A Decent Joker Take, But Not The One I Prefer

Rating: 6/10 (14 October 2019)

After seeing the credits roll on "Joker", it took me a bit to figure out my exact feelings towards it. On one hand, there is nothing inherently bad about the film, and it certainly is a new/fresh way to examine that character's backstory mythos. On the other hand, however, there is also a thought that nagged me which said that something was a bit "off" about the whole thing. The conclusion I've come to is that while "Joker" is a legitimate take on his origins, it just isn't the #1 (or even #2) take that I prefer.
For a basic overview, this film focuses on Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix), an aspiring stand-up comedian who works as an entertaining clown to support himself. Arthur clearly also has some some of mental illness, including the propensity for laughter when the emotional situation does not call for it. The combination of all these factors sees Fleck mistreated or put down by society at nearly every step of his Gotham-dwelling existence. After perpetuating a subway murder and then being embarrassed on live television by Murray Franklin (Robert De Niro), the late-night talk show host he idolizes, Fleck transforms himself into the tragically comedic figure Batman fans know well.
I actually have more respect than most, I think, towards the validity of this "take" on The Joker. It is easily the most gritty and true-to-life that has ever been attempted at this point. Basically, WB and director Todd Phillips are saying "here is how a real-life Joker figure could spring up", right down to explaining the makeup and predilection towards uncontrollable laughter. In and of itself, there really isn't anything "wrong" with this take.
That being said, I still prefer Ledger's mysterious Joker of "The Dark Knight" or even Nicholson's mob-leader Joker of "Batman (1989)". Acting performances strictly aside for the moment, I just don't know about--and feel a little uncomfortable with--the Joker being a tragic figure. I prefer the comic-book approach of Nicholson falling into the vat of chemicals, or the air of mystery surrounding where exactly Ledger's Joker came from. Having this Phoenix Joker spring from a place of potential sympathy? However legitimate that take may be, I just don't like it as much.
There are also a few frustrating choices that hold back the overall story of the film:
-A subplot involving Arthur's neighbor down the hall (played by Zazie Beetz) goes absolutely nowhere and ends up meaning very little.
-The shoehorning of the Wayne family into the movie. Did we really need to see the Waynes murder again?! That's becoming a parody of itself at this point. Plus, scenes that feature Fleck and any member of the Wayne family feel like pandering to the Batman crowd rather. The cherry on top, of course, is the insinuation (true or false) that Fleck may actually be a Wayne family relation. Again, that's taking the "easy way out" when it comes to crafting this story.
Fortunately, "Joker" does enough things right to make it watchable. It isn't boring by any means, the music and overall production value is great, and Phoenix does give a great performance. For the tone of the character that Phillips is trying to create, Phoenix is marvelous, actually.
Overall, though, I only moderately enjoyed this take on the Joker mythos. Maybe, had this been the first attempt at doing so, I'd feel differently. But as it stands, it comes down to me liking other interpretations of the character more than this one.