Joker: Folie à Deux - Adults Only

Folie à deux (noun): The presence of the same or similar delusional ideas in two persons closely associated with one another.

When I first saw Joker, I was taken aback by the reputation it left behind. Hailed as a distinct take on Batman’s arch-nemesis, the Joker, it highlighted the life of poor Arthur Fleck, who had a disorder where he laughed beyond control. After being given the short end of the stick one too many times, it jumpstarted his journey into becoming the feared Joker after killing plenty of people in Gotham City, including one of his closest friends, his mother, and TV personality host Murray Franklin. The reaction that followed was loud but almost split. Many people loved the film’s psychological study of Arthur Fleck’s character, while the rest were concerned about its violent and dark tones and the likelihood of it encouraging real-life violence, especially when Arthur Fleck was looked at as a sympathetic character pushed into doing some horrible things. It was no surprise that, shortly after this movie came out and grossed over a billion dollars at the box office, a sequel was underway with Joaquin Phoenix and Todd Phillips returning.

The result was Joker: Folie à Deux, which, in this case, introduced this universe’s version of Harley Quinn, portrayed by musical superstar Lady Gaga. In an unusual direction for this movie to take as far as comic book films go, this film decided to be a musical, with the characters breaking into song, and the tunes being pre-existing songs from classic musicals. Regardless, this is still Joaquin Phoenix and Todd Phillips returning from the first film. Even with such an unusual direction for this movie to take, this movie is bound to amount to something as wondrous as the first film, right?

Well, as soon as it came out, many people expressed nothing but pure disappointment and found the film unfocused, especially regarding Joker lore. But me? The psychological aspects that this film continued exploring with Arthur Fleck’s character from the first film still feel as engaging as ever. 

Let me explain what it is about this film that I have a soft spot for, though many others might disagree.

Let’s start with the story. Taking place within Arkham Asylum two years after his murder of Murray Franklin, Arthur Fleck endured his time in Arkham Asylum, sometimes with a dismal attitude and other times with a smile on his face as he gave in to his condition. Then, one day, while he was being escorted across the asylum, he caught sight of a young woman from a singing class who returned his look and expressed an interest in him. Later on, after Arthur Fleck was assigned to partake in the singing class, complete with the woman still there and this time expressing an even more profound interest in him, the two ultimately met up and got to know each other more. From the woman’s end, whose name is Lee Quinzel, she admitted that she had a very rough family life back home and was drawn into Arthur Fleck after seeing him on live TV as the Joker. Reportedly, she expressed the same contempt for Murray Franklin as Arthur did, and deep down, she wished to see Arthur Fleck do what he eventually did to Murray Franklin…

The whole time I was watching, I kept thinking, "I hope this guy blows his brains out." And then you did. And for once in my life, I didn't feel so alone anymore.

From then on, the two gradually grew closer together, not just sharing each other’s stories and activities but also engaging in song, which helps given that Arthur Fleck has not only taken singing courses but also watched a few musical films during then, some of them with Quinzel. As for how much of the singing occurred within their heads or in reality, that is a story I’ll get to soon. 

Meanwhile, while all that’s going on, the judges and juries decreed that because Arthur Fleck was guilty of five counts of first-degree murder, not counting Arthur Fleck’s murder of his mother - only because he didn’t say so - they agreed to put him on the death trial for his crimes. So, as Arthur Fleck prepared to set an example for himself and on the road to possible rehabilitation, his interactions and eventual experiences with Lee Quinzel left him reveling in his experiences and the joys of what he wanted to do to other people deep down as the Joker, unlike what his outer self, Arthur Fleck, would have done. As his witnesses and closest allies came forth to testify against him, Arthur Fleck was put in a corner as to how to abide by his instincts and set an example for himself. Which route did he plan to take? How was Lee Quinzel involved in any of his decision-making? And most of all, did Lee Quinzel mean a word she was saying to Arthur Fleck?

Ever since I saw the first Joker film, I already knew that it was good enough to have deserved a sequel. At the same time, part of that might be because so many superhero movies nowadays were guaranteed a sequel regardless. Most of it was bestowed upon the most successful superhero movies, and fortunately, many of them were the good ones. But when Todd Phillips’ Joker was given the green light to have a sequel made, I was intrigued to see where this movie could have gone, especially after the first film made such a splash with its provocative yet thought-provoking social commentary. But I felt equally astounded by the overwhelmingly negative feedback this movie received upon its release, especially by those who felt short-sheeted by the film’s direction within the Batman mythos. They acted like the film had undergone something seemingly meaningless and too disorganized to belong under the Joker name.

