Joker: Folie a Deux (2024)

Dir: Todd Phillips

Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Lady Gaga, Brendan Gleeson, Catherine Keener, Zazie Beetz

Phoenix and Gaga give it their all in this beautifully crafted sequel, which ultimately falls down as a result of its painfully thin narrative and contentious character arcs

****This review contains moderate spoilers ****

Since the dawn of cinema, a usually expressive and visually delightful art form, there have been a number of theatrical productions that either purposely set out to, or inadvertently, cause global uproar. What made these films so controversial upon their release may vary depending on the political or social landscape at the time, whether this be the Ku Klux Klan advocacy of D. W. Griffiths‘ “The Birth of the Nation” (1915); the Satanic Panic or Video Nasty Panic that was rife in the industry throughout the 1980’s; or the glorification or serial killers in Oliver Stone‘s “Natural Born Killers” (1994). While reception of some of these controversial titles may have become more favourable over the years, they serve as a timely reminder of how the media, the film industry included, can corrupt and influence the public, for better or worse.

One of the more modern examples of controversial cinema came from an unlikely source, a mainstream origin story for the iconic Batman villain “The Joker”. Following its release in 2019, “Joker” became a global sensation, as well as one of the most heavily debated films in modern cinema. Directed by “The Hangover” creator Todd Phillips, “Joker” took inspiration from the gritty, character driven dramas of the 1970’s, particularly Martin Scorsese‘s “Taxi Driver” (1976) and “The King of Comedy” (1982). The film was an undeniable success, grossing over $1 Billion at the global box office, as well as racking up an impressive 11 Academy Award nominations, the most that year, including wins for Joaquin Phoenix as “anti-hero” Arthur Fleck and Hildur Guðnadóttir for her dark and powerful original score.

Despite this success however, there was a strong public outcry against the film, with many of its naysayers believing the film to be promoting acts of disruptive, anti-social behavior. Similarly to David Fincher‘s “Fight Club”, the film was seen to encourage public rebellion against the authorities and the political system, with many critics and public figures fearing that this messaging would result in similar acts of violence given the justification surrounding the murders Arthur commits in the film. Contrarily, most audiences and critics heralded the film to be the best of the year, and a pinnacle of modern cinema given its refreshingly dark take on the comic book genre, which by that point had started to become oversaturated and stale.

Personally, I found myself in the minority by belonging in neither camp. I could see the arguments on both sides but ultimately I found “Joker” to be a well crafted, and relatively impactful origin story. It was unashamedly derivative of Scorsese’s past works, hence its casting of Robert De Niro, but I found the incredibly dark and depressing tone engaging, without ever being bowled over by it. I believe that those for and against the film are guilty of giving Todd Phillips too much credit, after all this is a filmmaker who is hardly known for his nuances. Phillips had set out to to make a pastiche of 70’s character cinema with Arthur Fleck’s Joker simply serving as a template, anything beyond that regarding its depictions of mental health and social disorder, I feel were blown way out of proportion, ultimately promoting the film even further….which was great news for Warner Bros.

Phillips believed “Joker” was not set up for a sequel, but was pitched the idea of a musical sequel by Phoenix, who felt Arthur’s story was not concluded. Having been convinced by Phoenix and Warner Bros., Phillips and co-writer Scott Silver announced a sequel in 2022 and had its world premiere at Venice Film Festival in September, the very festival where the previous film won the coveted Golden Lion five years prior.

After a brief Looney Tunes-inspired opening, “Joker: Folie a Deux” reintroduces us to Arthur (Phoenix) in custody in Arkham Asylum, as he is awaiting trial for the series of murders he committed two years prior. His lawyer, Maryanne Stewart (Catherine Keener), plans to argue that Arthur has dissociative identity disorder (DID), and that his “Joker” persona is responsible for the crimes committed, not Arthur. At a music therapy session he attends with bullyish prison guard Jackie (Brendan Gleeson), Arthur meets fellow patient, “Lee” Quinzel (Lady Gaga), who expresses her admiration and desires for Joker’s crimes and personality. Having learnt to express themselves through the therapy, the two begin a romance that often breaks into musical interludes within the confines of their evidently damaged psyches, and when Lee is released due to Arthur’s negative influence, she leads other advocates in a campaign for his innocence in the lead up to the trial.

As for Arthur himself, he remains conflicted. He understands that Maryanne’s insanity plea is his only option in avoiding the electric chair being pushed by smarmy District Attorney Harvey Dent (Harry Lawtey), but also longs to embrace his clown-faced persona once again, the only part of him that is seen by society and has brought him together with his only source of love and purpose, Lee.

