Todd Phillips’ “Joker: Folie a Deux” (hereafter referred to as “Joker 2”) defies expectations and will put to the test all of the pre-packaged welcome and fanboy glee that greets it.

The return of Phoenix’s Arthur Fleck, aka Joker, isn’t another opportunity to watch Phoenix murder in the name of nihilistic comic book authenticity, nor another attempt to mimic (or steal outright from) Martin Scorsese’s “The King of Comedy” (1983) and “Taxi Driver” (1976).

Instead, Phillips has made an honest-to-goodness musical, with visual allusions to “The Umbrellas of Cherbourg” (1964) and “Dancer in the Dark” (2000) as just a few of the many reference points.

Phoenix’s Fleck is now incarcerated and awaiting trial, with his extremely patient lawyer (Catherine Keener) struggling to keep him restrained, while the lead prison guard (Brendan Gleason) abuses him. When Fleck meets Lee (Lady Gaga) an enchanting, dark soul with an obvious crush on him, Fleck finds someone to live for, even as he’s just barely trying to keep his Joker persona under wraps.

Considering how much Fleck’s story resembles the horror show of Bernie Goetz’s 1984 New York City subway shooting and the shocking turns that followed, it is fascinating to see Phillips and screenwriter Scott Silver take this in the direction of a Goetz-infused daydream. I’m unsure that we need the interesting but crass animated short that opens the film but I’m positive that Phillips missed a golden opportunity by repeatedly referencing a TV movie made about Fleck but never showing us a clip.

Phillips’ film is a high-wire act from start to finish, the rare occasion where everyone involved decided to take a real chance on alienating material and not simply provide a bigger sequel that retells the same story. Even when the first act is still warming up, Phillips directs the hell out of every scene, including some long tracking shots that must have been a nightmare to choreograph.

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Joker Movie (@jokermovie)

The story is sad and often unpleasant, as it was in the first film, but avoids being redundant and obvious, which was most of “Joker” (2019). Aside from the riveting sequence that pit Phoenix against Robert De Niro, there is little in the blockbuster original that I’d care to revisit.

The controversy, pre-release hype and accolades attached to Phoenix’s performance made it a phenomenon, but here is a follow-up that is not only better but, amusingly, disinterested in audience adoration.

Although “Joker 2” is a musical, this a creative choice that avoids any obvious or commercial directions, even with Lady Gaga in the cast. At times, we’re seeing musical numbers break out, reflecting the fantasies of the characters.

Just as frequently, characters simply break out into song and sometimes it’s instinctive, such as when we sing along with a song on the car radio and aren’t even aware of it.

The model adapted for the musical numbers isn’t anything traditional or contemporary, like “La La Land” (2016), but Dennis Potter musicals, like “Pennies from Heaven” (1978) or “The Singing Detective” (1986), where musical numbers (fantasies or otherwise) are mental escapes that wallpaper over the real tragedies taking place.

At times, it’s a joy to hear Lady Gaga belt a big number on a highly stylized set but, just as often, she’s giving an intentionally pitchy, rough-voiced take on a radio standard. Likewise, Phoenix, whose singing here ranges from tolerable to far less than that.

It reminded me of Woody Allen’s “Everyone Says I Love You” (1996), a little-seen musical in the Potter mode where actors are either singing well with proper accompaniment (like Edward Norton) or, more often than not, giving musical interpretations that sound like emotional, tone-deaf rounds of karaoke.

Yes, ‘Joker: Folie à Deux’ Is a Musical: Everything Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga Have Said About Its Singing https://t.co/N7vlAJKE7w

— People (@people) October 4, 2024

Phoenix is still giving a highly-mannered turn that will either strike some as tour de force acting, a commentary on performance itself or a smattering of both. I still think his best performance is in Paul Thomas Anderson’s “The Master” (2012) and that his take on Arthur Fleck is like an extension of his work in the Anderson film.

At times, his Brando-esque turn here is extraordinary, but I also grew tired of it. Thankfully, he’s paired with the dazzling Lady Gaga – they have terrific chemistry, and her performance has depth and nuanced acting choices.

Unlike Margot Robbie’s take on the character, Lady Gaga isn’t playing Harley Quinn as gleefully crazy but as a lost soul who finds the wrong man to be her messiah; Lady Gaga makes Harley Quinn vulnerable and tragic.

I loved the musical numbers, even as every single one of them feels like a press-PAUSE intrusion on the story instead of an extension of it. Although Phillips has made a musical with a three-act structure (prison film, courtroom drama, love story), this isn’t a watered-down or any less nihilistic work than its predecessor.

In fact – and I won’t describe it or provide any spoilers – the disturbing final scene, which is so cruel and comes as a shock, manages to be poetic justice and tragic at the same time.