But I’ll tell you one of the first things I admire about this film. The allegedly disorganized nature of this movie ties back to what I believe this movie continued doing so well from the first film: its mental evaluation of Arthur Fleck. Only this time, it’s not just Arthur Fleck expressing his innermost madness, but also Lee Quinzel. She was sent to Arkham Asylum for the same reasons Arthur Fleck was: she was a crazed individual who went and committed horrible crimes.

This alone was a curious take on the famous story of Joker and Harley Quinn. As many people remember from throughout the Batman franchise, the Joker was a mental asylum patient, and Harleen Quinzel was an Arkham Asylum psychiatrist who came in to interview the Joker and diagnose him. Then, the Joker told her his so-called ‘life story,’ but even then, knowing the Joker, he could have just made that up. Harleen immediately took pity on him and sympathized with him until she ultimately became another one of the Joker’s pawns, famously going from being the Arkham Asylum psychiatrist, Harleen Quinzel, to the Joker’s henchwoman, Harley Quinn.

Thus, it led to what many people declared as one of the prime examples of toxic relationships, for Joker constantly beat down and abused poor Harley Quinn. In recent years, of course, Harley Quinn became so massively popular that several stories and shows were written so that she would escape her abusive relationship with the Joker and start a new path as her own woman, but not without a dash of craziness of her own.

But in this movie, they’re both Arkham Asylum inmates, which means they’re on an equal footing in terms of their relationship and hierarchy. But this leads to another trippy aspect I find the most fascinating about this film. Arthur Fleck was guided by Maryanne Stewart, a lawyer who represented him and provided arguments as to why he should be let out of prison and that some of the crimes he committed were induced out of his disorder. However, as Fleck spoke with her and more people about what he went through at the moment, like with his relationship with Lee Quinzel, he was told that she could have just been playing him like a fiddle and fooling him into doing something he should be embracing when he should be doing anything but embracing them, all because Quinzel was the same type of crazed individual that he was. So it’s likely that anything Quinzel said to him could be tactics she used to make her way on him and possibly suck up to his maniacal self.

So, in this case, even though Arthur Fleck and Lee Quinzel were on the same playing field together, there were some possibilities of Lee Quinzel being the manipulator this time and not the Joker like he’s usually known to do in many Batman installments prior. It paints their relationship in a more complex and no less engaging light, leading to the biggest question about them: who’s manipulating who?

Another reason I find this worth pondering is that the film’s decision to dip into musical essences this time around – unlike the first film or many of the other comic book movies, for that matter – allowed us to engage in a more carefree nature with Arthur Fleck, Lee Quinzel, and their troubles together, which only tied back to one of the main intrigues with this film. Did the musical performances that we’ve seen throughout this film actually happen? And since only Arthur Fleck and Lee Quinzel were doing the numbers, how much of it occurred inside their head? That may be likely since they decided to engage in their own fantasies rather than subject themselves to the world around them, and this tied into the mental evaluations with Arthur Fleck.

With Arthur Fleck, after suffering so much from real life and all the poor people who abused him, let him down, and forgot him, he was willing to unleash what he harbored inside of him, not just with his fantastical essences but also his innermost desires to do harm unto others. This movie basically showcases the aftermath of Arthur Fleck giving in and unleashing his fantastical self into the real world.

Of course, with regards to Lee Quinzel unleashing her innermost self, this is where I can understand some of the complaints people had with this film. She always talked about how she embraced wanting to unleash her innermost self after watching Arthur Fleck do just that on live TV by killing Murray Franklin. But even though she was the one pushing Arthur Fleck into embracing his Joker self, and even though she claimed to be taking inspiration from him, she was only halfway through with her transformation. It seemed like she was just getting started with her donning some makeup that reflected what Arthur Fleck put on himself as he became the Joker, while also putting on some harlequin-inspired red and black clothes. Hence, her Harley Quinn persona. But then, she gave up halfway through when she caught on to Arthur Fleck’s decision to go back on his Joker self, that it was all made up, and that Arthur Fleck was his true self. 

