Joker: Folie à Deux, A GOOD Metafictional Commentary on Society’s Narcissism and Expectations, Hated by the Mainstream.

Joker: Folie à Deux, written and directed by Todd Phillips along with Scott Silver, starring Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga gained a lot of hate. While the first Joker film was divided between critics and audiences, this time around everyone hated it. However, I loved it, and I understand why the director made such a hated film; to fuck with the mainstream audience who wanted a violent thriller, glorifying a PSYCHOPATH, but got everything they did not want; a musical courtroom drama about a HUMAN struggling with the said society. So many people have ranted to me about the film’s long ‘circular plot’ with no story, the ‘irrelevant’ musical scenes, and the casting of Lady Gaga. But while the film tried to discuss society’s narcissism and expectations held towards the face of Joker and not the reality of Arthur Fleck, Philips’ metafictional narrative fucked with the audience so much that their reaction in turn proved the same point. The narrative kept shining light on its fictionality, reminding the contemporary audience—engulfed in ‘toxic-masculinity’ media—that Joker is a weak, struggling human. Thus, through an analysis of the film’s theme, plot, musicality, cinematography and acting, the essay will counter the mainstream hate for the film.  

 

The film primarily followed a metafictional structuring—which, as stated—was used as a commentary against society’s narcissism and expectations; complimented by a secondary theme of interior and external appearance around Arthur Fleck’s character, to mess with the mainstream viewer. By making Arthur Fleck, his own person, who rejects the Joker ideal, accepting interior appearance and mental issues and not his societally celebrated appearance, the world hates him. His supporters within Gotham hated him, Lee hated him and most importantly, the mainstream audience hated him.  The Joker Fan Service would have entailed creating a violent, thriller and action film, to make the Joker wreak havoc on Gotham. The type of Joker seen in many Detective Comics, in Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight and games like the Arkham series; fans wanted another film that glorified the violent psychopath. However, what many failed to understand is the depth embedded within the Joker character, even within the comics the Joker isn’t what these fans would expect, he has character, and he is his own person, read The Killing Joke for reference, this one-off comic is so inherently philosophical it’s exactly what the mainstream would have hated, yet it's one of the most acclaimed comics. Thus, since the theme inherently works to fuck with the audience, many hated it, not understanding the metairony within this narrative, however, it is the use of this theme that makes this movie such a masterpiec—a story so layered that the audience themselves prove the point being made by the director, the mass frenzy depicted within the film is embodied within contemporary societies through their widescale hate against a mentally disturbed individual. He proves that the people always only want a face for their ideals and never work to understand individual agencies. Overall, using the metafictional and  interior and external appearance themes to give a larger commentary on the narcissistic herd mentality on expectations the society possesses.

 

Moreover, a major problem that most critics seem to argue is the circular plot of the film which makes it pointless. The film starts with the exposition of Arthur in the Arkham State Hospital, where he meets Harleen “Lee” Quinzel in a music therapy session; soon, the primary conflict, Arthur’s trial, begins, during which Arthur falls prey to Lee’s frantic views regarding his appearance as the Joker, consequently Arthur fires his lawyer, embodying the Joker persona (the climax). However, as the trial develops, Arthur becomes more unstable, he eventually removes his Joker colours and accepts the ‘guilty’ verdict, after which his supporters reject him, Lee rejects him, (the audience rejects him,) and he goes back to prison to then get killed. Critics thus ask what the point of the story is, if after all Arthur tries, he ends up right back where he started, citing it as a disjointed plot. However, they fail to interpret the message being projected; the circularity of the plot is exactly what the director brilliantly executes to expose society’s expectations of a climbing arc that hails the Joker, instead the director gives them a commentary on the struggles of troubled individuals, that not everyone falls into maniacal insanity, the Joker does not have to descent into madness to be deemed as a strong villain. Instead, his vulnerability and acceptance of reality, to eventually go back to prison, reveals his improving mental health after all the suffered trauma or as others would argue, his ‘weakness’. Thus the point of the plot’s circularity is to show him quite literally leaving the Joker colours behind in a sort of healing trajectory after the immense trauma dealt, foreshadowed by his eventual demise, in a nihilistic yet realistic depiction of life’s cruelty.  This however is metafictionalised and developed through two essential scenes from the beginning and near ending that sandwich the plot.

