Why the film doesn't work

Rating: 5/10 (20 December 2019)

I went back to see this movie two nights ago in a lonely suburban Edwards at 11pm because I wanted to see this film again, not for praise but because it's so controversial and because I still think it's fun to have these discussions anywhere online now. So...
The biggest thing for me is how lofty the film feels, as though the creative team is fully aware of the edgy grandiose sort of following it could acquire, couple that with the fact that the films plot very heavily relies mostly upon the joker the and the study of that character makes the main performance seem somewhat contrived. And the more I'm seeing ads, videos, pictures, interviews, articles or whatnot about the movie that feeling only materializes.
Joker, the character itself is already such a demanding and engrossing role to begin with, and undeniably whoever plays the character on screen has played, and will play, will always create some sort of buzz of stir up some sort of drama. Note that this is very common knowledge, everyone knows how big of a role the joker is. When you that role for a 2 hour film that focuses solely on the character and almost nothing more, sure environmental and societal reflections peak through here and there and set up the context for the character, regardless, it feels unnecessary. As stated before in the review, yes the world is cruel, yeah it can make someone crazy. And I'm not saying that this is what the film is trying to say and that I think it's irresponsible to promote the behavior illustrated, in just saying it feels unnecessary; like writing a book about a father who died and a boy who afterwards grieved. What I mean here is that this is a film about a somewhat typical human response, albeit slightly heightened as he is the joker and quite literally goes insane, regardless there's no bigger lesson, or takeaway. And so for that people say it's a character study, okay that's fine I'd love to see that movie except it's not. It's not a fight club where the figures represent some piece of his consciousness or ego, allowing the audience insight into an interesting character, and done in a way that both engages the audience and keeps them guessing. It builds and builds, author gets beaten and pushed to the point where he snaps. And I guess I can sympathize with that, but only to an extent. Secondly and more importantly -and this connects back to why I mentioned the grand allure and notion of the joker role - I almost hate the film because it knows it's good, the performance, and it rides oh so heavily on it. It's being shoved down my throat and I get it, it is good. It's hard to hone in on the feeling I get specifically for the film without completely dissecting it, but it just feels as if every single person that made the film knew the amazing performance Joaquin Phoenix was putting on the table, capitalized on it, and revolved the entire film around it. It works, but to am extent, like yes the film is perfect for what they could do with it. Overall though I thought it was alright, maybe a good film with outstanding parts. In personal taste, and this is PERSONAL TASTE, I enjoy those performances that standout and that show those silvers of humanity in a basic role or in a scenario that didn't really beg for it, because that's how life works, that's realistic. The film is absolutely beautiful and the art direction if anything should win an Oscar, but sadly the aesthetic as gorgeous as it is, and perhaps the one great thing I admire about the film, just adds to the pretension when wondering whether this was also used to engage audiences into an otherwise drab plot. The biggest line that I've seen online that I can't stop thinking about is, in regards to someone's discussing the film: "I just wish it didn't exist."