As a film critic with over two decades of experience, I must say that the decision to turn “Joker: Folie à Deux” into a musical was undoubtedly one of the most perplexing and disappointing choices I’ve seen in recent cinema history.
The sequel to “Joker: Folie à Deux,” released in 2024, was a significant disappointment at the box office, earning just $37 million over its opening weekend. This is considerably lower than the estimated range of $50-$65 million and falls short of the original’s $96 million opening in 2019. In other words, it failed to meet expectations and earned less than what Batman’s alter ego, Bruce Wayne, carries as spare change.
The movie ‘Joker’ made over $1 billion worldwide, with $335 million coming from North America alone, placing it as the second-highest earning R-rated film in history, until surpassed by 2024’s ‘Deadpool and Wolverine.’ However, unlike typical blockbusters, ‘Joker’ was anything but ordinary. It won the prestigious Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival, received 11 Academy Award nominations, including best picture, and Joaquin Phoenix took home the award for best actor for his role.
The dramatic drop in box office performance for the films suggests a mystery: What on earth went wrong? Despite the apparent inevitability of a sequel to the blockbuster hit “Joker”, “Joker: Folie à Deux” proved to be a financial disappointment, even worse than Gotham’s infamous crime statistics. For the executives at Warner Brothers, this is no jest, as they are now grappling with multiple potential explanations for the underperformance of “Joker: Folie à Deux”.
Joaquin Phoenix isn’t a box office draw
Joaquin Phoenix might be considered among the most respected actors of his era, or any era, really. He has garnered four Academy Award nominations and won one for “Joker.” As Movieweb’s critic put it, “Joaquin Phoenix isn’t an actor who is shaped by the films he stars in; instead, he shapes the films he’s in.” This was particularly true for “Joker”: despite being based on one of pop culture’s most iconic villains, it gained its esteemed status primarily due to Phoenix’s exceptional performance.
Yet despite his accolades and accomplishments, one inconvenient fact remains: Joaquin Phoenix isn’t much of a box office attraction. Sure, he may be a household name, but those households didn’t go to see “Beau Is Afraid” ($11 million worldwide) or “Inherent Vice” ($14 million worldwide). Phoenix’s global total is $3.6 billion, which is impressive at face value, until you consider that nearly a third of that comes from one film, “Joker,” his biggest hit by half a million.
Prior to “Joker,” his most successful blockbusters were released decades ago with “Gladiator” ($451 million) and “Signs” ($408 million). In both films, he played secondary roles to more prominent actors. However, for Phoenix’s highest-grossing film, it wasn’t his name at the top of the marquee that drew crowds; instead, it was the iconic character of the Joker, one of the rare characters to have set opening weekend box office records on two separate occasions.
Lady Gaga is a music star – not a movie star
In a somewhat surprising turn, it seems as if the artist often referred to as Madonna’s successor, Lady Gaga, shares Madonna’s prowess in the music world. However, similar to Madonna, it appears that her cinematic endeavors haven’t been as successful, with each film averaging around $58 million in earnings. This is the reason we bring up Madonna, to draw a parallel between the two pop icons and their acting careers.
Lady Gaga has achieved significant success in music, selling over 40 million albums globally. Notably, she is the first female artist to have three singles that each surpassed the 10-million mark in worldwide sales. Impressively, on streaming platforms, she boasts more than 31 million followers and has been heard by over 100 million listeners, earning her a place among Spotify’s most streamed artists throughout history.
It might appear that most of Lady Gaga’s “Little Monsters” flock to her movies, but in truth, it’s a bit like a “Bad Romance.” Her nine films have grossed over $864 million globally, averaging about $108 million per film. However, this figure may be misleading: The only one of her films that truly succeeded was “A Star Is Born” in 2018, earning $432 million. Next is “House of Gucci,” released in 2021, which made $147 million, but considering its production budget of $75 million, it needed significantly more to turn a profit. Even if “Joker: Folie à Deux” surpasses “A Star Is Born,” its rumored $200 million budget could make it the most costly flop of Gaga’s career.
The Joker is overexposed
As a devoted fan, I firmly believe that “Joker: Folie à Deux” didn’t strictly require an A-list actor for the title role. The Joker, the Crown Prince of Chaos, is one of the most profitable characters in cinematic history. In 1989, “Batman” shattered records by earning $40 million on its opening weekend, eventually raking in a staggering $411 million globally. Jack Nicholson’s captivating performance as the Joker in his purple suit and white makeup was a major draw.
Regardless of the mixed reactions towards Jared Leto’s portrayal of the Joker in “Suicide Squad” (2016), his performance contributed significantly to the film’s global gross of $745 million, proving that even controversial interpretations can impact box-office success. Interestingly, when examining Batman’s most successful films, they often include the Joker as a pivotal element.