To further my point, outside of Joker being crafty with his jokes and assassinations, the closest thing to anarchy Harley Quinn ever committed was going for a smoke as she, Arthur Fleck, and their fellow inmates watched The Band Wagon together in Arkham Asylum. As she was about to take a ‘smoke,’ she decided to light the rest of her matches on fire, throw them on some piano notes, and leave them to burn from inside the piano while the movie was still going on and as the audience watched intent and unaware of the fire going on behind them.

But this leads to another part of the movie that seemed most stimulating. After going through battle after battle of who he’s supposed to be, what he’s supposed to do, and who he should be doing it with, Arthur Fleck ultimately decided to undergo more and more of his innermost fantastical self as he decided to let his lawyer go and represent himself. But the longer he did that, the more he slowly came to grips with who he really was, and the Joker self that he meant to unleash wasn’t his true self like he thought, but rather, his more fantastical self. And since Arthur Fleck was the closest thing to an inner self that he had, he decided to abide by that and stick with it, even if it would have turned off so many of the cults and crazed individuals throughout Gotham City who worshiped him for it, including Lee Quinzel.

As I said, this is a decent enough follow-up for a movie like Joker because it continues the mental evaluations of Arthur Fleck as he was beaten down by society and beaten into embracing his inner, more vengeful instincts. And this movie ultimately had him grapple with whether he’s comfortable with his monstrous self once he lets it out. The movie even began with a Looney Tunes-style cartoon that recapped what happened during ‘Live! With Murray Franklin’ at the end of the last film. However, while the Joker was animated as expressively as can be, he was also animated with a shadow self fighting against him and trying to make its way into the public consciousness. Hence, Arthur Fleck’s battles with himself about where he stood in life.

It is equivalent to the last two episodes of Neon Genesis Evangelion. It is nothing like what many people expected compared to the rest of what came before it, but it still serves as a genuinely compelling psychological study of some of its main characters.

However, the mental evaluation this movie took on Arthur Fleck is not the only reason I find this as suitable a sequel as can be for Arthur Fleck. Two things have been thoroughly carried over from the last film, as misdirected as many of its viewers thought they were. 

The first one is Todd Phillips’ directing. He excelled in honing his focus on the grittiness apparent throughout Gotham City and paying close attention to the corrupt nature apparent from many of the Gotham City residents, not just from Arthur Fleck or some of his associates from Arkham Asylum. With the tight shots, dark overtones, and centralized focus on some of the characters undergoing severe crises in life, Phillips helped emphasize the insecurities and inner demons apparent within many of the characters throughout the film, mainly when you assess them alongside some of the more common evils rampant throughout Gotham City, like from within characters like Arthur Fleck and Lee Quinzel. Todd Phillips also highlighted how some decent people left in Gotham City still acted as the voice of reason. He demonstrated, but not condescendingly, who would still have spoken common sense and remained decent about it despite being surrounded by many others who expressed more unscrupulous antics than we would have liked to see out of them. 

This leads to the second factor that feels just as stimulating as in the last film: the acting. Many of the actors throughout the picture all contributed to their roles with a hefty amount of realism and commitment to emphasize the collective darkness and reality of Gotham City and all its citizens, especially the higher-ups in charge at Arkham Asylum and throughout the courthouse where Arthur Fleck was interrogated. Some of the new actors somewhat played a role in this, such as the guards who constantly nagged at Arthur Fleck and walked over him while he was outside with the other inmates or dragged him to the innermost recesses of Arkham Asylum to torture him further if he acted out of line. There’s also one fellow inmate who seemed like he was just a pathetic nobody, and he was also given the short end of the stick until Arthur expressed sympathy for him and became friends with him. But as he did that more, it was then when the supposedly helpless inmate expressed darker shades about his character than we would have anticipated.

But the rest of the returning actors all gave it their all in maintaining their characters’ likenesses from the first film while pushing them forth in different directions that reflected the after-effects of Arthur Fleck’s actions from the end of the last movie, including Zazie Beetz as his ex-neighbor, Sophie Dumond. She was among the returning characters who constituted the jury for Arthur Fleck’s actions, along with Gary Puddles, the dwarf who was a friend of Randall and whose life the Joker spared last time.

However, among the actors were three who expressed such emotion, effort, and unquestionable talent with their performances that they are the real reason I consider this movie far from a failure.

