The sequel to huge smash 'Joker' is a musical. Will be interesting to see how this does. The reviews aren't "great" but lots of positive reviews pointing towards both JP and LG performances...

Copy & paste of my thoughts about this from the Gaga forum...

 

Saw this Friday morning and hated it. The script is terrible and the movie itself is so awfully paced that it never gets going... there are a couple of scenes

Joker vs Puddles and the explosion

which were good scenes. But everything else was just so dull and boring that I genuinely felt like I had been there for hours on end. The musical aspect felt so forced and unnatural. I was wondering why 'Happy Mistake' wasn't in the movie to get them the Best Original Song Oscar, but I'm kinda thankful it's not really tied into this tbh.

 

Although I wasn't as "won over" by them as most are/were, the critics are correct in that Joaquin and Gaga's performances are not to blame. They did what they could with the heap of shit that they got given... although I'm not sure the reports about them rewriting the script on napkins as they were shooting helped matters! :drama:

 

Just a total misfire for me and it's annoyed me more than anything. :drama:

 

I hope if you are yet to see it that you can find good in it, at least! (Who knows maybe we've set the bar incredibly low for you all so that it's actually not as bad as you think it was going to be or something :lol:)

 

---

 

Box Office Tracking is going down and is now expected $45m-$55m opening in the US. International box office should be interesting though however, because this has a release in China and the first did not!

The early reviews weeks ago basically said the same. Poor GaGa :( The conxept xould have been really good ... if done properly. Sigh! Misded opportunity.

Why they wouldn't have original songs is one thing, and then if it had to be a jukebox musical, why all songs of a similar genre or cut into a similar style? You have Lady Gaga cast, she can sing anything.

Got no intention of seeing this anymore with how everyone is slating it :lol: Maybe I'll watch eventually just to see but everyone seems to be giving the film a rough time. Such a shame as the original Joker is superb. Really does make you think who was in creative control of this whole project though. I read the stuff about them not allowing audience testing too which is madness!

The more I think about this movie, the more it pisses me off tbh. :drama:

As soon as I heard it was a musical it was a no from me!

I'm going to go slightly against the grain here on this one. First of all though I didn't love it, nor did I hate it (and I really don't like musicals) but fell somewhere in the middle depending on what was happening on screen at the time. It's nowhere near as bad as certain areas of the internet will have you believe and looking at the type of people who are getting REALLY wound up over it, I'm inclined to think it must be doing something right. What I do think though is that it is a movie not afraid to take risks, and I have to applaud that. Do all the risks land? Not entirely but at least they tried something different. Lastly though I really do feel this is a film that will be more appreciated over time, as the longer you think about it the more it reveals itself to you.

 

This isn't a film that has been made in fan service and I couldn't be happier about that, as that's the death of creativity in films lately. What it has done though, is looked at the reaction to the first film, noted just how many people missed the point of it and decided we've done that and we're not making this one for you. You were never meant to view Fleck as a triumphant victim, he is a victim who becomes as much of a monster as the society that creates him. Both in the film and by many viewers he has been taken as someone to idolise and emulate but this was never the way you were supposed to see him and this sequel has quite smartly refused to indulge that attitude but throw a mirror up to it and show the viewer why Fleck is a tragic, pathetic and very dangerous individual.

 

The use of Lady Gaga's 'definitely not' Harley Quinn is clever. Her role displays no traits of any version of the character and bears only a passing visual resemblance but she acts as a cipher for all those who watched the first film, and who idealised Joker and wanted more of his nihilistic chaos. They and by extension she, plays her role more as a Lady MacBeth figure urging Fleck deeper into his madness. It is the perfect metaphor for the toxic elements of the first films fanbase.

 

The musical numbers are a bit too frequent, aren't particularly strong and very obviously signpost what any remotely objective viewer can already deduce from the scenes but they do leave you feeling that they're not the central core of the film. They showcase Fleck's mental health struggles in a way that other options really couldn't - long voice overs or scenes with Phoenix playing out the ideas through his physical acting would have been less effective. Whilst the musical segments are not that great they're ok although the Sonny and Cher bits were fun.

