‘Joker’: What to Read About the Divisive New Film (original) (raw)
Advertisement
You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.
The movie earned roughly a quarter of a billion dollars its opening weekend. It also earned some polarized reviews and an F.B.I. warning. Here’s what people are saying.
Joaquin Phoenix in a scene from “Joker,” directed by Todd Phillips. The film has generated reams of controversy; Phoenix has called it “a call to self-reflection to society.” Credit...Niko Tavernise/Warner Bros.
Oct. 7, 2019
Is “Joker” a definitive movie of our time? Is it incel propaganda? Might it even be dangerous? The film arrived in theaters last week accompanied by F.B.I. warnings about the threat of related gun violence, but by Monday its international box office had already reached about a quarter of a billion dollars. Meanwhile, the debates over its politics and artistic merit raged on. Here are some of the many reviews, interviews and features that have been prompted by this dark and divisive movie.
Reviews
‘Joker’ Review: Are You Kidding Me? [** **The New York Times ]
“To be worth arguing about, a movie must first of all be interesting,” A.O. Scott writes in his review for The Times. “It must have, if not a coherent point of view, at least a worked-out, thought-provoking set of themes, some kind of imaginative contact with the world as we know it. ‘Joker,’ an empty, foggy exercise in secondhand style and second-rate philosophizing, has none of that. Besotted with the notion of its own audacity — as if willful unpleasantness were a form of artistic courage — the film turns out to be afraid of its own shadow, or at least of the faintest shadow of any actual relevance.”
‘“Joker” Is a Viewing Experience of Rare, Numbing Emptiness’ [** **The New Yorker ]
“What results is more than the strenuous effort to contrive a story with resonant incidents and alluring details,” Richard Brody writes in his review. “‘Joker’ reflects political cowardice on the part of a filmmaker, and perhaps of a studio, in emptying out the specifics of the city’s modern history and current American politics so that the movie can be released as mere entertainment to viewers who are exasperated with the idea of movies being discussed in political terms — i.e., to Republicans.”
‘Brilliant and Unforgettable, “Joker” Borders on Genius’ [** **Observer ]
“Even if you hate it, it’s unlike anything you’ve ever seen before — like waking up next to a poisonous snake nestled on your blanket, poised and ready to strike,” writes Rex Reed. And although he admits to having mixed feelings, he adds, “I think it’s the best film about the psychological effect of violence as pop art since Stanley Kubrick’s ‘A Clockwork Orange.’”
Interviews
‘“I [Expletive] Love My Life”: Joaquin Phoenix on Joker, Why River Is His Rosebud, His Rooney Research, and His “Prenatal” Gift for Dark Characters’ [** **Vanity Fair ]
Actor Joaquin Phoenix anticipated a mixed reaction to the film’s moral ambiguity. “It’s a difficult film,” he acknowledges. “We want the simple answers, we want to vilify people. It allows us to feel good if we can identify that as evil. ‘Well, I’m not racist ‘cause I don’t have a Confederate flag or go with this protest.’ It allows us to feel that way, but that’s not healthy because we’re not really examining our inherent racism that most white people have, certainly. Or whatever it may be.” The movie isn’t a “call to action,” he insists, but “a call to self-reflection to society.”
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Advertisement