Returning to Gary Puddles, I remember the actor portraying him, Leigh Gill, being as decent as can be in the first film. But his performance improved when he witnessed Arthur Fleck killing Randall in a fit of rage for supposedly lending him the gun that cost him his job in the first film. By the time the actor caught on to the high stakes that came about before his eyes, he carried some of the deeply held fear and helplessness with him as he testified against Arthur Fleck, this time in his Joker persona. By the time you hear this character express more of his fears that came with Arthur Fleck going down this path of becoming the Joker, you can feel the fear all over his face, as well as the boatload of grief he carried with him over witnessing his friend being killed, as well as his other friend, Arthur Fleck, becoming such an absolute monster. By the time he gave his testimony against him, especially when he was talking to Arthur Fleck as the Joker in court, you could feel his anguish all over his face and body language and feel as if he was reliving some of the scariest and worst days of his life while trying and supposedly failing to come to grips with the consequences that followed because of it.

The second performance is by Lady Gaga as Lee Quinzel. Say what you will about whether the movie failed its characters or audiences, but the performance Lady Gaga gave as her character felt worth the hype.

Lady Gaga seemed like a shoo-in to be Joaquin Phoenix’s costar, not just because of her rising talents as an actress but also because of her well-established background as a singer. And because the film went in a direction that was best suited as a musical, it only became a more fitting opportunity for Gaga to showcase her singing skills and test out her acting capabilities when performing alongside Joaquin Phoenix. I also admire that this film carries the vibes of being a twisted equivalent of what we’ve seen of Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper in A Star Is Born several years ago. What Lee Quinzel shared in common with Lady Gaga’s character from that film is that she started sympathizing with another famous person after watching his accomplishments and going through a complex wave of emotions and turbulence as she had to consider her codependence with the man she had feelings for. Only in the case of Lady Gaga and Joaquin Phoenix in this movie, what they meant to create together are just twisted variations of what they desired most out of life, and that is to escape reality and either sink into their own fantasies or unleash their fantastical pursuits out into reality.

Also, Lady Gaga’s portrayal of Harley Quinn felt so distinct and distinguished that she did wonders for her character because of it. Whenever I think of Harley Quinn, I think back to Arleen Sorkin from Batman: The Animated Series, Kaley Cuoco from Harley Quinn’s own animated series, and Margot Robbie from the live-action films. In this movie, Lady Gaga conveyed a slightly different personality with the same mannerisms and almost the same name as she walked and sang alongside Joaquin Phoenix in all their madcap adventures together, whether it’s from within or outside Arkham Asylum. As she spoke with Joaquin Phoenix’s character, you could feel her deep-seated frustrations that she wanted to express to the world, just as Arthur Fleck had done in his Joker self. And while she conveyed it with such delectability to her, she also did so with a certain charisma that sets her up as a different kind of crazy from Joaquin Phoenix’s character. Or, as the other characters pointed out, it could clue viewers like me into a more deceitful nature Quinzel carried with her, especially when she knew she was in the company of one of the most chaotic men roaming around Gotham City and whom she idolized for what he accomplished.

Gaga may not have sung as frequently or distinctively as the next actor I’m about to discuss here, but whenever she did sing her numbers, the strength of her vocals as she sang was still evident. Again, this reinforces why I find this movie a fitting avenue for Lady Gaga to take advantage of. However one interprets Lady Gaga’s performance, it’s still evident that she brought Harley Quinn to life with as much dignity as I thought Harley Quinn, or at least a variation of her character, deserved, especially after seeing Arleen Sorkin, Kaley Cuoco, and Margot Robbie master it their own way.

And that leaves us with Joaquin Phoenix as Arthur Fleck. Need I say more?

Joaquin Phoenix continued expressing the insecurities, borderline psychosis, and deranged antics of a broken man who unleashed hell in the streets after assassinating Murray Franklin on live TV at the end of the last film. He portrayed Arthur Fleck as a helpless man with nothing but problems on his shoulders, especially when some of them tied back to his condition as he tried to live life as he was expected to in Arkham Asylum or wherever he roamed in Gotham City. However, as he got together more with Lee, he expressed more sensitivity, not unlike what he unleashed before he was bullied in the streets and began his trek to become the Joker, even if most of it centered around almost being at peace with his more chaotic inner self. It invites the possibility that what Arthur Fleck felt about being at peace with his chaotic self could have been encouraged by Lee Quinzel after they spent enough time together to cherish each other’s company.

