Yes, it’s a musical. Yes, Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix) reassesses his Joker persona. If those aren’t the qualities you want in your Joker sequel then you will not like Joker: Folie à Deux.  

If you look at the film for what it is rather than what it’s not, then you may conclude that it is in fact superior to its predecessor. It’s about Arthur Fleck’s fluctuating stances on the pros and cons of his public infamy. It’s about him getting what he wanted in the first film and the price he has to pay for it. It’s about media, escapism, duality, music and romance.

So why does everyone hate it?

Fleck is in Arkham State Hospital awaiting trial for the murders he committed in the first film. At a music therapy session, he meets Harleen Quinzel (Lady Gaga). For the first time in his life Arthur feels joy. However, like his followers, Lee only appreciates Arthur when he’s wearing clown makeup.

The Character

Back in 2019 (five years ago. Yikes!) I focused only on Arthur in my review of Joker as I believed he was the only character with any dimension. I don’t hold that stance now; characters such as Penny, Randall and Gary (Leigh Gill) went on to appear more than what they were. My point was, Joker was a character study and I was interested in talking about the character it was studying.

I’m doing the same with Folie à Deux for similar reasons. It’s about Arthur learning whether his Joker status is worth having. His lawyer (Catherine Keener) mounts her defence on the argument that Arthur has dissociative identity disorder and therefore cannot be held responsible for Joker’s actions.

I really didn’t like this at first. I mean come on; you hear about split personality in the context of DC, the first person you think of is Two-Face not Joker.

Fortunately, Folie à Deux’s theme of duality doesn’t manifest as a clinical disorder ailing Arthur. His lawyer’s argument refers to Arthur’s indecision over whether he is what society forced him to be or who he is.

The downsides of his Joker infamy are apparent; he’s incarcerated, facing the death penalty and being demonised by the media. The upsides are few and far between at first. A part from his followers, he has some fellow inmates he gets along with and the guards who encourage his comedic talents.

Then he meets Lee and for the first time he feels truly seen. You don’t have to be a marriage counsellor to see that she and Arthur’s ‘romance’ is similar to that of two adolescents. Their relationship stands on immature foundations and is doomed to fail but that doesn’t stop you from feeling happy for Arthur.

In the first film, the only solace he could get was in punishing those who exploited him. Solace that could only be found in deprivation and hopelessness. With Lee there is no deprivation or hopelessness because he has someone who accepts him for what he is.

Unfortunately, complications arise when Arthur learns about Lee’s background, leading him to suspect that she’s using him.

What made the first film so tragic in the end was that Arthur could only feel valued when viewed as a symbol for rebellion and destruction, hence his dancing before that cheering crowd.

Folie à Deux continues the tragedy by not only showing how little Arthur’s symbol has done for him but by giving him false hope in the form of Lee.

In the first film, he loses everything. In the sequel, he wins something only to lose it. If there’s one area where Folie à Deux tops its predecessor, it’s in drama.

The Music

Music was a distinct characteristic of the first film. When Arthur was happy, we heard hits by Sinatra, Jimmy Durante and Nat King Cole. When Arthur was sad or angry, Hildur Guðnadóttir’s haunting score boomed in our ears.

Doing the sequel as a musical seems like a logical progression to me, especially considering the fantasy scenes in the first film. Arthur fantasized about being on Murray Franklin and in a relationship with his neighbour, so is him fantasizing about singing with Lee on grandiose sets such a stretch?

My only complaint about the songs, and the film as a whole to be frank, is their frequency. There are too many. There’s a point in the middle where it feels like there’s a song after almost every progression, no matter how miniscule. Cutting two of them would’ve taken the film a long way.

I think Folie à Deux is a pretty damn good sequel if I’m honest. It’s not a retread of the first one, it expands on the preestablished themes and gives our protagonist new but relevant obstacles to overcome. It’s undeserving of the panning it’s getting.

I give Joker: Folie à Deux a brilliant 9 out of 10.