That might seem an odd statement. I'm pretty much the target audience for "Downton Abbey." And also it's an odd way to open my review of "Joker."
But this past week I saw both "Downton Abbey" the movie and "Joker." I think they are both important films for people to see, perhaps side by side. I understand that might seem like a far too weird statement. The two movies have clearly different audiences and purposes. But the success of both films is a critical commentary on what's going on in our society at the moment.
I doubt there are few, if any, movie goers out there who are NOT familiar with the basic character of Joker. In researching both the movie and the character for this blog, I ran across a nifty little article about
those who have played the painted super villain in the past. This new movie brings up, first and foremost, a comparison of past portrayals.
The ones I'd like to bring up would be the ones who have done live action work as opposed to the animated voice actors. (Sorry, Mark Hamill.)
In live action, we can basically look at three versions: Jack Nicholson, Heath Ledger, and Joaquin Phoenix. (Sorry, Jared Leto...your demonic weirdo take in "Suicide Squad" was not only weird, it was completely superfluous to the rest of the movie and could have been left on the cutting room floor. would have made a better movie. Plus, you're a giant jerk.)
Jack Nicholson's divine "misunderstood genius who loves to dance" version from 1989's "Batman" gave us comedy, weirdness, and drama, plus a really cool back story that involved a vat of acid. Intelligent and witty...the total package for a super villain.
Heath Ledger's cutting edge (no pun intended) take on Joker in 2008 led to a posthumous Oscar win. Joker's back story changed every time he spoke in the "Dark Knight" which made the character that much more eerie to watch. There was still humor. It was dark, really dark, but it was clever. This was a Joker that was highly intelligent and witty. For my money, this is the best Joker done to date.
Which brings us to Joaquin Phoenix.
His performance is original and memorable. No one is going to argue that. Whether it's Oscar worthy or not, that remains to be seen. (Again, for me, Heath Ledger's interpretation of Joker will long stand as the gold standard.) But...is this a good movie?
Let's get all the noise surrounding the movie out of the way: I live in a suburb of a moderately large city. We don't have a lot in the way of violent crime. So it was a shock to see a county sheriff posted next to the ticket taker at an 11 AM Saturday matinee. There were signs everywhere stating that no one wearing a costume or a mask would be allowed into the theater. Our theater also suddenly changed their purse policy. (I had to leave mine the car.)
This seems like a lot of overkill for a movie about a cartoon character. BUT, then you have to think back to the shooting in Aurora, Colorado. So, okay. We're all taking precautions in case someone decides they can't differ between the movie screen and real life.
The movie itself is dark, gritty, and very violent. (One must wonder why Hollywood, who spends a tremendous amount of time and money screaming about gun control, would continue to keep cranking out movies where gun violence is glorified.) Phoenix is backed up by a strong cast in an original take on his back story. He does take on Joker within the guidelines of the script and gives us something memorable. (Another howling about the movie involves the use of Gary Glitter's "Rock and Roll part 2" as the back ground music to a pivotal scene. Glitter is a convicted pedophile and apparently the use of his music in movies is a giant crime.)
All of that is noise that really has very little to do with the film itself. Here's my problem with the movie: In this take, Joker is a victim. He's a catalyst. But he's NOT a master villain. He's a victim of his upbringing. He's a victim of domestic violence. He's a victim of a crappy economy, boss, workplace, poverty, and women's scorn. He's completely reactionary and, if I'm understanding the story arc, we are to feel sorry for him.
Poor, poor Joker. He can't help but become evil.
And that's a big comment on what's happening in our society. We are looking at those who participate in mass shootings and we're finding an excuse for them. "He's a mentally ill guy." "He had a hard upbringing." "He lived on the streets."
Okay, a lot of people do, unfortunately, live hard lives. That doesn't always turn them into criminals. I know a number of mentally ill people, including members of my own family, none of whom have turned into violent criminals.
In looking for a origin story for Joker, script writers Todd Phillips and Scott Silver have turned him into a victim who is hardly capable of feeding himself much less becoming an evil mastermind. The final shot of the movie, meant to be frightening, is simply sad.
If writer Phillips (who also directed the film) wanted to make a comment on mental health care in the US, he accomplished that. And he and I are in agreement that mental health is an area that needs a tremendous uplift in perception and practice.
But, if the point of the movie is to give us a the history of one of the most entertaining, colorful, powerful villains in comic book and movie history...then it's a fail. There's no genius. There's no twisted, clever humor. There's just a talentless, humorless guy who needs to get back on his meds. Nicholson and Ledger understood the layers of the character. Phoenix simply gives us one note that gets more and more sour as the story progresses.
Initially I gave the movie 4 out of 5 stars. I think I'm going to back off of that a little. After thinking about it quite a bit, I have to give it a 3.5 out of 5 stars.
But, you may ask, how does "Downton Abbey" fit into all this?
It's simple: In a world where we have mass shootings, political unrest, class warfare, a decline in educational standards, a gap in health care, and everything else that's going on...we need a movie like Downton to remind us of a world where manners mattered. Downton is pure escapism from the gritty violence Hollywood insists on feeding the viewing public. Sure, there's drama, there's conflict, there's angst. But it's quiet, it's orderly, and it's dressed to the nines. Downton is the flipside to Joker's coin. Every moment is shot for its beauty.
If you're going to accept Joaquin Phoenix's humorless Joker, you're going to need a good dose of Maggie Smith's wit to counter balance. (I give "Downton Abbey a 5 out of 5 if for nothing else than the image below.)