I haven’t stopped thinking about it.

“Joker 2” will be a challenge for most, even those who adored the stubbornly unlovable original. What Phillips and his team have created is distancing, often experimental and risky.

Coming a week after the all-or-nothing roll of the dice that is “Megalopolis” (which I adore), it’s exciting and encouraging to see yet another lavish movie, getting a mainstream wide release, that wants to challenge its audience as sincerely as it wants to entertain.

Three Stars

The post Yes, ‘Joker: Folie a Deux’ Trumps 2019 Blockbuster appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Chris Sanders’ “The Wild Robot” has emerged as a true sleeper in an age where animated movies are mostly sequels or spinoffs of toys or games.

Based on Peter Brown’s 2016 book, Sanders’ CGI-animated comedy is about a robot stranded in nature, but also about resisting the way we are programmed.

Lupita Nyong’o is the voice of Roz, an advanced, physically capable robot who can hold her own when marooned on a planet. Once she realizes there is wildlife around her, Roz’s mission isn’t just survival from desertion but avoiding being torn apart.

The first act, in which Roz cannot understand the animals she encounters and is surprised when they don’t reply to her voice commands, is fantastic. If the entire film had gone in this direction, it could have resulted in something truly refreshing.

Seeing Roz earnestly attempt contact with an angry horde of mammals is hilarious (I love her late-night battle with an army of squirrels) but it has a nice edge.

A pivotal moment comes when Rox discovers a goose egg that quickly hatches. She recognizes the need for a mother figure and doesn’t immediately see the value of taking care of the newborn. To her surprise, Roz not only sticks with the hatchling but turns to a fox (Pedro Pascal) for help.

Later, Roz sits completely still and figures out the language of the animals, simply by observation (weirdly, the same way Antonio Banderas learned to communicate with Vikings in “The 13th Warrior”!). Roz is able to talk to them, and we understand what everyone is saying.

It’s at that point the movie gets a major case of The Cutes.

“The Wild Robot” doesn’t fall apart and is never an insufferable time waster like so many children’s films, but the promise and comic potential of the early scenes is sanded down. There’s a version of this movie where only Roz speaks English and, more believably, no one else on screen can speak with her.

Perhaps what we have here is the more commercial choice, but the film is often at its best when no one is speaking. I recall Disney’s “Dinosaur” (2000), which was majestic, until all the dinosaurs started chatting and telling jokes, undermining the grandeur.

“The Wild Robot” is a different case, though I suspect the film could seriously work with no one onscreen talking.

There’s only one other sequence in the film that is as poetic as the opener – Roz goes on a rescue mission during a blizzard, which results in some wondrous and very funny reveals.

“The Wild Robot,” both the film and appearance of the title character, have been compared to Brad Bird’s 1999 masterpiece, “The Iron Giant” (1999). I also saw moments that are strikingly similar to “Wall-E” (2009.

Look, these are great comparisons. I wish there were a minute, let alone an entire scene, in the disposable “Despicable Me 4” or the over-praised “Inside Out 2 that made me think of “The Iron Giant,” let alone inch near that level of greatness.

While the middle of “The Wild Robot” is pure formula (it becomes, weirdly, an extended training montage), it reconnects with the dramatic power and invention of the beginning during the emotionally charged third act.

Another thing I loved? The wrap-up isn’t a given, as the story goes as far as it can and finds surprising dramatic richness.

I cried more than expected and my 8-year-old was dazzled and laughed frequently.

‘The Wild Robot’ receives an A on CinemaScore. pic.twitter.com/5YIsPl5r6m

— ToonHive (@ToonHive) September 28, 2024

There are deeper films about how a robot can learn to love (everything from “A.I. Artificial Intelligence” to “Robot and Frank” come to mind) but this is less a cautionary tale about A.I. and more an allegory for the role and mindset a parent has with their adopted child.

While there is a lack of depth overall (look how cute those animals are! Ohhhhh!), “The Wild Robot” is touching and awfully entertaining. It doesn’t hit the milestone of “The Iron Giant” but, in many complimentary ways, it is, like Bird’s film, thoughtful and compassionate.

Few recent CGI animated children’s films are on that level.

Three Stars

The post Why ‘Wild Robot’ Earns Those ‘Iron Giant’ Comparisons appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Bob Clark’s “Black Christmas” (1974) is a petrifyingly scary film, easily one of the all-time most unsettling to take place during the yuletide holiday season.

While not a hit upon a release (it left a very small impression), it was among the first of the Canadian Tax Shelter films made, so called because a budget was established to help create a Canadian film scene and allow budgets for films with commercial potential.

