As a film critic with decades of experience under my belt, I’ve seen my fair share of cinematic tricks and twists, but Todd Phillips’ latest move with Joker has left me more bewildered than a cat on a hot tin roof. It feels like he’s been playing a game of three-card Monte with us, and now that the dust has settled, I can’t help but wonder if he wasn’t just trying to pull a fast one all along.
Warning: This article contains spoilers for Joker: Folie à Deux
Initially, Folie à Deux, a sequel to the blockbuster hit and Oscar-nominated film Joker, was anticipated as one of the most successful movies of 2024. Given the return of director Todd Phillips and star Joaquin Phoenix, along with Lady Gaga joining the cast as beloved character Harley Quinn, it appeared unbeatable. However, the film is now predicted to be a major disappointment both critically and financially for the year. One of the most debated choices in the movie was the final scene, where Arthur Fleck is murdered by an inmate who suggests he is the real Joker, contradicting the title characters of the two previous films.
Todd Phillips has attempted to explain and justify the creative decisions made in the film, stating that this was part of the original plan, despite the initial Joker movie being produced without any plans for a sequel. However, various quotes and interviews seem to present more inconsistencies than the complex backstories of the Joker character in the comics. Here is how Phillips has defended his unconventional ending, which conflicts with the previous film, yet aligns with some of his earlier statements as a director.
Todd Phillips Claims This Was Always the Plan (But Was It?)
It came as quite a surprise to many when it was disclosed that Arthur Fleck wasn’t actually the true Joker, but merely the inspiration for the real antagonist. Given that the initial film was titled “Joker” and seemed to be an origin tale for the DC Comics character, this unexpected twist seems to have been a deliberate decision by Phillips and Phoenix since the first movie’s release. In an interview with IGN, Phillips discussed the ending for “Joker: Folie a Deux”:
In my perspective, the initial motion picture goes by the title “Joker.” It’s not referred to as “The Joker,” but simply “Joker.” The script for this film has always described it as an “origin story,” not “THE origin story.” This suggests that perhaps we’re not witnessing THE Joker, but rather the genesis of a character who may inspire the infamous villain. In essence, by the movie’s end, you’re left pondering, “Could that figure lurking in the background be him?
It appears as though Phillips is employing the widespread feedback from both fans and critics of the 2019 film to support his creative decision. The criticism pointed out that Arthur Fleck, as a character, didn’t embody the ruthless criminal mastermind destined to become Batman’s most formidable adversary. Instead, he seemed more vulnerable, something that Joker: Folie a Deux consistently emphasizes. While Arthur Fleck donned makeup and assumed the identity of The Joker, his portrayal lacked any significant ties to the comic book character. It was challenging for many to accept that this version of the character could evolve into someone cunning and malevolent enough to confront Batman.
Following the release of “Joker”, fans began speculating that Arthur Fleck may not have been the true Joker but rather the inspiration behind him. As promised by director Todd Phillips, this concept is now realized in his statement to IGN:
Arthur, Joaquin’s portrayal of The Joker, differs significantly from our interpretation in that he’s not depicted as a criminal mastermind. This has been consistent since the first movie, and if we hadn’t made a sequel, people would have imagined various transformations for this character, but it wouldn’t have resembled the Joker we all grew up admiring. I hope you understand what I mean.
Todd Phillips maintains that Arthur Fleck wasn’t meant to become Batman’s main nemesis, but rather the inspiration behind the character. However, it’s hard to ignore the fact that the original Joker portrayed a different narrative. The film concluded in such a way that it was evident this was the story of the Joker who would confront Batman in the future. Granted, the Joker appeared older than Bruce Wayne, but considering the movie was an Elseworlds-type tale without a sequel plan, this detail seemed insignificant. Essentially, the movie served as an origin story for The Joker.
It seems like you’re questioning whether Todd Phillips created another Joker movie to clarify or expand on a theme he may have left unclear in the original film. However, considering his initial plans for the previous film’s ending, it appears more likely that he wanted to explore new creative directions rather than feeling compelled to clarify an unclear point from the first movie.
Todd Phillips Reused His Original Ending Proving Arthur Fleck was THE Joker
It seems questionable to accept Phillips’ assertion that Arthur Fleck wasn’t intended to become The Joker, given the initial plan for the 2019 movie’s climax. According to reports, Todd Phillips initially planned for Phoenix’s character, Arthur Fleck, to carve his face in front of a crowd, mirroring the iconic Glagslow scar associated with Heath Ledger’s Joker. However, Christopher Nolan, who was a significant figure at Warner Bros., rejected this concept, arguing that only Heath Ledger’s Joker should bear the carved mark. Instead, in the final cut of the film, Arthur Fleck smears blood across his face to create a large Joker grin before the mob.
Since 2019, Warner Bros. has undergone significant transformations. Notably, Christopher Nolan departed from the studio in 2021 over their decision to simultaneously release films in cinemas and their streaming platform, now known as Max, on the same day. Nolan opted to distribute his subsequent film, the eventual Best Picture winner Oppenheimer, through Universal Pictures instead. Todd Phillips subsequently adopted this approach for Joker: Folie à Deux, altering the character of the new inmate and giving himself a self-inflicted scar to portray the Joker.
In the original plan for the 2019 film, why did Joaquin Phoenix’s character, Arthur Fleck, seem destined to adopt the distinctive grin linked with Heath Ledger’s Joker, suggesting that he might be portraying the iconic Joker himself, rather than just a man named Joker? This contradicts Todd Phillips’ assertion that “maybe this isn’t THE Joker.” The inconsistency between their statements suggests a possible strategic move to avoid being pressured into directing Joker 3, which, if it were ever made, could have been called JOK3R.
Phillips Started a Joke, But the Joke Was on Us
During the production of Joker, Phillips chose to reinterpret the character in a manner that deviated from the Batman narrative, reflecting his unique approach to these films. Before the movie’s release, he made several statements, such as “We’re going to disguise a real movie within the framework of a comic book film.” In a 2019 Q&A with GameStop, Phillips expressed, “Perhaps it could have been titled ‘Arthur’ and focused solely on the clown character. Maybe. I thought there was an opportunity to tell a comic book story in a fresh way — and maybe I was mistaken — let’s try it as a character study.” This statement sheds light on Phillips’ rationale for his decision.
From the get-go, he made it clear he was “sneaking” what he perceived as “a real movie” under the guise of a comic book film, using the name to trick the audiences into seeing a movie they might not rush out to see. At no point during the publicity of 2019’s Joker or Joker: Folie à Deux did Todd Phillips decide to let audiences know “this isn’t really about the Joker;” instead, he let the DC association carry and sell the movie and then decided to pull the rug out from underneath audiences and tell them that Arthur Fleck was never really Joker. If it was never meant to be about The Joker, why would it include characters like The Waynes and Harvey Dent or put Harley Quinn so prominently in the marketing? They didn’t create a new character or even use a more obscure DC character; they picked Harley Quinn for no real reason other than marketability.
Perhaps Todd Phillips’ creation of the Joker film was a calculated deception all along. It might be that he harbored resentment towards having to produce such a movie, but found a way to bring it to life nonetheless. This approach allowed him to trick the audience from the outset, and with Joker, he succeeded in making a film that grossed over $1 billion globally. However, his downfall was attempting to revisit the scene of the crime and not stop there, as he sought to deliver one final jest.
The joke has paid off, but it is clear nobody finds the punchline funny.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-10-11 04:01