Modern Flâneuse

A New Take on Superhero Movies

There are superhero movies, and then there’s Joker. Joker transcends its premise, evolving into much more than just a superhero movie. It’s a gripping psychological thriller that explores societal issues like mental illness, isolation, and socioeconomic inequality, and I loved every minute of it. It had strong Taxi Driver and King of Comedy vibes, blending psychological tension with social commentary to create a dark and compelling character study. Yesterday, I attended the premiere of the sequel, Joker: Folie à Deux, and it did not disappoint. Joaquin Phoenix was brilliant once again in his portrayal of Arthur Fleck/Joker, delivering another captivating performance.

To be honest, after a certain age, I stopped watching superhero movies. They started to feel childish, with their simplistic, black-and-white view of heroes versus villains—nothing felt realistic or relatable. Not that realism is essential, but Batman—a billionaire turned vigilante—has always struck me as a bit silly. The film Joker set itself apart by removing Batman from the equation, showing only a young Bruce Wayne, and focusing instead on the evolution of the Joker character. The iconic Batman villain is reimagined as Arthur Fleck—a real, flesh-and-blood man who transforms into the Joker. He is not a typical supervillain or criminal mastermind, but the tragic and perhaps inevitable product of his circumstances.

What made the first Joker movie truly special wasn’t just the plot itself—though it was compelling in its own way—but rather Joaquin Phoenix’s performance. His portrayal was a masterclass in acting. We witness the Joker rise like a phoenix from the ashes of Arthur Fleck’s tortured life. I highly doubt any other actor could have portrayed the role so masterfully. Joaquin Phoenix truly worked his magic, and rightfully won the Academy Award for Best Actor for it.

The Sequel: Arthur Fleck’s Descent

Some spoilers follow. In the second film of the series, we follow Arthur Fleck in the aftermath of the events from the first movie. He’s incarcerated in a psychiatric ward, awaiting trial for the murders of five people, most notably the very public killing of talk-show host Murray Franklin on live television. His defense rests on the claim that he suffers from dissociative identity disorder. A result of childhood abuse, with the Joker manifesting as an alter ego that takes control when Arthur feels threatened or in pain. This strategy is proposed by his lawyer, who, nonetheless, seems to genuinely believe in the theory.

In the non-prisoner psychiatric ward of Arkham State Hospital, there’s a woman known as Lee, short for Harleen. This character is loosely based on the DC Comics’ Harleen Quinzel, also known as Harley Quinn, and is played by Lady Gaga. Lee has voluntarily committed herself solely for the chance to meet the Joker. For lack of a better word, she’s obsessed with him. It’s a match made in heaven—or perhaps in hell. I never imagined I’d feel such sympathy for a fictional character, but poor Arthur, a man starved for love, sees Lee as his salvation. He truly believes she loves him and that they have a future together. But Lee harbors no genuine affection for Arthur—she’s infatuated with the fantasy of the Joker. Manipulative and controlling, she feeds into Arthur’s delusions, like a trashier version of Lady Macbeth.

A Courtroom Showdown: Arthur vs. Joker

In a bold and reckless move, Arthur fires his lawyer, convinced by both his own delusions and Lee’s influence that the Joker can win the day. He dresses as the Joker in court and attempts to represent himself. He does predictably a poor job, given that he never even finished high school. During one of his outbursts as the Joker, Arthur publicly humiliates the prison guards. They don’t take kindly to the insult. His hubris provokes their retaliation, and after enduring one too many abuses, the Joker persona vanishes for good. Arthur is left too broken, incapable of being the Joker anymore. He simply wants to be Arthur again and have a chance to start his life over. This moment, of course, was yet another remarkable display of Joaquin Phoenix’s exceptional talent and his ability to bring depth and intensity to Arthur Fleck’s character.

I really don’t want to give away the ending. I’ll just say that in a final fleeting moment of freedom, he crosses paths with Lee one last time. In a cruel twist of fate, she renounces him, just as he had once renounced Joker. The film concludes with Arthur, now shattered, a husk of himself, back in the psychiatric ward, finally facing what some might call his due. But if it were up to me, what he truly deserves is proper mental health care and a hug. Arthur is one of those vulnerable people who have been failed by the system. When they reach a breaking point, can we really place all the blame on them?

The Music: Amplifying Emotion Over Plot

As expected from the cast, there was quite a bit of singing throughout the film. This time, during moments of intense emotion or pivotal character developments, Arthur not only dances, as in the first movie, but also sings. Joaquin Phoenix handles this seamlessly, and naturally, Lady Gaga delivers just as expected. While there are musical elements in the film, it is not a musical in the traditional sense. I have to admit, I’m not usually a fan of musicals. Nevertheless, I found the musical moments in this film quite enjoyable. There are several scenes where Arthur and Lee sing together, either celebrating their love or airing their conflicts. Sometimes all this happens on an imaginary stage that exists solely within Arthur’s mind. The Frank Sinatra song “That’s Life” also makes a return from the first movie. Even amidst the film’s poignant moments, hearing it again made my heart skip with bittersweet joy.

As for the plot, it’s not Game of Thrones—there aren’t many major events—but the focus is on Arthur’s emotions, conveyed through his dream-like state and delusions. Was it better than the first film? I’d say no; the original felt more complete, telling the full arc of the character from beginning to tragic end. In my opinion, the inclusion of Lee didn’t have a significant impact on the main sequence of events, aside from adding further misery to Arthur. I mean, as a character, Lee didn’t have much room for development. However, Lady Gaga delivered more than well within the confines of the role. But was the movie worth watching? Absolutely. It was compelling, held my attention throughout, and I was thoroughly entertained.

The Reception, and Final Thoughts

I should say a few words about the reception of the film. There was a lot of excitement surrounding Lady Gaga’s presence—someone even shouted, “We love you!” in the theater before the film began. I couldn’t help but feel a bit sorry for Joaquin Phoenix as he entered the Sala Grande. There was noticeably less fanfare for him, even though he’s an actor of immense talent. While Lady Gaga drew cheers and screams, no one did the same for Phoenix. Not that it likely matters to him. A pop icon like Lady Gaga is bound to draw crowds, which is great for the film—”bums on seats, laddie, bums on seats.” I just wanted to highlight the somewhat misplaced enthusiasm of the audience. At the end of the screening, the audience erupted into applause, continuing to clap for an extended period—the longest I’ve ever witnessed during the film festival. P.S. I know the reviews for the film have been mixed, but I must say I enjoyed Joker: Folie à Deux, and that seemed to be the general impression of those around me.

You can read more of my film reviews of premieres from the 81st Venice Film Festival, including Maria, Babygirl, The Room Next Door, and Queer.