    The Looney Tunes cartoon about the Joker and his shadow, and Arthur’s final chase scene, in the grey of the dust, chased by a vibrant Joker impersonator; these scenes quite literally define the circularity of the plot, intentionally reminding the audience of their own criticism, a strong metafictionalisation. This one connection holds so much value in the entire narrative that I could talk about it for hours (but won’t). First the cartoon, not only is it a beautiful symbolic narrative, but it is the ultimate link to the metafictional through its canonic foreshadowing of the entire film. The shadow is symbolic for Arthur’s insanity that takes over during the assassination and most of the narrative when the dance sequences are replayed but it throws Arthur under the bus when the cops show up, symbolic for his Joker persona leaving in the courtroom near his guilty verdict. Also further projecting the exeunt from the dance-music sequences after Arthur removes the Joker makeup, that his insanity only held ground within the lunacy and left at the hint of Arthur’s improving mental well-being and acceptance of the situation—a human process. During the cartoon there is also a part where the Shadow gives Arthur a stick of dynamite instead of the mic, resembling the same situation, when Arthur gets a voice in the courtroom and the courtroom blows up—another metafictional foreshadowing. Following the scene after the explosion, Arthur is seen fleeing, in the grey of the dust—similar to the shade of the shadow—and a Joker impersonator, wearing the exact makeup and outfit of Arthur’s Joker, starts chasing him. This scene is a direct mirror to the cartoon; from Arthur chasing the Shadow in the cartoon, his ‘shadow’ in full resemblance is chasing him, while he is in the grey of the Shadow. Within the narrative of Arthur’s trial, the director links back to the canonical narrative within Joker’s cartoon, to send a complicated message of fictional reality and fiction within fiction about the fiction; and through this denies the ‘incels’ the ability to coherently comprehend the film. The circularity within these scenes also work against the critics’ views, that the director himself exposes the circularity yet the critics who hated it still bash on it, as if the director’s point completely flew by their heads. Now seeing the complexity its understandable why the mainstream audiences would hate it, they cannot understand the nuance, another ‘fuck you’ to their glorification of a violent psychopath. The director denies them the pleasure of seeing carnage and insanity by projecting a human display of struggle and recovery with identities in almost a Jekyll and Hyde fictionalisation that they still attempt to critique. 

 

Furthermore, taking such a highly anticipated film, popular for being the pinnacle of the thriller, drama, and superhero genre, and making it into a musical, arguably the most hated genre, is the ultimate ‘fuck you’ to the audience. As Peter Debruge puts it, they used such an “unpopular format” against the “incels’’ who worship psychopaths, to “end the franchise,” but fully commit to the “punch in the face” this movie is to society. Many stated that the music held no value to the film; sure, it did not directly contribute to the advancement of the plot but indirectly it showed the advancement of Arthur's insanity, which is as important as any other feature. It is a very common yet essential technique used, e.g. the Tarantella in A Doll’s House by Henrik Ibsen or the Varsouviana Polka in Streetcar Named Desire by Tennessee Williams. Artists use music and dance to depict mental states, to show entrancements, to emphasize the tone they are trying to project. With each blow Arthur got, the music became louder, more vibrant and more energetic; inverse to Arthur’s state. Moreover, Near the end he says “No more songs” to Quinn, a symbol of his emancipation from the appearance he held up throughout the film; an exodus from Quinn puppeteering his insanity. More importantly, the music is Jazz, another genre more popularly hated for its incoherent chord changes and heavy use of rhythm hated by the mainstream listeners. The jazzed chaos does a brilliant job in depicting the insanity within Arthur’s head, the lack of structure and pain; and simultaneously is amazing in fucking with the audience by putting another cacophonous genre everyone hates; another ‘fuck you’. Therefore, contrary to the haters, the music does in fact add value to the film by being a direct emphasizer and indicator of Arthurs insanity; the popular audience’s incomprehension of music is just a cherry on top for the director trying to metafictional-ise the narrative. Overall, the GOOD (but underappreciated) musicality of the film effectively compliments the director's metafictional commentary about societies’ narcissism.  

