Furthermore, the film is a critique of formalized "mental health" on multiple levels. On one level it reveals the myth of the "us". The psychiatrist is shown to be inattentive and not really caring about Arthur. She doesn't listen to him and only when she is losing her job due to spending cuts she says "they" don't care about "us". But, there is no "us" here, she only cares about herself and her paycheck. She doesn't really care about Arthur. Infact, everyone in the film behaves selfishly.
The fat work friend's behavior is another good example of selfish behavior. He only comes to check up on Arthur when he gets investigated by the cops about the gun. He doesn't care about the death of Arthur's mother. He only pretends to care, just like the psychiatrist. Society is shown to be a myth.
On a second level, "mental health" is normative and subjective. What is a disorder can only be a disorder from the frame of reference of order. From the subjective perspective of the disordered, the ordered is disorderly. Again, a critique of intersubjectivity.
The Joker in this film is more authentic than The Dark Knight's joker because an absurdist character would never organize as organizing itself is a kind of non-chaotic activity. If joker is a "leader" that defeats the entire purpose. Leading creates order. Joker doesn't want to inspire people to rebel, he doesn't care about anything.
There is a scene in Apocalypse Now where the Captain goes into a supposed "battle line". All the soldiers are screaming and firing at apparently nothing but black wilderness. The Captain repeatedly asks the soldiers where is the "CO"(commanding officer). Some of the soldiers say there is no commanding officer. Finally the Captain asks one person "is there a commanding officer", the soldier simply stares blankly and says "Yes", then continues loading ammunition to fire at nothing. This is a perfect exemplar of an army "led" by joker. If there is a goal, if there is a motive, if there is any kind of reason or meaning then that defeats everything that the joker stands for.
reply
share
[deleted]
5 years ago
SamGerard says that Arthur was a "bad" stand up comedian. But, "bad" according to whom? Arthur himself mentions that comedy is subjective. He didn't know this in the beginning he had to painfully discover this. The audience was laughing at him because they didn't like or didn't understand the joke. Indeed, SamGerard thinks he's a bad comedian because that is his subjective point of view.
First it’s pretty condescending to respond to my post directly but then talk about me in the third person as if I’m on trial and you’re addressing a jury (*said in a southern drawl
“Ladies and Gentlemen clearly Mr. Sam Gerard doesn’t know his elbow from his asshole” ). Second Arthur is a “bad” stand up comedian according to the film itself. Being a “good” stand up comedian means you tell your audience jokes that they not only can understand, but will also find funny. A good stand up comedian needs to be able to read his audience to tell jokes that will make them laugh and Arthur is shown as incapable of this. Obviously we see just a couple of his jokes but we’re clearly meant to believe this is representative of his entire act and the film wants us to believe he is bad at stand up comedy. Yes humor is in fact subjective but whether you're good or bad at stand up comedy is NOT subjective. I personally don’t care for most of Dane Cook’s jokes but his ability to fill large venues with people that go there specifically to see him means he is good at stand up comedy, but just doesn’t appeal to my personal tastes.
reply
share
[deleted]
5 years ago
The Joker in this film is more authentic than The Dark Knight's joker because an absurdist character would never organize as organizing itself is a kind of non-chaotic activity. If joker is a "leader" that defeats the entire purpose. Leading creates order. Joker doesn't want to inspire people to rebel, he doesn't care about anything.
To take a page from your playbook, more authentic according to whom? Indeed Geff thinks he’s more authentic because that’s his subjective point of view. (*southern drawl
now your honor I’m tired of these games ). But seriously if you want to argue that Joaquin is a more compelling portrayal of a person with mental health issues you will find no argument from me. I think Phoenix is nothing short of brilliant in this film. And if you want to argue that you can see him as growing into a criminal mastermind, I will also have no issue though I’d personally disagree.
reply
share