A perfect companion movie or a prequel of some sort to Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight"

Rating: 10/10 (3 October 2019)

I was blown away by this film.
Joaquin Phoenix delivered a sure-win Oscar performance as the Joker. And I can straight-out say that this was a perfect companion movie or a prequel of some sort to Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight".
It was in the final act of the movie that I literally saw Phoenix's performance as if the late Heath Ledger himself was reprising his role as the titular character. Phoenix seamlessly slipped into the characterisation of the Joker as Ledger did. From the character's mannerisms to the words that he uttered. It was like the Joker was an entity in itself - a real thing/person that owns any actors playing the role.
But that's not to say that I purposefully distinguished both actors during the movie. Nor was the fact that Phoenix made it a point to replicate what was already did by Ledger in "The Dark Knight". Both actors owned the character in their own ways. But it's like they both captured the essence of The Joker as he was intended to be in the comics.
Another thing was that critics have been saying that Todd Philips' "Joker" was very Scorsese-esque with regards to the latter's "Taxi Driver" and "The Kings of Comedy". And I could see why. But in my own words, I would say that "Joker" was more of a homage to those two rather than trying to emulate Scorsese's works. From the 70s New York-style of Gotham to the colour palate used in the cinematography, everything just screamed from that era. Even the haunting score by Hildur Guðnadóttir was so disturbing that it drew me ever deeper into the movie.
When it comes to "Taxi Driver" it was no denying that there were parallelisms between that and "Joker". Yet, I think "Joker" compels us to re-analyse the message that is still relevant to these troubled times just as Scorsese did for "Taxi Driver" during the 70s.
I would say "Joker" is a multi-layered movie that played on so many aspects of society and its impacts on individuals. Such as the treatment of society on mental illness and depression as well as the possible outcomes of such environmental abuse that cause the degradation of individuals that burned that need to act on their violent tendencies onto society as a payback. These facts, as portrayed in the "Joker", are all grounded in our reality; with gun violence, murders, etc.
As such, "Joker" (along with Alfred Hitchcock's tour de force, "Psycho") ought to be a visual medium as a curricular training tool in psychological studies not just for students but also to be indoctrinated in law enforcement organisations' training modules.
With that said, "Joker" is by no means a cautionary tale of societal impact on one's behavioural mould.
In terms of pacing, the movie was, no doubt, a slow burn and audiences seeking action sequences would utterly be disappointed even though The Joker was synonymous with the Batman series and the DC universe. However, that's not to say that there were no hints in relation to Bruce Wayne. But keep in mind, with a title like "Joker" this movie is rightfully deserved to be told from the perspective of the titular protagonist (or antagonist, whichever you look at it).
But, for me, it was surprisingly fine with it. It takes its time to properly address its message. As for the depictions of violence in the movie, there were indeed intense and gory. So much so that at times, I found myself looking away or holding on tight my to my seat. But they were justified to tell the story otherwise the movie would just fall flat. However, that's not to say that I condone those violent acts nor I expect "some kind of action" going.
Nevertheless, "Joker" was indeed a masterpiece that captured the timeless issue of violence and societal impacts on individuals.