Joaquin Phoenix was not half-bad as Arthur Fleck performed in his musical numbers. He was phenomenal as an actor playing a broken man, but when he sang his numbers in character as Arthur Fleck, It did seem new and out of the ordinary, but it never felt unfitting. The notes he belted out and the tone he expressed them in felt enough for me to buy into the possibility that this was how Arthur Fleck would have broken out in song if this was a regular musical film. Of course, I should not be too surprised, considering that he’s had a background in musical work after starring in Walk the Line as Johnny Cash with Reese Witherspoon. If his musical talents are anything like what he unleashed in Walk the Line, then his musical talents in this movie did not disappoint.

But that’s not all. Every time Phoenix engaged in Arthur Fleck’s Joker persona, complete with his outfit and makeup, he conveyed his sarcasm, innermost contempt, and almost sadistic tendencies to make a name for himself and live up to his reputation in local anarchy when not ranting about the disorderly conditions of the world within which he walked. But even then, after all of this, Phoenix also excelled in expressing more of Arthur Fleck’s conflicted nature as he spent enough time to reflect on his past actions, how he felt about himself and his potential other self as the Joker, whether or not he felt prouder embracing his inner self, and if Arthur Fleck was his true self all along, and that the evil half that he carried inside of him was relegated to nothing more than just that, his bad self.

That’s another thing that this movie touched upon, and I did not expect to hear this discussed about Arthur Fleck. During one of his trials, some of the characters and lawyers asked about whether or not Arthur Fleck may have been diagnosed with multiple personality disorder.

When I think of that disorder within the Batman mythos, the one character that usually fits the bill most succinctly is Harvey Dent. He constantly struggled with having an evil self that continually nagged at him and pressured him into doing something that he did not feel comfortable pulling off. But it took an unfortunate incident with acid being splashed over half of his face to cement his transformation into Two-Face.

And speaking of whom, it just so happens that one of the lawyers representing the witnesses who testified against Arthur Fleck was Harvey Dent, played by Harry Lawtey. He appeared in this film as his regular self as he was before his face was half-scarred. However, the most curious part of his involvement in the movie occurred when it looked like the debate surrounding Arthur Fleck was about to reach its verdict. As that was about to commence, an explosion went off that blew off half of the courtroom and left a good chunk of people there for dead, including the judge. And when the camera hovered over Harvey Dent, he stared, shellshocked by what happened as half of his face was covered in soot from the explosion and possibly scarred or burnt enough to jumpstart his transformation into Two-Face. Whether or not this event began his multiple personality disorder, I don’t think anyone will know.

However, the ending of the film was not what I had expected. In other words, spoilers afoot!

SPOILER ALERT

Long after the bomb went off in the courthouse, and before he was taken back to his cell in Arkham Asylum, he approached Lee Quinzel on the staircase where he danced down in the last film and tried to make amends with her. Unfortunately, she turned him down, admitting that she loved him when he was letting his inner monster loose and left him in a huff.

After that, back in the Arkham Asylum, Joker was told that there was a visitor waiting for him. Arthur Fleck was halfway through on his trail when a fellow inmate approached him, the one Arthur spoke to often and encouraged to stand on his own two feet, and he was about to tell him a joke. But it turns out the ‘punchline,’ if you could even call it that, was little more than what Arthur said to Murray Franklin as he killed him off, and this inmate stabbed Fleck a few times in the stomach with a knife. As Arthur Fleck lay dying before our eyes, surprisingly, the inmate behind him made a Joker smile of his own and started cackling as if to clue me into the possibility of him becoming the Joker next.

This introduced a compelling topic with Joker that I had never contemplated until I saw the ending. Yes, Joker: Folie à Deux is technically a DC Elseworlds movie, so whatever happened could’ve occurred only in this interpretation of Batman and nowhere else. But think about all the other Jokers we’ve seen throughout the years: the comics, Mark Hamill, Caesar Romero, Jack Nicholson, Heath Ledger, and yes, even Jared Leto. Watching the inmate suddenly slaughter Arthur Fleck for giving up on his Joker persona makes me wonder, could this inmate, by claiming the Joker mantle by assassinating Arthur Fleck, have ended up as any one of these Jokers? Or, are the different interpretations we’ve seen thus far of the Joker all in separate universes, or were any of them all multiple different Jokers that came about in light of what Arthur unleashed in the two Joker films? This raises some eye-opening questions about the legitimacy of Joker’s character and the Batman mythos altogether, and it portrays the idea of there being multiple new Jokers, if there even can be such a thing as that, in a fascinating light.

