Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Film Review: The Joke is On the Audience with the Awful 'Joker: Folie à Deux' – Awards Radar

Published

on

Film Review: The Joke is On the Audience with the Awful 'Joker: Folie à Deux' – Awards Radar
Warner Bros.

I went into Joker: Folie à Deux with such an open mind, ladies and gentlemen. After all, while I didn’t particularly like Joker, I found it to be pretty effective at what it set out to do. The film was doing something I didn’t care for, but it was achieving its goals. The musical element here, the trailers, it all pointed to doing something bold and different, which I more than appreciate. Alas, the movie we ended up with is dreadful and a complete slog. This is, without question, one of 2024’s cinematic lowlights.

Joker: Folie à Deux is awful. It’s not interesting in the slightest, overstays its welcome by nearly an hour, and leaves you in a terrible place. The success of the first film enabled the sequel to more or less go anywhere the creative process could take it. The fact that this is the movie that resulted is almost mind-boggling. Aside from solid technical work behind the camera and a nice performance or two, there’s absolutely nothing here.

Warner Bros.

In the aftermath of the first film, Arthur Fleck/Joker (Joaquin Phoenix) is locked up in Arkham and awaiting a competency hearing before his murder trial. Escorted by the guards (including Brendan Gleeson) to his lawyer (Catherine Keener) in a minimum security wing, Arthur catches a glimpse of Lee Quinzel (Lady Gaga) in a music therapy class. He’s smitten, and when he’s allowed to take the class for good behavior, Lee is just as interested in him. Their relationship flourishes in musical interludes, while those around them debate if Arthur is mentally ill or just a monster.

Declared competent to stand trial, Arthur is more concerned initially with Lee having a good seat than what the case against him is. Lee has a plan for them both, which he goes along with, but as the trial proceeds, his lawyer argues that the separate Joker persona is to blame, while prosecutor Harvey Dent (Harry Lawtey) argues that Arthur is nothing more than a barbaric monster. How this all resolves I won’t spoil, but it’s deeply unsatisfying, actually building to a final moment that isn’t just awful, but could very well be insulting to fans.

Warner Bros.

Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga are the least of the issues here, though neither gets much of a showcase. Phoenix is far more passive of a character here, only coming alive during the musical numbers. Gaga has a very underwritten Harley Quinn interpretation to play with, and while she gives it her all, no one could save the character. Her sining is a highlight, at least. The pair have no chemistry, so the “love story” is never believable. It’s actually depressing to see Brendan Gleeson and Catherine Keener given this little to do. It’s nice that they presumably got paid handsomely, but it’s criminal to neglect their talents. In addition to Harry Lawtey, the supporting cast includes returning players Zazie Beetz and Leigh Gill, as well as newcomers like Steve Coogan (wasted as well), Ken Leung, Jacob Lofland, and Sharon Washington.

Filmmaker Todd Phillips actively torpedoes good returning technical work from cinematographer Lawrence Sher and composer Hildur Guðnadóttir, which is a real shame. Last time, with Joker, you left with the sense that Phillips and co-writer Scott Silver had seen The King of Comedy and Taxi Driver growing up, if not the sense that they fully got the point of those flicks. Joker: Folie à Deux makes Joker actually seem like The King of Comedy and Taxi Driver, by comparison. The musical numbers are bland and forgettable, the plot is threadbare, and the pacing nonexistent. Phillips’ direction lacks any sense of forward momentum, so by the time you reach the atrocious ending that he and Silver have cooked up, you’re long past the point of caring in the slightest.

Warner Bros.

Don’t expect the same type of awards attention this time around. I’d be very surprise for any above the line Oscar nominations, given the miserable lack of quality on display. Now, below the line, Guðnadóttir could once again be a factor in Best Original Score, while something like Best Production Design wouldn’t be crazy. Regardless, this flick will not be an Academy Award juggernaut, mark my words.

Joker: Folie à Deux is one of the worst films of the year, full stop. Fans of the first movie will be flummoxed by the choices made here, while anyone not previously on board won’t see anything worthwhile within. I hated nearly every moment of this film, which is something I rarely say. See it if you like and decide for yourself, but I never want to even think of this dreck ever again. Yuck.