 

The cinematography is beautiful and both leads turn in great performances. Phoenix yet again really sells it and add greater depth to the role this time but Gaga is the true spark here. I was never sold on her being right to play Harley Quinn but the saving grace is that she doesn't. It's something else and freed from the trapping of trying to outdo or match Arleen Sorkin, Tara Strong or Margot Robbie she's able to deliver something different but intriguing.

 

Overall, yes it isn't as good as the first and it doesn't quite nail it in the execution of its ideas but if you go into it with an open mind and not expecting the same themes, violence and mood of the first film then will you'll be able to appreciate Folie a Deux for what it actually tries to do. It might be effectively Joker pt 2 but it really ins't trying to be just another film in the same mold.

 

Most of the hate it's getting is because it isn't what the 'fans' wanted or expected but if nothing else it deserves the credit for what it does well and for taking risks so it's a 6/7 out of 10 for me.

I'm going to go slightly against the grain here on this one. First of all though I didn't love it, nor did I hate it (and I really don't like musicals) but fell somewhere in the middle depending on what was happening on screen at the time. It's nowhere near as bad as certain areas of the internet will have you believe and looking at the type of people who are getting REALLY wound up over it, I'm inclined to think it must be doing something right. What I do think though is that it is a movie not afraid to take risks, and I have to applaud that. Do all the risks land? Not entirely but at least they tried something different. Lastly though I really do feel this is a film that will be more appreciated over time, as the longer you think about it the more it reveals itself to you.

 

This isn't a film that has been made in fan service and I couldn't be happier about that, as that's the death of creativity in films lately. What it has done though, is looked at the reaction to the first film, noted just how many people missed the point of it and decided we've done that and we're not making this one for you. You were never meant to view Fleck as a triumphant victim, he is a victim who becomes as much of a monster as the society that creates him. Both in the film and by many viewers he has been taken as someone to idolise and emulate but this was never the way you were supposed to see him and this sequel has quite smartly refused to indulge that attitude but throw a mirror up to it and show the viewer why Fleck is a tragic, pathetic and very dangerous individual.

 

The use of Lady Gaga's 'definitely not' Harley Quinn is clever. Her role displays no traits of any version of the character and bears only a passing visual resemblance but she acts as a cipher for all those who watched the first film, and who idealised Joker and wanted more of his nihilistic chaos. They and by extension she, plays her role more as a Lady MacBeth figure urging Fleck deeper into his madness. It is the perfect metaphor for the toxic elements of the first films fanbase.

 

The musical numbers are a bit too frequent, aren't particularly strong and very obviously signpost what any remotely objective viewer can already deduce from the scenes but they do leave you feeling that they're not the central core of the film. They showcase Fleck's mental health struggles in a way that other options really couldn't - long voice overs or scenes with Phoenix playing out the ideas through his physical acting would have been less effective. Whilst the musical segments are not that great they're ok although the Sonny and Cher bits were fun.

 

The cinematography is beautiful and both leads turn in great performances. Phoenix yet again really sells it and add greater depth to the role this time but Gaga is the true spark here. I was never sold on her being right to play Harley Quinn but the saving grace is that she doesn't. It's something else and freed from the trapping of trying to outdo or match Arleen Sorkin, Tara Strong or Margot Robbie she's able to deliver something different but intriguing.

 

Overall, yes it isn't as good as the first and it doesn't quite nail it in the execution of its ideas but if you go into it with an open mind and not expecting the same themes, violence and mood of the first film then will you'll be able to appreciate Folie a Deux for what it actually tries to do. It might be effectively Joker pt 2 but it really ins't trying to be just another film in the same mold.

 

Most of the hate it's getting is because it isn't what the 'fans' wanted or expected but if nothing else it deserves the credit for what it does well and for taking risks so it's a 6/7 out of 10 for me.

 

Agreed with everything. :clap: