4.5/5 stars
By Anna Husted EBS FILM CRITIC
While most critics have blasted Todd Phillips’ “Joker” as
gratuitous, I stand with the audiences and their reviews, which scored the film
with a resounding 89 percent on Rotten Tomatoes.
And for good reason: “Joker” is perceptive (and timely) in
its themes of classism and societal abuse, and progressive in its long-takes
and directorial homages to Martin Scorsese and David Fincher.
“Joker” is not a superhero movie but is an inquiry into one
man’s experience in a society with a growing class divide and dwindling empathy
for the condition of fellow humans. Said man is Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix),
who suffers from an unspecified mental illness where he laughs uncontrollably
when he is nervous, uncomfortable, or in a situation that calls for tears.
Phillips’ decision to keep the illness vague is important because it respects
mental illness and maintains the Joker’s
nebulous past, which is important to the comic books and character.
By day, Fleck works as a clown performing for kids or
twirling signs for warehouse sales. At night, he longs to be a stand-up
comedian like his idol and late-night host Murray Franklin (Robert De Niro).
We slowly uncover clues that Arthur was neglected as a child
because his mother suffers from a mental illness as well, and that due to his
own illness and impoverished state he continues to be neglected by the system.
While humanity has not quite reached the depths of Gotham’s
grotesque inquietude, New York City came awfully close in the 1980s, and while
he is not attacked by thugs, and rather by drunk, young financiers, Arthur
stands up for himself by shooting them. It’s an act that takes Gotham by storm,
instigating city-wide riots demanding class equality.
The grittiness of the subway and back alleys reflects
Scorsese’s New York City in “Mean Streets” and “The King of Comedy.” The
stand-up comedian and late-night host plot line draw directly from “The King of
Comedy” but with richer and darker characters than its predecessor.
Phillips also draws direct parallels to Fincher’s “Fight
Club” in the main character’s love for violent self-expression and in its
anti-consumerism motif. We pity and root for Arthur in the first half of the
film because he has no one on his side. It is not until he becomes Joker that
he is comfortable as himself and we are finally disturbed by his transformation
from the victim to the monster of the city.
The transition from Arthur to Joker happens in two long
takes following Arthur up a particular, and now iconic, set of steps in the
city. The first time we see these steps they make for an oppressive climb for
Arthur, who has just been beaten up by a group of kids. The second long take
shows Arthur dancing down these steps now as a nonchalant Joker to Gary
Glitter’s “Rock and Roll Part 2.” He gets his “Rocky” moment, but his success
and happiness are directly tied to violent revenge.
“Joker” usurps the superhero genre. Its anti-hero is more
complex than any hero we have seen on screen. Phillips and Phoenix’s remarkable
contribution created a film that will transcend the superhero genre and
contribute to films for years to come.
“Joker” is now playing in theaters.
Anna Husted has a
master’s in film studies from New York University. In Big Sky she can be found
skiing or at the movies at Lone Peak Cinema. When not gazing at the silver
screen or watching her new favorite TV show, she’s reading, fishing or
roughhousing with her cat, Indiana Jones.