SPOILERS END

Next, I ought to point out the film’s musical aspects. I found it most unusual that Joker: Folie à Deux, a sequel to the gritty, Oscar-winning Joker, would have decided to become a musical. But once the musical aspects came into play, it made a lot of sense. Once the two main characters broke into song, they sang more out of convenience, and they started singing out of inspiration from Arthur watching Quinzel performing at the singing class and after Arthur Fleck was put into the class. Why he was put there since he was still on trial and awaiting the results of the consequences of his murder spree, I don’t know.

Nonetheless, it started Arthur and Quinzel’s quest to free themselves of all the pain surrounding them by indulging in their musical instincts, walking about as if the world was a stage. Which is funny because, as the judge said,

A word of caution. This is not a comedy club. You are not on stage.

I like how he said that because, one, the stage the judge thought of is not just a comedy stage in Arthur’s mind but a musical stage as well. And what makes sense about the musical tendencies in this movie? Well, all the numbers they sang were pre-existing songs, including ‘That’s Entertainment’ from ‘The Band Wagon,’ Stevie Wonder’s ’For Once in My Life,’ Judy Garland’s ’Get Happy,’ and the returning song from the first film, Frank Sinatra’s ‘That’s Life.’ All the songs that Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga performed together were mostly from classic musicals, which, from the looks of it, they started getting into after watching a few of them and engaging in singing classes together.

Seeing the two of them engaging in musical numbers together adds a genuinely comedic flare to some of their actions in the movie. However, that might only be because we would be taking a peek inside their mental psychosis as they perceived what they found to be funny. As I recall from some of the production sets as they sang or fantasized together, it’s shown to be flashier and more theatrical than the rest of the film. And every time they went all out and acted out their innermost vengeance against whoever they targeted, it was painted in an exaggerated and almost comedic manner. Again, it’s because we see it as they would have.

So, while many people expressed doubts and probably still do about whether Joker: Folie à Deux should have even been a musical, I honestly believe that it did an excellent job of cluing its viewers into the mental conditions from within Arthur Fleck and also with Lee Quinzel.

What only strengthens this likelihood with the movie is that it was primarily Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga performing the songs. There might have been a couple of instances where some of the supporting characters broke into song, too. But even then, if they have, it’s likely that they only did so as part of Arthur Fleck and Lee Quinzel’s perceptions of what they consider the fantasy they’d rather live in versus their real world. In my opinion, it did not slump on that, even in a film like a follow-up of Todd Phillips’ Joker. It still ties into the movie’s mental evaluations of its central characters to a tee.

Many might say this film has forsaken its connections to Batman and is trash or unworthy because of it. I feel like the movie was too insightful to devote too much of its time to that and focused on what mattered the most in the story, and that’s the mental evaluations of Arthur Fleck’s post-transitional phase. All in all, while many people may have problems with this movie, it is one of those recent films that introduced utterly out-there and unthinkable tactics that, in my opinion, might only be celebrated later down the line for what it had accomplished and had done right. The only other recent film I could think of that has that same reputation is Francis Ford Coppola’s Megalopolis. I feel like both films work because they encourage us not to take things at face value and attempt to dig deeper to find the truth about specific life lessons as well as what we experienced in each movie.

Joker: Folie à Deux is no exception, for it did just that within the superhero genre. And after getting used to the commonplace superhero ethics from DC and especially the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it feels like a borderline breath of fresh air. But that still isn’t to say that this movie is as much of a masterpiece as the first film is.

Much like Megalopolis, this is one of the most unconventional recent films I’ve ever seen, if not one of the most misunderstood, and you know what? That’s not a bad thing. The characters are engaging enough. The performances are incredible. The direction by Todd Phillips feels admirably tight. The musical numbers feel surprisingly apropos. And the implications surrounding the whole film only add to its collective intrigue more than it does its pratfalls. To those who doubt the movie’s potential as a legitimate sequel or a worthy follow-up, give it another chance. Or, at the very least, give it some time and revisit it later. Chances are, you might find a new sense of reality hidden in this movie that you would not have anticipated after getting acquainted with the first film from Todd Phillips. It might help you out of your fantastical phases and discover what beauties can be found out of reality.

Rather than listening to the knee-jerk or the tone-deaf, listen to the tunes awaiting you in this film and see if you can find some beauty within the insanity.

My Rating

B