Going into my screening of “Joker: Folie a Deux”, I was not sure what to expect, on one hand I had enjoyed the original despite me finding it to be overhyped by many, on the other it was coming off the back of scathing critical reviews, not just from those who took offence to the first film, but also from those who defended it. Before I get into the nitty-gritty as to why this sequel is bombing with critics and audiences, I first want to praise the aspects that have not been overshadowed by controversy and contention. Todd Phillips is not filmmaker from a distinct auteur background, having made a series of incredibly crude adult comedies such as “Road Trip” (2000), “Old School” (2003) and the diminishing aforementioned “Hangover” films, however despite the surprising choice for the 53-year-old to make such a wild departure from his usual projects, he has proven with both “Joker” and more so with this beautifully crafted sequel, that he can craft a spectacle of a motion picture. Everything from the seedy 1980’s Gotham set design, to the vibrant Sonny and Cher styled costumes of the fantastical musical numbers, is spot on and impeccably visualises the juxtaposition between Arthur’s wildly different personalities.

Guðnadóttir’s composition once again brings a much needed realism to proceedings that remind us that these impromptu and occasionally jarring musical numbers are not real but emphasize the instability of Arthur’s mind, whether it be fragmented or not he is clearly a troubled and psychotic individual. Then there is Phoenix himself, who if anything I believe has improved upon his Oscar winning performance of the first film, with his excessive cackling and Travis Bickle-esque mentality being subdued second time round, providing a more nuanced performance, highlighting the character’s internal conflictions. Gaga also does a great job given the very little she has to work with, her natural musical talents elevate the musical numbers, and she seems to share a genuine chemistry on screen with her comic book partner. Her character however, is painfully underwritten, as her narcissism and manipulation of Arthur is never fully explored, leaving the audience with no closure as to whether it is intentional or not. What is her motive? Does she have genuine feelings towards Arthur, or is she just using his “Joker” persona for her own gain, the answer remains unknown, as does the fate of Lee herself given that both characters partly live in fantasy. It begs the question if their final encounter of rejection is in fact real or a projection of Arthur’s mind.

Those who loved the first film will have a hard time adjusting to the new direction Phillips takes this narrative, as it seems the filmmaker has allowed all the negative press surrounding the first film to get to him, resulting in him completely back-peddling on Arthur’s character development. “Joker” saw the rise of the titular villain, an alter ego that Arthur embodied and embraced, well aware of his actions including the murder of Robert De Niro’s Murray Franklyn on live television. So the decision to have the sequel focus on a questionable redemptive arc, that sees Arthur disown his face-painted alter ego is completely baffling to me. This is either a middle finger from Phillips to Warner Bros. for forcing is hand into making another film – he has already announced he will not be returning to the franchise in the future – or it is his way of an apology for all the potential wrongdoings of the first film. Either way, how can Warner Bros. let this happen, it is no surprise that this sure fire hit is remarkably going to flop.

Not only does Phillips not commit to the narrative that made the first film compelling, but he also fails to commit to the universe in which the film exists. It was announced by head of DC, James Gunn, that “Joker: Folie a Deux” does take place within his extended DC universe, essentially distancing himself from the project. Furthermore, this sequel is not released under a DC comics banner – so is this even a comic book movie? While the first film differed tonally from the conventional comic book movie, it did feature some staples of the Batman Universe, such as Thomas Wayne, a young Bruce Wayne and the central setting of Gotham City. This time round though, other than the introduction of Harvey Dent, there is no indication that this is a “Joker” movie. The Waynes are not mentioned despite their murders as a result of Arthur’s antics in the first film, Arthur disowns his villainous persona, meaning he never was “Joker”, Lady Gaga never gets to present herself as Harley Quinn, Gotham is often referred to as New York and Harvey Dent only suffers minor scratches from a courthouse bomb rather suffering the recognisable injuries that may lead to a potential “Two-Face” heel turn. It begs the question, why have all these little character introductions and call backs to the source material if you are not going to commit to them, a truly bewildering creative decision.

Phillips also clearly struggled to conjure up a narrative to conclude Arthur’s story, with this tedious musical, courtroom drama playing out more like an epilogue to the first film than a direct sequel. Great sequels often follow on from their predecessor but often have a stand alone narrative that contributes the characters’ overarching development within the franchise. “Joker: Folie a Deux”, however would be almost impossible to follow without the context of the first film, but may be enjoyable as the Arthur and Lee’s stories may be less perplexing and compelling in isolation.

Painfully thin and surprisingly tedious, “Joker: Folie a Deux” may not be as controversial as its predecessor but has proven to infuriate more people as a result of its self-deprecating narrative. Despite showcasing some of the year’s best technical craft and further proving Phoenix and Gaga to be formidable acting talents, this disappointing sequel will no doubt go down as one of the most scorned in recent times.

Joker: Folie a Deux is now showing in UK Cinemas

• 2025-2026 Movie Awards Season
  • 2026 Academy Award Predictions: June
  • 2026 Academy Award Predictions: September
• All Movie Reviews & Posts
• Movie Rankings
  • A24 Movies Ranked