Before attending the press screening for Todd Phillips’ “Joker,” I wondered if Joaquin Phoenix’s comic book villain was supposed to integrate into the greater DC Universe. The trailer seemed so moody and visceral — even by DC’s comparatively dark standards — that I got the sense “Joker” would be more of a standalone film than a cog to fit Marvel-style into some larger story.
My instinct was right, but I was still completely unprepared for what I saw. Even now, I’m not entirely sure how I feel about it.
On the surface, “Joker” is an origin story for Batman’s most iconic nemesis, but that description is laughably insufficient. In fact, the Batman ties are probably “Joker’s” biggest weakness; Phillips’ film is such an immersive character study that hearing names like Wayne and Gotham almost shake you out of the experience.
And yet, “Joker” is set in a pre-Caped Crusader Gotham City, in the midst of a garbage strike that has inflamed class tensions throughout the city. In the midst of the decay, sickly, fragile Arthur Fleck (Phoenix) works as a clown-for-hire, and dreams of becoming a stand-up comedian. He lives with his ailing mother (Frances Conroy) and suffers from an awkward condition that leads to sudden bursts of involuntary laughter.
Arthur has spent time in an institution and struggles with delusions. He watches a popular late night talk show and imagines himself getting spotlighted in the audience. He wants to make people laugh. As he explains to his social worker (Sharon Washington), he wants people to know he exists.
After Arthur gets jumped in an alley, a co-worker (Glenn Fleshler) gives him an unregistered gun, which leads to tragic consequences when a trio of drunken Wall Street-types decide to harass him on the subway. After losing his job, Arthur finally gets up the nerve to try stand-up, and he bombs.
Arthur and Gotham are on a collision course. As Gotham drops deeper into despair, Fleck loses touch with reality and normalcy. “Joker” may be set in Gotham City, but what we see screams New York in the ’80s, and that offers us an insight into what Phillips is up to.
At its heart, “Joker” is the spiritual sequel to “Taxi Driver,” Martin Scorcese’s surreal tale of a New York cabbie turned vigilante, and his protagonist is Travis Bickle 2.0. It’s no coincidence that Robert De Niro plays Arthur’s favorite talk show host, or that Arthur exists in a nihilistic porn-infested urban neighborhood that inspires its residents — like the pretty single mom down the hall (Zazie Beetz) — to point imaginary guns at their heads.
Lots of comic book movies will try to integrate contemporary political and social issues to make them appear more relevant. “Joker” flips that trope, the same way it flips the superhero origin story formula. Here the comic book origin story is merely a device; it’s an excuse to explore the relationship between mental illness and violence, and hold up a mirror to the dark side of contemporary society.
The result is utterly engrossing. Driven by Phoenix’s staggering performance, Phillips’ pitch-perfect directing, and Lawrence Sher’s haunting cinematography, it might be the best film of the year. But “Joker’s” open-ended ambiguity also makes it dangerous. It defies the idea of a simple good/bad rating, and to categorically recommend or condemn “Joker” feels incomplete, if not irresponsible.
This hesitation only partially comes from the R-rated content, which mostly comes in the form of some late graphic violence, scattered profanity and fleeting flashes of the dirty pictures Arthur tapes inside his joke journal.
The hesitation largely comes because “Joker” is so successful at portraying conflict and chaos. We know the Joker is a “bad guy,” but Gotham isn’t so sure, and Arthur draws our sympathy, at least early on. There are no heroes in this Gotham City. Even the usually beloved Thomas Wayne (Brett Cullen) is portrayed as an out-of-touch, philandering elitist. Arthur’s Bernie Goetz-like encounter on the subway accelerates him on his path of villainy, and it also acts as the flashpoint in a growing class war. “Joker” wants to connect the dots between mental illness, cultural tensions and terrible violence, but what will amount to a thoughtful warning for some could send a different message to others.
Ultimately, “Joker” is a portrait of a man toppling from a state of exasperated fragility to a state of unhinged violence, set against a backdrop of our own worst tendencies. Its ties to the world of comic book heroes are completely incidental. It’s dark, violent and unsettling, but it’s also extremely thoughtful and executed to perfection. If you do choose to see it, it will stick with you for a long time.
“Joker” draws an R-rating for scattered profanity, flashes of sexual images, and scenes of graphic violence.