IMDB
Is the ambitious sequel to Todd Phillips’s masterpiece, “Joker” (2019), dubbed “Joker: Folie à Deux,” a perfect movie? No. It certainly has its issues. It tries to be a courtroom drama, musical, sequel and love story all combined into one film. While it has a lot of great ideas, it doesn’t fully execute all of them. Compared to the first film, “Folie à Deux” is not as gripping, its twists and turns aren’t as clever and the plot is flimsy.
But is it nearly as bad as the internet would have you believe? Absolutely not. While it is underwhelming, “Folie à Deux” is still a fine sequel that continues the story of Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix) thematically well and in no way deserves universal hatred from the World Wide Web.
This review will contain more spoilers than usual to try and push back against the unfair criticism this movie is receiving. View this article as my crusade to defend this movie from the mind-bogglingly overblown criticism. Readers, be advised.
While “Joker” focuses on how society failed Fleck, “Folie à Deux” explores how people failed him. It highlights how society idolizes martyrs and heroes, putting them on pedestals. In the first film, Fleck is a disenfranchised, mentally ill man, not a mastermind with a political message. Yet, people elevated “the Joker” as a symbol of the economically and socially oppressed class of Gotham.
In “Folie à Deux,” this perception collapses when, towards the end, Fleck declares “there is no Joker,” revealing that no one cared for the real Fleck, only for the heroic figure they created in their minds — a clever twist that deepens the themes of the original film.
A common criticism of the realization that “there is no Joker” is that it undermines the first film and degrades the character. People seem to forget this version of the character was never meant to be the “clown prince of crime” we’re used to. Instead of a villainous, psychopathic clown, this Joker is a troubled, disenfranchised, depressed, genuinely human man failed by society. This unique take was refreshing, and if it didn’t bother you in the first film, it shouldn’t now. If you want to see the Joker as the classic criminal mastermind, you can watch “The Dark Knight” or “Batman: The Animated Series.”
This realization perfectly aligns with the first film: Fleck, though mentally ill, was never “crazy” in the typical sense. The notion that “there is no Joker” reinforces that Fleck was not a criminal mastermind but rather a troubled man onto whom the masses projected “the Joker,” deepening the tragedy of Fleck’s life.
Another constant criticism of the film is that it’s a musical, which should never come as a shock, given that it has been reported since 2022 that the film would include original music. Conceptually, this makes sense: Fleck has consistently been a character filled with music. Indeed, director Todd Phillips has talked about this aspect of his character consistently since the first film was released. The film cleverly integrates the sequences in a believable way to show Fleck’s mental state during his dissociative episodes. My issue with the musical sequences is not that they exist, or the frequencies of them; rather, it’s that the sequences themselves are sometimes subpar. They frequently fail to find a good balance between spectacle and substance.
Performance-wise, Phoenix continues to prove why he is one of the greatest actors alive. He turns in another fantastic performance as Fleck, rivaling the brilliant performance of the first. Lady Gaga also turns in a fine performance as Harley Quinn — a character who, to my discontent, is rather underexplored in “Folie à Deux.” It would have been nice to understand this iteration of the character more, especially considering how much her character drives the story.
On the whole, the film is a jack of all trades but a master of none. It’s a serviceable musical, courtroom drama, love story, introduction to Harley Quinn and sequel. Yet it doesn’t excel at any of these, which can make the film feel underwhelming. Phillips tries to shoehorn all these elements but fails to fully execute any, which would have been possible if the movie were allowed room to breathe.
I’ll be the first to admit “Joker: Folie à Deux” is a flawed sequel. It attempts to weave together multiple genres and themes, but ultimately leaves it feeling scattered — but despite its flaws, it serves as a good continuation of Fleck’s story and cleverly builds on the themes of the first film. The notion that this may be the worst comic book film ever made is, just like the Joker himself, patiently insane. Yes, it has its issues and doesn’t compare to the first film, but it’s still a fine story that adds depth to Arthur’s story and builds upon the themes of the first film. Unfortunately, the discourse of this film is overrun by nit-picky keyboard warriors who watch too much CinemaSins.