“Joker” was undoubtedly one of the most anticipated film releases of 2019. Now, it is one of the most controversial. The film follows a psychologically unstable comedian who resorts to gun violence. Understandably, this can be very upsetting to audiences, given the frequency of gun violence this year. According to the Gun Violence Archive, as of Oct. 6 there have been 324 mass shootings in 2019. That comes out to an average of more than one mass shooting each day. Even outside of these statistics, mass shootings and gun violence have become a staple in the news and on social media.
The controversy does not stop with the content of the film alone. Prior to its Oct. 4 release, the FBI issued warnings to law enforcement about potential mass shootings at showings of the film. While there were no specific locations, the FBI claimed they had been receiving tips about potential threats upon the film’s release for months. This stems from the mass shooting at an Aurora, Colorado movie theater during the premiere of “The Dark Knight Rises” in 2012. At the time, this was the deadliest mass shooting in American history, with 12 people killed and 70 others injured.
Despite being so controversial, “Joker” is a box office success. The Warner Brothers film has a nine out of 10 rating on IMDb. On Rotten Tomatoes, the critic score is 69% and the audience score is 89% as of Oct. 29. The film broke records opening weekend as it made an estimated $93.5 million in North America, defeating “Venom” as the top grossing film ever released in October year-over-year. “Venom,” a superhero film from the Sony Marvel Universe, grossed around $80 million in October of 2018.
The juxtaposition of controversy with such success leaves us with many questions to consider. Are films like “Joker” glorifying gun violence and feeding inspiration for copy cats? Can a film be responsible for perpetuating a problem that society fails to eliminate?
The director of the film, Todd Phillips, voiced frustration with the backlash. During an interview with Vanity Fair he said, “We’re making a movie about a fictional character in a fictional world, ultimately, and your hope is that people take it for what it is. You can’t blame movies for a world that is so fucked up that anything can trigger it. It’s not a call to action. If anything it’s a call to self-reflection to society.”
After seeing all of the buzz about this film online, I went into the theater skeptical about what I was about to witness for the next two hours.
It was intense and, at times, difficult to watch. I felt a whirlwind of emotions from horror to sympathy to anger. Audiences witnessed Arthur Fleck, a failed comedian, struggle with personal hardship and mental illness, which leads him to violence. While the film never reveals a specific diagnosis, it is clear that Fleck is suffering from mental illness. Fleck mentions being locked in a hospital and says that he takes seven different medications. Eventually, as the film progresses, he can no longer afford them because of governmental budget cuts. The film illustrates a dangerous link between mental illness and gun violence, which is the root of the controversy behind this film. It’s clear that the filmmakers want us to sympathize with Fleck, otherwise they wouldn’t have taken the time to give him an extensive backstory. If they had, the backstory would have been more similar to that of Heath Ledger’s Joker in “The Dark Knight,” simply showing Fleck committing a criminal act and killing civilians.
My heart hurt when Fleck said during a therapy session, “I just don’t want to feel bad anymore.” In this scene, he is very relatable, as I’m sure that is something we have all thought in times of hardship. I know I’ve said this when going through tough times myself. Many of us struggle with mental health issues — Fleck is not the only one.
Despite this, many claim the film does not do enough. It introduces a mentally ill man, characterizes him through stereotypical symptoms, and convinces the audience he has no other option than to resort to violence. This sounds like something straight out of a news article. While this is upsetting to many, Phillips himself said that this was the point. This film is a call for self-reflection. We should not be focusing on what we dislike about the film, but rather we should be focusing on what we dislike about our society (the mass shootings that occur every day) and thinking about what we can do to fix it. “Joker” is not trying to offer solutions, and frankly, that is not its responsibility. Whether tied to mental illness or not, gun violence is a real problem. Blaming perpetrators of gun violence strictly on those who struggle with mental illness is not the answer. Criticizing a fictional plot line for featuring gun violence is not solving anything either.
I was scared to go see this movie in the theater, but not because of the movie itself. I was worried for my safety, frightened of another mass shooting like the one in Aurora, Colorado. Evidently, this film is not perpetuating gun violence. We are.