The Joker: Society is to Blame

Before I go into this movie, I feel it is necessary to address the weird elephant-sized problem in the room about society and its nearly comical ignorance of violence and the media that portrays it. For those who really want to know: movies, videogames, books and any other type of entertainment media do NOT inspire the already mentally ill of our society to rise up in arms and harm other people. Society and its perceived lack of interest in helping those who might do such things, plus an unhealthy dose of a need for infamy or merely misplaced hatred are to blame. NOT media. Got it? No? Okay. Watch The Joker and maybe it will help...

Yes, for those who have lived in a cave for the last three months and have heard nothing about all the critical accolades or lavish praise of Joaquin Phoenix's performance, The Joker is a brilliant character piece on arguably the most mysterious character in all of comics. The setting is ominous, Arthur (Phoenix) is relatable as a put-upon nobody with an uncaring society slowly tightening the noose around his neck and the message (society is emasculating and alienating and can cause a violent response from those it deems unworthy of attention) is so on-the-nose in terms of not only The Joker as a character but the modern world as a whole that it almost feels like Director Todd Philips binge watched Fight Club fifty times while writing the script and actually got the point of that particular movie (the whole THIS IS A BAD THING argument that wasn't in that movie). Kudos for finally making a valid argument that doesn't revolve around abs.

Unfortunately, while most of the movie wears its message proudly on its sleeve (Joker is a reflection of a violent, uncaring society), the movie takes a sudden shift in tone in the third act where, for reasons that boggle my mind, suddenly society is made a reflection of The Joker. While it eventually rights itself in the form of the cop-out of an unreliable narrator (because our narrator is insane), this entire segment of the movie felt forced and written by a completely different set of screenwriters. You had me at “when the world burns, it only has itself to blame”, movie. You didn't need to jump into unfamiliar territory out of some misplaced fear that viewers might be bothered by the notion that (gasp) we might all shoulder some of the blame for the violence we see every day.

As for watching it, yes, go do that. Not only is this thing practically an Oscar reel for Phoenix but it does something that even The Dark Knight never managed: make The Joker a sympathetic character despite the knowledge of the monster he becomes. I'd be lying if I said I didn't root for poor Arthur to stand up for himself even though I knew people would die in the process. The movie made me root for a psychopathic killer. Good job, movie?

Todd Philips (The Hangover) tries something very different with The Joker, a dark, brooding take on a clown who just wants people to laugh at the absurdity of life and, when that doesn't work, decides to laugh for them. When Gotham, in a budget crisis, slashes public services, part-time clown Arthur Fleck (Phoenix) loses access not only to much-needed therapy but also the myriad of pills he requires to keep a toll hold on his growing mental illness. This, combined with the stress of caring for his elderly mother and the growing disenchantment of his place in an uncaring and cruel society, prompts a violent reaction that will eventually lead to the creation of that one dude who wears a cheap purple suit and tells bad jokes. Seriously, why can't Batman have an origin story this good?

My score: 8/10. Seriously, why did Fight Club inspire so many stupid, real-life Fight Clubs? You do realize emasculated and alienated people performing acts of violence against an uncaring society in the form of blowing up several buildings is a BAD thing, right? Does it really only take having the main characters watching the world burn to a Pixies song to make us forget that what happened in the movie was actually a terrorist attack?

Ad Astra: A Space Movie that Hates Space

As much as NASA, JPL and pretty much every Star Trek fan loves the idea of humanity diving head-long into distant space travel, colonizing planets and, perhaps, contacting some form of intelligent life, most people are more down-to-Earth (no pun intended) on the whole idea of traveling too far from a planet where, you know, we can actually breathe. This is not saying that space travel is necessarily a terrible idea or the concept of habitats on the Moon and Mars are horrible ideas that will doom us to never learn from our mistakes (because we'd just be putting our own species somewhere else to propagate and destroy a planet that didn't have life to begin with). Its the idea that many people who promote such practices are using the idea of Mars and other potentially colonization-ready planets as an excuse to avoid problems that the same intelligence and ambition could probably fix if they focused just a little bit more attention closer to home. Hence the concept of James Gray's Ad Astra, a movie that tries to yell this at you with all the eloquence of a sledgehammer to the face.

Okay, to be nice, Ad Astra isn't necessarily a bad movie from a strictly film perspective. It does try to stay a little bit on the side of science a la Interstellar and Brad Pitt, despite not really being in his comfort zone here, is still pretty well cast for a part that spends 40% or so zooming in on his face while he tries to argue philosophically with himself for a two hour movie (yes, he actually does this). And, yes, even the whole film's twist (what's the point of dedicating one's entire life to a noble cause if you wind up alone in the end because of that pursuit) is a rather sad yet hopeful turn from a genre usually about people floating through space and doing seemingly impossible things (he does some of that to). In all, a pretty interesting companion to Christopher Nolan's Interstellar with better character development and none of the nonsense about black holes and time travel. Plenty to love for the space nut in us all.

Unfortunately, mostly due to the movie being a much bigger “tell don't show” kind of movie, people coming here to see astronauts float through space and visit far away planets (or, in this case, the Moon and Mars) will be sadly disappointed at just how lackluster said locations are. The Moon and Mars bases are both bland, uninteresting way points for Roy (Pitt) and his journey further out of the solar system and many attempts to make the settings more interesting (Moon Pirates?) are either too ridiculous to acknowledge or too nihilistic (what country capable of putting a base on the Moon would actually need to harbor Space Pirates?) to be entertaining. So, you know, more like Interstellar.

As for watching it, good luck finding anything else out this weekend. I heard Rambo came out and, if you want to anger people who like to attribute movies to real-life violence, you could always go see a 70-year-old Vietnam veteran fight a drug cartel. Or, if you're one of the ten non-critic people on the planet that actually watches PBS, you could go see all the actors get stuffy about simplistic things on Downtown Abbey. Sorry but, with competition like this, Sad Spaceman seems to the most entertaining bet.

James Gray (The Lost City of Z) continues to make heady, mostly lackluster movies with Ad Astra, a too-smart-for-its-own-good, family drama in space that could serve as a running headshot for Brad Pitt. After discovering that his hero astronaut father might still be alive and releasing a space pulse from his last known location at Neptune, Roy McBride (Pitt) agrees to a mission through human space civilizations in an attempt to contact him all the while lamenting how his own ambitions about space travel have doomed his more Earthly relationship with his estranged wife. Big name actors (Donald Sutherland, Tommy Lee Jones) will pop in and out repeatedly, the extent of secrecy around Roy's mission will be so easily compromised it will be ridiculous and we will somehow be able to travel to Neptune within six months without the use of sub-light travel. It's too dark for sci-fi fans and too sci-fi for drama fans. Good luck with that.

My score: 5/10. Is it weird I was really wanting the sci-fi movie to end with the astronaut going home and reconciling with his wife? Is that even considered a climax in this kind of thing?