, sloppy or pedestrian or dull, or clueless - see the Sicario thread where I dismantle Villaneuve’s complete and utter lack of ability this area. For something that is so crucial to directing competence, I am astounded by the low level of skill displayed by 99% of the directors out there. As I never tire of saying, we live in a time of acting excellence and directing incompetence. So many good actors, so very, very few good or even marginally competent directors.
Next, something that is also regrettably rare is good use of music. The music written for the film by Hildur Gudnadottir is quite good - it is not on the level of iconic music like Nino Rota in the Godfather or Herrmann in Taxi Driver, but these days, just to have music that is not grating on the ears in a filmic context has sadly become a rarity. Here, it works quite well - and what a contrast to the sludge of that insufferable no-talent Hans Zimmer - he doesn’t overwhelm you with a tidal wave of cacophony from a thousand instruments like Zimmer in Dune. It creates a mood that matches extremely well with the tone of the film. And the choice of songs - fantastic! I must say, either the director has good taste in music or at least can tell when his music director has chosen good music…!
The sets and locations - excellent. Yes, it’s dark psychologically, but it’s part of the whole of the film, it matches the mood and works really well. Same for makeup and costumes - it all works together, a sign of a great movie, it can create its own distinct world.
All those things are enough for me to proclaim this one of the best movies of recent years. But what of the vociferous criticisms it has received? Let’s tackle it. Again, the story has flaws as I outlined in the beginning of this review, but a lot of the barbs thrown against it seem to me misguided. “This is not he character of Joker as depicted in the comic stories” - what? And which depiction is the “right” one in any of the many instances, where is the “original” to which this Joker is supposed to answer to? As near as I can tell, they’re all different from each other (including the TV shows) so there is no “original” - and I’m not going to hold this Joker to the unique standard of “as in the paper comix” that none of the other screen portrayals were held to. Barry G.’s objection is that this Joker is simply a mentally ill loser as opposed to the criminal mastermind as he’s commonly understood. First of all, this is an *origin story* - so you don’t expect to see a master criminal at the full bloom of his criminal mind - you are seeing how this guy got there. And I think that is also WRONG - at least by the standard of The Dark Knight which is perhaps the most recent iconic depiction of the Joker as played by Heath Ledger. Heath Ledger’s primary characteristic is his demented violence and hatred of society and obsession with Bruce Wayne Batman, not a criminal mind bent of maximizing the size of his haul and profits. Please take another look at The Dark Knight - what is the primary impression we get of the Heath Ledger character? Certainly not “master criminal” insofar as money - it is how much he sees himself as a negative couterpart to Batman, where Batman protects society and Joker hates and wants to destroy society. Heath Ledger’s Joker is quite demented. And so, if we go by the most recent iconic depiction of Joker - Heath Ledger - AND NOBODY OBJECTED TO THAT JOKER AS NOT BEING “TRUE TO THE ORIGINAL CHARACTER”, if we want to see the origin story of how that demented hatred of society got started - and from that point of view, Joker 2019 delivers right on the money! One could object that it’s a bit too focused on the mental illness johnny one note, and that would be a fair rap, but to claim “this is not Joker” is balderdash. It is Joker, through and through, and entirely believable as the origin story to The Dark Knight. Would I have wished for a more subtle portrait - yes, and I guess that’s somewhat a flaw, but let’s not forget, this is a comix character - we are talking DC Universe here, not Shakespeare. So my expectations going in are genre based - and for that, my expectations were met, though not exceeded.
More pt. 2
This film is hated or loved. I fall firmly within the camp of “LOVED IT!”. This is easily in the top 5 movies of the past few years, and along some axis - very important axis - it goes into my hall of fame along masterpieces like Taxi Driver.
I suppose before I focus on the flawless aspects, I should mention that it’s not a perfect movie and those imperfections are centered around the story, or as Batutta put it “the reach of this film exceeds its grasp” - I don’t think it quite manages to convince that the responsibilty for Joker’s mind rests completely on society… reality is too complicated for such easy diagnosis. In other words, it lacks subtlety. The plot is a bit Johnny One Note and the narrative is too straightforward in a cavalcade of one “hard done by” after another befalling Joker in a steady drumbeat with no variation. It’s a bit simplistic. That said, it’s not quite the pearl-clutching ‘collapse of culture and our way of life’ that Barry G. sees here (in my words). I’ll say more about this later.
But onto the masterpiece aspects. First and foremost the performances, specifically Joaquin Phoenix - absolutely riveting and some of the best acting onscreen of any era. Absolutely spectacular. I’m a big fan of the legendary performance of Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight, but this is on another level. This is such an over the top role, that it’s easy to play it too broadly and very, very, very difficult to make the character believable. Joaquin plumbs such depths of psychology in the Joker, is so convincing, that you cannot tear yourself away - a monumental achievement.