 

Thankfully, the cinematography of the film is one thing that most critics undeniably appreciate. The lighting, direction, placement, colors, etc are mostly appreciated. It indeed is a beautiful film to watch. The use of a primary palette for the iconic Joker appearance and the grey spots—of his reality—in between, wonderfully exemplifies the themes at play. The geometry of the shots and effective use of techniques like the rule of thirds, long shots and closeup to exemplify the emotions and the mood of the film are brilliantly executed. However, as unnoticed as it might have been, the director does insert metafictional commentary within the cinematography. Jumping back to the musical style used, the cinematography around it, with the sudden jumps from the serious, suspenseful and thrilling scenes to highly energetic and “happy” musical performances keep striving the audience away from realism, reminding them through the erraticity of the fictionality behind the psychopaths. The crazed camera angles and movement within the musical scenes, shifts from closeups to wide shots and the eccentric moving colors all contribute to this. Thus, the (pleasing) cinematography’s extenuation of the metafictional narrative, directly compliments all the other factors contributing to the commentary on societies narcissism, thereby further basing the commentary within the brilliancy of the film’s ability to criticise the hate inflicted by the audience. Overall, underscoring that cinematography, which was good and popularly appreciated, persisted in providing the metafictional commentary of societal narcissism by catalysing the other techniques used to meet the goal through visual commentary. 

 

Additionally, I viewed the acting as also one of the boons of the film. Though somewhat agreeing to the popular critique against casting Gaga, I get it, her musical brilliance was fully juiced for the creation of this film. As compared to Margot Robbie’s performance, Lady Gaga was just not as crazed as the “Harley Quinn”. Really, it is just another ‘fuck you’ to the audience; you don’t get your Joker, or your Quinn, but they get each other *Queue Dance Sequence*. In all fairness though, its futile to compare artistic interpretations, like Gaga can’t be Robbie, nor can Phoenix be (the great) Heath Ledger, but their work is good in their own ways. Gaga’s role as Harleen Quinzel comes out as the artist she is, the puppet who makes the Joker dance, the manipulator lover, the mirror of society’s view of Joker, controlling him from the sides of support and shooting him after he is not who they want to see. Despite all the conflictions with Gaga, Jaoquin Phoenix; His acting was truly inspiring. From the pure energy in the meltdowns, the brilliant dance moves, the crazed singing to the depressed yet enigmatic acting within the prisons, really showing the pain, suffering and bleakness of life amidst adversity. His method acting techniques were extraordinary, the grimming nihilistic despaired faces to the crazed smiling lunatic, it was simply lovely. I don’t think anyone can or does actually deny the brilliance of his acting beyond the ‘confines’ of the direction. Also working from the first film that showed Arthurs’ descent into madness and becoming the Joker, to this film where it reverses and he embraces his true colors is inspiring, it shows range within the characterisation and his execution. Even after beautifully portraying Joker’s mainstream symbolisation as a creature of chaos, to now show vulnerability, pain and struggle as a human and a creature of struggle underscores the beauty in the characterisation highlighted by Phoenix. Overall, the acting within this movie was quite nice, and despite the slightly awkward casting choices, stars like Phoenix aced their roles in a way no one could have.

 

In conclusion, Joker: Folie à Deux, a movie so hated by critics and audiences combined, was one I loved. And I loved it exactly because of the reason people hated it. The metafictional commentary by the director, intendedly drove the viewers crazy, the movie was a ‘fuck you’ to the audience, critics and incels who wanted a crazed Joker; not a Joker who is human, Arthur Fleck who is hidden behind a wall of makeup, an object to jest the audiences. The prevalent themes that are the core of the plot, surrounded by the musical sequences and the acting and cinematography that shined out made for one heck of a movie. A brilliant underrated masterpiece that will live long in the history of cinemas, that hopefully will be appreciated one day. But by the virtue of its metafictionality, will never be appreciated. I just want to thank the makers for this masterpiece, I will cherish it in the face of all adversities; it's truly a masterpiece that makes me chuckle on how it's commented against.