“Should I sing a love song? Shouldn’t we invent a new genre?” It is unlikely that Todd Phillips is familiar with the hits of the group “Chizh & Co”, but probably thoughts of approximately the same content have been spinning in his head for the past five years since the release of the first “Joker” Love song with Joaquin Phoenix. caught on, but Phillips didn’t invent anything radically new. The original film was an excellent compilation of Martin Scorsese’s “Taxi Driver” and “The King of Comedy”, all of which was justified, albeit predictable, by the participation of Robert De Niro, who starred in both films. It was a wild success: $1 billion at the box office and the title of most successful R-rated movie, but it’s now gone to Deadpool and Wolverine, with 11 potential Oscars (including the main one), ultimately winning two for Best Actor and Soundtrack. the mark of an instant classic.
Following the success of Taxi Driver in the late ’70s, Scorsese took on his first major studio project, New York, New York, about the love affair between a saxophonist and a vocalist. The saxophonist is played by De Niro, who migrated from his previous works, and the vocalist is played by singer and actress Liza Minnelli. In this film, Scorsese tried to combine the diversity of Classic Hollywood musicals with the gloom of New Hollywood, between the lines of a love letter to his hometown. “New York, New York” cost an impressive $9 million to produce at the time; It had an unsuccessful run theatrically, collecting only $16 million and also receiving criticism from critics for being vague and unfocused.
Shake Phillips’ hand and he seems to go all out in imitating Scorsese. The second Joker, in which Phoenix was joined by singer and actress Lady Gaga, cost nearly three times as much as the first, made half as much money as its predecessor in its first weekend, and showed a spectacular drop in box office receipts in its second weekend. 90%, while also becoming the first comic book movie in Hollywood history to receive the minimum CinemaScore (company employees survey theatergoers, so this decision better reflects the audience’s consensus). The press seems outraged; One has to think it was supposed to be a big call back to the Venice Film Festival where the first Joker premiered, but in the end the new installment was saved by no one carrying it around. There are now rotten tomatoes. A final touch to the ongoing circus seems like a respectful send-up of Francis Ford Coppola, whose long-suffering long-haul “Megalopolis” has now failed so miserably that it takes your breath away (he might as well do it).
All of this, to some extent, makes Madness for Two an ideal sequel: In the first part, we were talking about a person who at first dreams of being loved by everyone, then seems to like him, but in the second part he reveals that people actually do not like him, but they do not like him. I really don’t want to. What’s even funnier is that the previous chart – coincidentally, it seems – predicted the reaction to him from self-styled citizens (I wasn’t referring to far-right Americans five years ago). wrotePeople will shamelessly call their favorite movie “Joker”, but the result is Balabanovism, so to speak). And the second – apparently on purpose – does the same. “Madness for Two”, of course, does not deserve mortal curses, but now it seems that it has a chance to appeal only to a modest circle of people who: a) any sequel that cares about a sequel to a movie that, in general, does not need; b) The hero of the movie “Joker” does not look like a role model. And even then with reservations.
For example, like this. The movie doesn’t have time to decide whether it’s a musical after all. Those who are interested in such a concept and come to the cinema hoping for spectacular musical performances will be disappointed: more than half of the total screening time seems to be devoted to close-ups of faces – the sensations are almost the same. In the Russian version of “Anora”, all images containing drugs were cropped this way. The domestic flights over the cuckoo’s nest in the first half (where Brendan Gleeson is particularly wonderful as the singing guard at Arkham Asylum) and the legal drama in the second half (featuring, among other things, Harry Lawtey and Ken Leung) are much more It is interesting. Stage a mini reunion of the “Industry” series.
There’s no question about “crazy” in general in the title, but “for two” is of course a strong word. Here it is one and a half at best: local Harleen Quinzel will give odds even to women in Christopher Nolan’s films, and if the villain played by Margot Robbie looks provocative, then Gaga’s Harley is defiantly poorly written. When one of the film’s three genres doesn’t work at all, a broken female lead is a near-fatal blow.
What saves the film is mainly its ambition; Simply put, it’s better for this to be a failed experiment than another dastardly hack based on a pre-popular intellectual property. Therefore, we will assume that it is good that Phoenix did not run away from filming on the eve of the start (apparently there is someone behind him) this bad habit). It’s a shame there’s no room for a great new song here, unlike “New York, New York” (in fact, that’s where “New York, New York”, later sung by Frank Sinatra, comes from). That said, it’s always nice to watch someone stick their face in their shit: as Scorsese recently noted, “unfortunately, the norm is that one in every two people looks like Travis Bickle.” The main character of the movie “Taxi Driver”” I want to believe that all this will not end, as in the case of Scorsese’s “New York, New York” – depression, addiction and hospitalization. Take care of yourself and your loved ones; this is not a joke.
Original title: “Joker: Folie à Deux”
Premiere date: September 4, 2024
Release date in Russia: 12 October 2024
Duration: 138 minutes
Manager: Todd Phillips
Casting: Joaquin Phoenix, Lady Gaga, Brendan Gleeson, Catherine Keener, Jacob Lofland, Harry Lawtey, Zazie Beetz, Steve Coogan