The second masterpiece aspect is one that is so rare nowadays, that just that rarity by itself is worthy of writing paens about. Many here have remarked upon the cinematography, which is indeed spectacular - but what absolutely blew me away, had me practically on my knees sobbing with gratitude was that rarest of directing skills these days… camera placement, framing, movement and blocking. This is so, so, so, so rarely done well. Here it is on such a high level, that I honestly cannot think off the top of my head of any movie that can match it in the last few decades - we’d have to go back to something like The Godfather. Look at the closeups on the Joker’s face - the angles picked and the way it’s framed (plus the lighting of course!), and really practically every shot in the film is spectacular without it feeling studied the way some of Hitchcock’s films can sometimes feel, where the camera is brilliantly deployed, but also done in a “look at me” way - here, the camera is invisible to the viewer, but yet so extraordinarily effective and done at the very edge of what’s possible. From this point of view, it is an absolutely stellar masterpiece, bar none.
I have often complained about camera placement, blocking and framing in films, where there simply is no skill displayed and in fact a kind of anti-skill, sloppy or pedestrian or dull, or clueless - see the Sicario thread where I dismantle Villaneuve’s complete and utter lack of ability this area. For something that is so crucial to directing competence, I am astounded by the low level of skill displayed by 99% of the directors out there. As I never tire of saying, we live in a time of acting excellence and directing incompetence. So many good actors, so very, very few good or even marginally competent directors.
Next, something that is also regrettably rare is good use of music. The music written for the film by Hildur Gudnadottir is quite good - it is not on the level of iconic music like Nino Rota in the Godfather or Herrmann in Taxi Driver, but these days, just to have music that is not grating on the ears in a filmic context has sadly become a rarity. Here, it works quite well - and what a contrast to the sludge of that insufferable no-talent Hans Zimmer - he doesn’t overwhelm you with a tidal wave of cacophony from a thousand instruments like Zimmer in Dune. It creates a mood that matches extremely well with the tone of the film. And the choice of songs - fantastic! I must say, either the director has good taste in music or at least can tell when his music director has chosen good music…!
The sets and locations - excellent. Yes, it’s dark psychologically, but it’s part of the whole of the film, it matches the mood and works really well. Same for makeup and costumes - it all works together, a sign of a great movie, it can create its own distinct world.
All those things are enough for me to proclaim this one of the best movies of recent years. But what of the vociferous criticisms it has received? Let’s tackle it. Again, the story has flaws as I outlined in the beginning of this review, but a lot of the barbs thrown against it seem to me misguided. “This is not he character of Joker as depicted in the comic stories” - what? And which depiction is the “right” one in any of the many instances, where is the “original” to which this Joker is supposed to answer to? As near as I can tell, they’re all different from each other (including the TV shows) so there is no “original” - and I’m not going to hold this Joker to the unique standard of “as in the paper comix” that none of the other screen portrayals were held to. Barry G.’s objection is that this Joker is simply a mentally ill loser as opposed to the criminal mastermind as he’s commonly understood. First of all, this is an *origin story* - so you don’t expect to see a master criminal at the full bloom of his criminal mind - you are seeing how this guy got there. And I think that is also WRONG - at least by the standard of The Dark Knight which is perhaps the most recent iconic depiction of the Joker as played by Heath Ledger. Heath Ledger’s primary characteristic is his demented violence and hatred of society and obsession with Bruce Wayne Batman, not a criminal mind bent of maximizing the size of his haul and profits. Please take another look at The Dark Knight - what is the primary impression we get of the Heath Ledger character? Certainly not “master criminal” insofar as money - it is how much he sees himself as a negative couterpart to Batman, where Batman protects society and Joker hates and wants to destroy society. Heath Ledger’s Joker is quite demented. And so, if we go by the most recent iconic depiction of Joker - Heath Ledger - AND NOBODY OBJECTED TO THAT JOKER AS NOT BEING “TRUE TO THE ORIGINAL CHARACTER”, if we want to see the origin story of how that demented hatred of society got started - and from that point of view, Joker 2019 delivers right on the money! One could object that it’s a bit too focused on the mental illness johnny one note, and that would be a fair rap, but to claim “this is not Joker” is balderdash. It is Joker, through and through, and entirely believable as the origin story to The Dark Knight. Would I have wished for a more subtle portrait - yes, and I guess that’s somewhat a flaw, but let’s not forget, this is a comix character - we are talking DC Universe here, not Shakespeare. So my expectations going in are genre based - and for that, my expectations were met, though not exceeded.
More pt. 2
), but millions who have a different experience of that system will feel differently.