“Black Christmas” and the early works of David Cronenberg were among the Canadian Tax Shelter films; while Cronenberg eventually broke through to widespread success and acclaim, neither his earliest works nor “Black Christmas” were hits in their day.

The film that wound up super-charging the Canadian film industry was none other than Ivan Reitman’s “Meatballs” (1979).

Decades later, not only does “Black Christmas” stand out for being one of Clark’s best two Yuletide films (more on that later), but it also ended up influencing dozens of subsequent horror films.

Clark’s film opens on a beautiful shot of a cottage decked in Christmas lights on a snowy night. It looks like we’re in for a heartwarming family film, until the title font reminds us: this is a horror film.

We meet the lovely young members of a sorority – the central characters who stand out are Jess, played by Olivia Hussey (post- “Romeo & Juliet”) and Barb, played by a pre-Lois Lane Margot Kidder. While everyone in the bunch is buoyant and lively, ready to celebrate the holidays, a horrific phone call brings everyone to a cold silence.

Then some of the sorority members start to vanish.

Potential suspects arise, like Peter, played by a mop haired, unrecognizable Keir Dullea (Dave Bowman from “2001: A Space Odyssey”) who plays Jess’ moody, controlling boyfriend and…wait…did you hear that? Is there someone up in the attic?

The point of view shots, establishing the fractured mindset of “Billy,” aren’t steady and establish a distorted perspective of life. The shock reveals are extremely effective but don’t come looking for gore and excess- despite the killer on the loose angle, Clark’s film is closer to Hitchcock than “Friday the 13th” (1980).

Cinematographer Reginald H. Morris (who later lensed subsequent Clark movies) displays some tour de force cinematography here. Remember, this is the early 1970s, with big, heavy cameras performing acrobatic feats, all to convey the visage of a broken mind.

Black Christmas – Italian Theatrical Poster
1974 / Canada / Bob Clark pic.twitter.com/aazboRaXDV

— psychotronica (@psychotronica_) December 15, 2023

“Black Christmas” plays on the overly familiar angle of a sorority of potential victims, but exploiting them isn’t what Clark does here, as the characters are beautiful, of course, but also strong-willed and intelligent. In addition to Hussey, Kidder, a pre-“SCTV” Andrea Martin (who is also in the dreadful 2006 remake) and the terrific Lynne Griffin (who is also a standout in the underrated 1983 horror cult film, “Curtains”).

Martin played a role that once belonged to Gilda Radner, who left the film to become a part of the original cast of “Saturday Night Live.”

Clark’s film, which is savage in small doses, and subtle and creative more often than not, is a masterpiece of mood, tension and suspense. I didn’t catch up with it until I was in college, where I watched it with a roommate (we were both horror movie aficionados), only to be rendered in stunned silence by the ending credits.

An aspect of “Black Christmas” that makes it unusual and classier than much of what followed: it doesn’t fetishize any of the murders. What occurs here is a tragedy. This is the rare horror film, then and now, that exudes a rare compassion for the victims.

John Saxon’s supporting role as a law figure would, oddly, become something of a horror movie staple, though Saxon, as evidenced by this and “A Nightmare on Elm St.” (1984) does the concerned cop better than anyone else.

The moments of humor are welcome (and mostly via a scene-stealing Kidder) but the tone is mostly serious and dread-inducing. A chilling crossroad is presented for Jess: she either has a violent, unstable boyfriend in Peter or, far worse, Peter and “Billy” are the same person.

Instead of presenting a definitive answer to that mystery, Clark ends things on a far more provocative, haunting note.

“Black Christmas” is, to state the obvious, a precursor to “Halloween” (1978), “When a Stranger Calls” (1979), “Silent Night, Deadly Night” (1984) and countless more. The alternate titles include “Silent Night, Evil Night” and “Stranger in the House.”

RELATED: ‘VIOLENT NIGHT’ DELIVERS ON BLOOD-SPLATTERED PROMISE

Another, far more provocative factoid is that Clark declared that John Carpenter’s “Halloween” copied the blueprint of this movie (as stated in Richard Nowell’s exhaustive and excellent 2010 book, “Blood Money: A History of the First Teen Slasher Cycle”). Rather than pick sides or declare one superior over the other, the easy thing is to note how strong and stylish both are.

Noting the ways this influenced subsequent horror movies makes watching this a game for horror fans: with many scenes being from the perspective of “Billy,” and only a few chilling shots of his eye but his face covered, the mold was set for everyone ranging from Michael Myers to Jason Voorhees and on and on.

Whereas just about every horror film, Christmas-themed or otherwise, would sacrifice style and compassion for cheap thrills and gratuitous, well, everything, Clark’s film is still petrifying but also elegant.

This is a master class that manages to get under your skin.

The post How ‘Black Christmas’ Changed the Face of Horror appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.