The Joker? More like a grotesque attempt at a joke.

Rating: 2/10 (18 December 2019)

I read the reviews about this film, and went to see this movie expecting a psychological masterpiece, filled with nuance and emotional depth, and I left the film feeling mentally violated. If I had to paint this film in generalized strokes, I'd sum it up as a malignant tumor on the collective psyche of our generation.
The film starts up showing Arthur - a pathetic, fragile man with an obviously low IQ. He gets beat up in the first 10mins of the film by a gaggle of teenagers, who on their way out of the alley call him "weak". Throughout the film he continues to portray himself as weak, up until the point he gets his hands on a gun. Then you see him staring to feel 'empowered', and by that I mean, he dances half naked with the gun shooting a hole in his wall, then gets brazen and takes it to work for which he gets fired as a result. On his way home he shoots three guys, who also decide to beat him up (you gotta start wondering why is everyone out to get this guy). He gets into an imaginary relationship with a neighbor. Kills his mom, cause guess what? His mom turns out to also be a bad guy. He then kills his coworker, who was also a 'bad guy', and then goes on a talk show with host who he's been fangirling over throughout the film, and then kills him on air, because guess what? He was also a bad guy!
This film is 2-dimensional at best. There is no emotional depth WHATSOEVER. Joaquin, for all the solid acting (at times overacting) that he does, and I'm sure a significant part of it was method (the guy starved himself for the role, so I give him props for that) does not even for a moment show any likeability as a character. He is flat, entirely unempathetic from the start of the film, and has no thoughts or feelings of his own to relay to the audience. Everything in the film happens to him, he makes no decisions. He just acts, and flatly for that. Everyone around him is equally flat - all the rich people are insensitive pigs, and all the poor people are violent anarchists. He is grotesque and detestable throughout the entire film. Most of the film is uncomfortable and some flat out unbearable to watch (if you're not a psychopath).
What's most disturbing though, is the reaction this film gets from some members of the audience. a couple of people in the audience were laughing at the parts where he killed, and right after. The one part where the little man tries to leave his apartment, one girl next to me fell into laughter at that. This little 'comedic' tidbit was tossed in there right after a gruesome murder.
The reason I categorize it as a malignant tumor, is because this film and films like it desensitize the audience to grotesque violence, and rationalize senseless acts of violence for those already lacking in the empathy department. They paint a picture of a bleak, cold and uncaring world that "makes monsters out of down on their luck folks". The film desperately tried to add a psychological element to this character, and failed tremendously. The mental illness he had was not properly portrayed. The DC Joker is a Malignant Grandiose Narcissist with Antisocial Personality Disorder, Arthur, however, is a vulnerable narcissist with what I'm guessing was supposed to be a variation of Tourette's. His narcissism is poorly portrayed, it only rears its ugly head once he kills and feels nothing about it. But narcissism is more than just that. Instead of showing other elements of malignant narcissism, the director decided to bombard the audience with grotesque shots of his malnourished, mostly naked body dancing for the purpose of making the audience uncomfortable. I'm guessing that was intentional, so that the film could be seen as "edgy, dark and artisitc".
So many reviewers on this site call this garbage a masterpiece, simply because it was disturbing to watch and makes the viewer squirm during a few scenes. Let me tell you, just because something makes you squirm or makes you want to gag, that doesn't make it good, or signify exceptional acting or directing. I would squirm just as much if I saw a video of a swarm of bugs crawling on a carcass, and that doesn't require any acting or directing.
The only reason I gave this film 2 stars instead of 1, was because of Joaquin's effort. Everything else was horrid, static and two-dimensional.