The excessive portrayal of The Joker is a significant issue, as he was only seen in one movie between 1989 and 2008 (“Batman” and “The Dark Knight”). Since then, however, he has appeared in six more films: “Suicide Squad,” “The Lego Batman Movie,” “Birds of Prey,” “Joker,” Zack Snyder’s “Justice League,” and “The Batman.” With so many Joker appearances, it seems that the character is overused, as evidenced by the unsuccessful release of “Joker: Folie à Deux.
Harley Quinn is not a box office draw
Harley Quinn’s intriguing past, known as Dr. Harleen Quinzel, started in “Batman: The Animated Series.” Since then, her fanbase has grown to match or even surpass the Joker’s own, as evidenced by her consistent presence in comics, cartoons, video games, and popular costumes. However, despite her widespread appeal across various platforms, she hasn’t managed to achieve box office success yet.
In her initial appearance on the big screen, Harley Quinn starred in the live-action movie “Suicide Squad.” The film, boosted by the excellent choice of Margot Robbie for the part, managed to gross $133 million despite receiving terrible reviews. However, “Suicide Squad” left a sour taste in fans’ mouths, and its follow-up, “Birds of Prey,” only made $33 million on its opening weekend. Ultimately, it garnered just $200 million worldwide, which is significantly less than the earnings of its predecessor. It’s important to note that “Birds Of Prey” was already struggling before the COVID-19 lockdowns forced theater closures, so this wasn’t the reason for its poor performance.
In 2021, Robbie reappeared in “The Suicide Squad,” however, without Will Smith and with less audience excitement, the film – which could be seen as a semi-sequel/reboot – didn’t perform well, earning just $26 million on its opening weekend and a total of $167 million globally. This represented an alarming 78% decrease compared to “Suicide Squad.” One might think that casting renowned singer and actress Lady Gaga as a different Harley Quinn could improve the situation, but this doesn’t seem to be the case based on the box office results of “Joker: Folie à Deux.” Regrettably, it appears that Harley Quinn isn’t particularly popular at the box office.
Nobody wanted this movie
It seems that despite the success of “Joker” five years prior, which left Warner Brothers execs grinning wider than the Joker himself, there was less enthusiasm among moviegoers for its sequel, “Joker: Folie à Deux.” In fact, it appears that the studio was more eager to fund this follow-up than audiences were to purchase tickets for it.
The film titled “Joker” was quite a daring endeavor. It was an R-rated standalone story set within the universe of Elseworlds, significantly altering the traditional Joker and Batman narrative. In essence, we believe that the focus on the Joker served as a clever ruse, masking what the film truly represented: an introspective examination of a solitary, marginalized individual on the edge of madness, spiraling into chaos and violence. Rather than a typical comic book movie, “Joker” was a tribute to Martin Scorsese’s classics, “Taxi Driver” and “King of Comedy,” with Robert De Niro’s inclusion in a supporting role serving as an overt acknowledgment of this influence. Given its modest $55 million budget, there was a risk that “Joker” might flop; however, the risk proved to be worth it, both at the box office and during award season.
The upcoming film “Joker: Folie à Deux” seems like an unscrupulous attempt to capitalize on the success of its predecessor, rather than a genuine creative endeavor. While some audiences might flock to sequels and spin-offs that are clearly intended for financial gain, a seemingly unwarranted follow-up to “Joker” may have struck viewers as deceitful and exploitative in a way they could instinctively perceive, leading them to avoid the theater.
Comic book movie fatigue is still a thing
Following the much-anticipated release of “Joker: Folie à Deux,” in 2024, other beloved comic book characters made their return to the big screen in a hard R-rated movie, marking a five-year hiatus. This film, as you might guess, was “Deadpool and Wolverine.” On its opening weekend, it raked in an impressive $211 million, surpassing what is expected for the entire domestic run of “Joker: Folie à Deux.” To date, the sequel to “Deadpool” has amassed over $633 million domestically. It’s predicted that this total will exceed the worldwide earnings of “Joker: Folie à Deux.” And with a staggering global gross of over $1.3 billion and counting, it seems likely that the Marvel blockbuster will secure the title of the year’s second highest-grossing movie globally.
It seems that “Deadpool and Wolverine” outshone “Joker: Folie à Deux” rather significantly this year. The reason might be due to the ongoing trend of comic book media, where audiences still seem captivated by these stories. However, it’s possible that the success of “Deadpool and Wolverine,” which are more adult-oriented, may have satiated a large portion of the audience’s craving for such films this year, leaving less room for other comic book movies like “Joker: Folie à Deux.
Further, “Deadpool and Wolverine” reintroduced two cherished characters into the Marvel Cinematic Universe in a manner that didn’t seem like a mere money-making scheme (though it might have been). On the contrary, it felt like a gesture of atonement towards the MCU audience for five years of less-than-impressive films. Conversely, “Joker: Folie à Deux” seemed to echo the same formula from Warner Brothers/DC, offering a forced and muddled extension of a disjointed franchise that has experienced five consecutive financial flops in a row. Instead of rectifying this trend, “Joker: Folie à Deux” perpetuated it, continuing the brand’s unfortunate tradition of producing box office duds.
