Without going into spoilers, I was fine with everything up until the ending. For me it made Arthur/Joker’s journey pointless. It neither feels cathartic or earned. Basically he had a miserable life from beginning to end and that’s it. The first film spoke about the Haves and the Have-nots and those who are left forgotten by a system that has dilapidated under its own weight.
While Arthur’s actions are not correct, one can understand from his point of view why he did what he did. In addition, sometimes the downtrodden characters in drama and in life are the only ones who know what is really going on. You see this in Shakespeare with the grave digger in Hamlet. He’ll tell you what’s going on in the kingdom. He may not be as artful as Hamlet and Horatio, but he is honest and sobering.
So I don’t know why Todd Phillips chose this horrible conclusion to the character’s story, but I have read the original screenplay which was published professionally, and the screenplay clearly states that this is the Joker. In fact, there is a subtitle underneath the word joker on the cover that says “an origin story.” So why change things now when it’s obvious that you had, speaking of Phillips, a definite intention, which you may not have thought was going to resonate as it did, but nevertheless sometimes art has a life of its own, and while he has every right to tell the story and conclude it as he does, nobody can blame anyone for feeling as though he ruined something that should’ve been better left alone. I really feel it should’ve just been a one and done story and that’s just my humble opinion. Thank you.
(C) Copyright 2024 By Mark A. Rivera
All Rights Reserved.
You can watch the SPOILER mini review at this site’s companion YouTube channel, GenreOnlinenet by clicking on the image below. Thank you.
