Universal Potentate

I have truly not seen such a satisfying film in a long time. I was wrought with pure joy during the entire film. Having seen Joker 1, The Batman and even Nolan's Dark Knight series multiple times, I had a high expectation for what this type of movie could be. My expectations were shattered. Absolutely a must see film. SPOILERS AHEAD! TO AVOID, STOP READING NOW! While Joker 1 felt disjointed at times, showing Arthur Fleck's descent into madness. Joker 2 told a very carefully crafted story showing Joker becoming sane and himself through a process of madness. Lee (Harleen Quinzel) was a psychologist who seemed to be guiding him back to sanity in the most insane way possible. How Lady Gaga was able to sing with a rough normal voice, contrasted against the fantasy music numbers, just showed her talent and range. Her performance as an actress was also impeccable. I loved her (Lee) in the beginning and hated her in the end. The character motivations were absolutely true and carried throughout the script. This was consistent with all the characters. I am also not sure if people noticed but ultimately Madness for Two (Folie a Deux) was a Joker Origin Story! The inmate who stabbed Arthur was laughing hysterically while cutting laugh lines into his face. It was reminiscent of Heath Ledger's joker. This was also set in the 1980s and the very young man (early 20s) who stabbed Arthur (mid 50s) could easily be the Joker that Robert Pattinson's Batman must contend with 40 years later. This is also its own universe (for now) so they could do whatever they want. We also didn't see Arthur die. It was implied but not overt, so a Joker 3 (whether Arthur Fleck or this other person known only as The Psychopath) is entirely possible. Watch and enjoy! :)

This review will contain spoilers. So, I rated this 2 stars. It wasn't trash. It had tidbits of wisdom. That is precisely the problem with it: it wasn't wise. It wanted to take on a brave and controversial subject: healthy open relationships. Then it just back peddled itself into "monogamy = maturity." The writer had a great opportunity to show the challenges and triumphs of an open relationship, as people negotiate their needs in a society that suppresses those needs. The back peddling began when the couple attends the book signing of this insightful author who discusses how a relationship must balance "newness" with stability. She even offers that sexual openness isn't a failing in our partner but a need for us to be a different person, which only different person can offer. Then after her presentation, the couple compliments the author on her insights. She's quick to admonish "Well, it's just an idea, not a recommendation." This is where the movie starts to go south quickly. They show the couple breaking their fundamental rule of honesty and openness. The problems start when the man (Martin) invites Gabi to meet his parents. He cannot be open about the loss of certain women: his dead sister, his mother with dementia and his ex-wife who blocked him on Facebook. While they're peeling back emotional layers and exploring new boundaries with their open relationship, the ex-wife never gets addressed ... which is ridiculous in any open relationship. This lack of closure Martin has with his ex is what in the end is used as the driving force for his desire for an open relationship; he wants to leave a door open for his ex. Once he closes that door, he can commit to Gabi. Instead of Martin and Gabi reaching this closure together and committing to dig deeper with one another, Gabi runs off with an older man only to realize she wants Martin ... and ONLY Martin. The movie ends with Gabi having sowed her wild oats and Martin reaching closure with his ex alone, so they can finally have what they really needed: monogamy, a "serious" relationship. So yeah ... I was disgusted. While the movie addresses multiple aspects about honesty, human sexuality, our needs, societal norms, balancing conflicting ideas, the process of forging a relationship, never giving up on each other ... it completely misses the mark to close a note that says "Society was right all along." Tidbits of wisdom, but not wise. To be fair, this could have been a story about how monogamy worked best for this couple. It could have contrasted positive and negative open and closed relationships. The couple in sober reflection could have concluded on monogamy. It did none of that. It had two experienced, intelligent, emotionally aware people "triumph" when, after a set of emotionally confusing unheavels, they cowered into a monogamous agreement ... and END SCENE. We don't see them beyond that. No kids. No marriage. No "10 years later." Just fade to black. This was a 2 star movie because it a full cup of potential that fell and broke on the ground.