Dark movies aren’t a box office draw
Have you been keeping up with the news lately? It’s not all sunshine and rainbows at the moment. While “Joker” and its upcoming sequel “Joker: Folie à Deux” may show a clown dancing to “Smile” and “What The World Needs Now”, it’s important to remember that this clown is also a violent psychopath. These are not light-hearted films, as the original “Joker” broke records in 2019, but the world we find ourselves in 2024 is vastly different from that time. Therefore, it’s likely that “Joker: Folie à Deux” will struggle to recoup its costs.
A glance at the past years’ top 10 box office earnings reveals the movies that audiences are most interested in. For instance, “Spider-Man: No Way Home” ruled the 2021 box office with an impressive $1.97 billion, thanks to the return of fan favorites Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield as Spider-Men. In 2022, “Avatar: The Way of Water” took the global lead ($2.3 billion), while “Top Gun: Maverick” shone brightly both in the U.S. ($713 million) and worldwide ($1.4 billion) by focusing on themes of camaraderie and valor.
2023 saw blockbuster hits like “Barbie” ($1.4 billion) and “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” ($1.3 billion), offering up vibrant, humorous comedies built around iconic intellectual properties that the audience adored. While “Oppenheimer” had its moment, it’s anticipated that 2024 will close with family-favorite sequels “Inside Out 2” and “Deadpool and Wolverine” taking the top spots. On the other hand, the gritty, somber, and ominous “Joker: Folie à Deux” is unlikely to make it to the top of the box office charts this year.
Everybody hated it
The original “Joker” movie earned a billion dollars by appealing to two distinct groups of cinema enthusiasts: those who enjoy comic book adaptations and aficionados of high-quality films. Essentially, it was a film that could captivate your snobbish film teacher as well as your friends who rush to every Michael Bay premiere. However, “Joker: Folie à Deux” attempted to recreate this formula for success but fell short with both types of audiences.
In a peculiar turn of events for contemporary cinema, the upcoming sequel “Joker: Folie à Deux” seems to be a film that leaves both critics and fans feeling equally displeased, with the latter potentially expressing even stronger disapproval.
It’s clear that the poor reception of “Joker: Folie à Deux” can be attributed to its disorganized, incredibly dumb state. This movie earned an exceptionally low Cinemascore of “D,” which is quite rare for a comic book film. A movie can succeed at the box office if it’s critically acclaimed but disliked by fans, or if it’s loved by fans but panned by critics. However, when both audiences and critics disapprove? The result is a cinematic catastrophe like “Joker: Folie à Deux.
It’s a musical
It’s interesting to consider who came up with the idea to turn an Academy Award-winning character study about a psychotic serial killer into a musical. One could speculate they thought, “Since we have Lady Gaga on board, let’s give it a try,” but creating “Joker: Folie à Deux” as a full-fledged musical seems like one of the most unusual choices in contemporary cinema. Initially, when whispers about “Joker: Folie à Deux” being a musical emerged, we speculated that perhaps it might incorporate a few musical sequences, which seemed plausible given its exploration into the minds of two clearly disturbed individuals. However, it has now been confirmed that indeed, “Joker: Folie à Deux” is a full-blown musical, which comes as quite a surprise.
Points for creativity, we guess? The choice is even more bizarre considering that live-action movie musicals have been largely out of fashion for film since before, well, most of us were even born. We can debate the real reason many musicals flop, but we believe it’s simply because moviegoers just aren’t into them, and haven’t been for awhile.
Making “Joker: Folie à Deux” a musical was not a creative attempt that missed the mark but a critical mistake that likely had a significant negative impact on its financial potential.
It took the audience for granted
If you found yourself questioning, “Have I ever encountered ‘folie à deux’ before?”, let me clarify that it refers to two individuals in close relationship sharing the same or similar delusional beliefs. In simpler terms, it describes characters like The Joker and Harley Quinn. While it’s intriguing and imaginative compared to titles like “Joker 2” or “The Rise of Harley Quinn”, it might be a bit confusing for some moviegoers. Movie studios often use straightforward numbered sequels because they are easy for busy people to understand without causing confusion.
A studio might dare to make a sequel to “Batman Begins” with “The Dark Knight,” as most moviegoers are familiar with the Batman franchise. However, expecting audiences to grasp French and psychological terminology from the title of “Joker: Madness Duet”? That’s quite a stretch.
It turned out that the title “Joker: Folie à Deux” was merely a small part of a larger picture. From its unimpressive and repetitive marketing to its surprise musical genre (which wasn’t made clear), to an extravagant $200 million budget, triple the original, everything about this film seemed arrogant. Unfortunately for the producers, it appeared that they underestimated their audience, as “Joker: Folie à Deux” flopped at the box office due to lackluster ticket sales.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-10-08 01:30