Advertisement

SCORE: ★1/2

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

Bagheera movie review: Sriimurali shines in Prashanth Neel’s homegrown Batman flick

Published

on

Bagheera movie review: Sriimurali shines in Prashanth Neel’s homegrown Batman flick

Bagheera movie review: Indian filmmakers’ romance with the vigilante genre has seen some hits and numerous misses, mostly due to the lack of a convincing story. Unlike typical heroes, these characters do not have superpowers or resources, but rely on courage, wit, and a strong sense of justice. Some directors, like Shankar, have found the near-perfect formula. Now, Kannada filmmaker Dr Suri has given us Bagheera, starring Sriimurali, along with Rukmini Vasanth, Prakash Raj, Garuda Ram, Sudha Rani, Achyuth Kumar, Pramod Shetty and Rangayana Raghu. (Also Read – Bagheera actor Rukmini Vasanth: Even if you’re a star kid, there’s a learning curve in the film industry)

Bagheera movie review: Sriimurali in a vigilante superhero flick

What’s Bagheera about?

Little Vedanth dreams of becoming a superhero, but eventually becomes a cop like his father. But the twist is that he still has dreams of being a superhero. Though he knows he doesn’t have superpowers, he believes he can take on the biggest evil of them all (in this case, bad man Rana played by Garuda Ram). As an IPS officer, Vedanth combats the usual crimes, but as Bagheera, the superhero, he takes on an organised crime syndicate that is involved in illegal organ trade. Director Dr Suri has divided the film into seven chapters, and we are taken through how Vedanth becomes Bagheera and eventually succeeds in his mission.

Bagheera is Dr Suri’s Batman

Bagheera is clearly like Batman and the director Dr Suri has said that he intended it to be like the popular superhero character. Given that the director loves superhero films and comics, it is not surprising that he chose this theme. But it’s ace director Prashant Neel, who has written the story that Dr Suri has brought to the silver screen. The connection between them ends there as Dr Suri has given the film his own stamp and one can see that there are gaps in the execution style. For instance, in some scenes Bagheera has not really been amped up for those goosebumps-inducing moments and the romantic track brings down the pace of the film, unfortunately. Any romance has to seamlessly connect with the main story and here it’s a little jarring.

Advertisement

How do the performances fare?

Sriimurali comes back to the big screen after a gap of three years and the making of this film has not been easy on him either. He sustained serious injuries twice during the shoot, but he is the core of the film. His performance, especially in the action scenes, stands out. He has delivered the dual-shaded role with finesse, and his portrayal of Vedanth and Bagheera resonates with all as he is a common man-turned-superhero who wants to deliver justice. Rukmini Vasanth (who plays Dr Sneha) is a fine actor, but her character hasn’t been really explored and given ample weightage in the film. Also, a stronger and more terrifying villain than Garuda Ram would have added more gravitas to the film.

The verdict

Technically, the film is pretty sound and the cinematography by AJ Shetty and the music by B Ajaneesh Loknath are good but not outstanding, which is what is expected from a superhero film to elevate those key moments. The editing by Pranav Sri Prasad could have been tighter as well. Having said that, the action choreography by Chethan D Souza does stand out and makes the film enjoyable. The director has ensured that action scenes have been crafted and captured visually in a way that it keeps the audience invested in Bagheera’s victory and the film as well. On the whole, Bagheera is a homegrown Batman film that is mostly entertaining and a new genre for Kannada filmgoers to explore.

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Cranky Craig’s Movie Reviews – We Live in Time

Published

on

Cranky Craig’s Movie Reviews – We Live in Time

WATERTOWN, New York (WWNY)

We Live in Time

This is a very good film.  It is very well acted. It is well crafted. It has emotional resonance, but it really doesn’t have a plot and barely a story.

If you like Andrew Garfield this film is a must. He is fantastic in this film. Every moment with him is authentic and well earned. Florence Pugh is also fantastic in this film.  If you love good acting and movies about love and relationships, then I highly recommend this.

Written by Nick Payne and Directed by John Crowley

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Netflix’s New Martha Stewart Documentary Makes Her More Powerful Than Ever

Published

on

Netflix’s New Martha Stewart Documentary Makes Her More Powerful Than Ever

Martha.
Photo: Martha Stewart/Netflix

When Martha Stewart eventually passes away, she should order that director R.J. Cutler also be buried along with her inside her death pyramid. With the new Netflix documentary, Martha, he has constructed the greatest possible tribute one could want for a figure as godlike as Stewart — a warts-and-all portrait of the lifestyle mogul that somehow still manages to be a hagiography. Although she clearly cooperated with the production, Stewart has reportedly criticized Cutler’s finished film, which is understandable. In Martha, she comes off as combative, egomaniacal, impatient, uncaring, and at times delusional, as well as a wronged visionary who has reemerged on top. And not just merely “on top”: As someone says early in the film, Martha Stewart essentially created the world we’re currently living in — a world of influencers and borrowed lifestyles and perfect surfaces, all while deep beneath us roll the storms of chaos. Is Martha a good movie? I’m not sure. But it might be an essential one. Anyway, into the pyramid you go, R.J. Cutler.

Formally, the film is no great shakes. It’s an amiably edited journey through Stewart’s life and career with plenty of archival footage, synopsizing her early years in Nutley, New Jersey, with an abusive, embittered father who made the family raise their own vegetables; her young marriage to law student and future publishing-house chief Andy Stewart; the couple’s move to a Westport, Connecticut, fixer-upper that she transformed into a tony manse; and the discovery of her catering and entertaining talents after her lavish dinner parties. Like so many streaming-era documentaries, the picture effectively opens with a trailer for itself, briefly previewing its main points before settling into a by-now familiar cadence of bland insights, light historical context, and obvious music cues. (When young Martha Kostyra takes up modeling, we hear Etta James sing “Good Lookin’” on the soundtrack. When she becomes a stockbroker, we hear Nancy Sinatra’s “These Boots Are Made for Walkin’.” When her career as a lifestyle guru takes off, we hear the synth beats of Depeche Mode’s “Just Can’t Get Enough.”)

Advertisement

What makes Martha fascinating is the now-83-year-old Stewart herself, who presides over the film with a contemporary onscreen interview. (Other interviewees — including family members, friends, employees, and inmates she did time with at Alderson Federal Prison — remain offscreen as they attest, choruslike, to her gumption, her drive, and, occasionally, her goodness.) She makes a hard-nosed guide to her own life, pushing back when Cutler presses her on tougher topics. When Stewart talks angrily about how Andy cheated on her, Cutler notes that she also cheated on him. Her answer? “Yeah, but Andy never knew about that.” When Cutler replies that Andy did in fact know, Martha dismisses her own affairs as minor dalliances. This sort of back-and-forth actually helps humanize Stewart, however much she may hate it in retrospect. And it lifts Martha the movie up from just another bit of swoony celebrity blather to something more interesting.

Stewart’s surface perfection powered her business. She created beautiful spaces with beautiful things and cooked beautiful dishes, all while still looking beautiful. As the film makes clear, she connected with a generation of women who had been raised by working mothers; many of them didn’t get homemaking knowledge or recipes passed down. Stewart filled that gap, and she did so without requiring any kind of emotional reciprocity. She was there, smiling and infallible, the MacGyver of good housekeeping, ready to turn a used glass jug and some tissues into an elegant centerpiece at the drop of a hat. An incredible amount of initiative and energy went into all this, but she made it look so effortless partly because she had taste.

When Stewart did fall from grace, however, the celebrity culture that had embraced and lionized her bit back. She had always seemed so unfazed by everything, so the world now delighted in seeing her brought down several pegs. The infamous insider-trading scandal that landed her in prison is still a raw subject; Stewart and others involved continue to claim she did nothing illegal, and that she became a target because then-U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York James Comey wanted to make a name for himself by bagging a celebrity. Stewart was also genuinely changed by prison and made friendships there among the women incarcerated alongside her. Once her mask of perfection fell, she seemed to open herself up more to the world.

All this would make an ideal rise-fall-rise narrative for a standard documentary, and you can imagine what the pitch memo for this might have looked like: Watch Martha Stewart achieve success, then watch the world unfairly humiliate her, then watch her claw her way back to fame and relevance. And maybe Martha still thinks it is that kind of movie. But Cutler’s onscreen interactions with Stewart, as well as occasional forays into the way she treats the people around her, turn the picture into something a lot slippier and the subject into someone more captivating. While most films would crystallize their theses as they near their end, Martha invites ambiguity and uncertainty. The more we see of Stewart, the more we feel for her — and the less we understand her. She cannot be summarized. And as much as Martha might try, in its failure to do so lies its unlikely power.

See All

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending