Joker, director Todd Phillips’ origin story about the Clown Prince of Crime, hits theaters next weekend, and it’s already gotten plenty of buzz. Some of it is good — the film won the top prize at the Venice Film Festival this year and critical reception has been positive…mostly. Some have worried that the movie, a bleak story about a man warped into a psychopath by an uncaring world, will hit too close to home for American audiences currently living through a mass shooting crisis, where disaffected young men (mostly) seem to be picking up guns and turning their anger on innocent civilians with alarming regularity.
“A movie with the message this one hammers home again and again… feels too volatile, and frankly too scary, to separate from the very real violence committed by young men like Joaquin Phoenix’s Arthur Fleck in America almost every day,” writes Leah Greenblatt of Entertainment Weekly. “I see in Joker an attempt to elevate nerdy revenge to the plane of myth. That’s scary on a lot of different levels,” writes David Edelstein of Vulture. And it goes on like that. And honestly, I get the instinct to respond like this. The epidemic of mass shootings is scary, and if movies are capable of inspiring people to violence, do movie studios have a responsibility to temper their messaging?
Of course, there are some catches in there. To start, the question of whether disturbing movies actually encourage real-life aggression is, at best, unsettled. It’s analogous to the question of whether playing violent video games cause violence, a point that’s routinely brought up in the wake of mass shootings and which has been pretty thoroughly debunked. We can agree that there are way too many mass shootings in this country, but is going after media really the way we’re going to solve that problem? Really?
Predictably, Phillips doesn’t think so. “The movie makes statements about a lack of love, childhood trauma, lack of compassion in the world,” he told IGN. “I think people can handle that message.”
"It’s so, to me, bizarre when people say, ‘Oh, well I could handle it. But imagine if you can’t.’ It’s making judgments for other people and I don’t even want to bring up the movies in the past that they’ve said this about because it’s shocking and embarrassing when you go, oh my God, Do the Right Thing, they said that about [that movie, too]…To me, art can be complicated and oftentimes art is meant to be complicated. If you want uncomplicated art, you might want to take up calligraphy, but filmmaking will always be a complicated art."
Calligraphers of the world, defend your art.
Naturally, Phoenix backed up his director. “Well, I think that, for most of us, you’re able to tell the difference between right and wrong,” he said. “And those that aren’t are capable of interpreting anything in the way that they may want to. People misinterpret lyrics from songs. They misinterpret passages from books. So I don’t think it’s the responsibility of a filmmaker to teach the audience morality or the difference between right or wrong. I mean, to me, I think that that’s obvious.”
"I think if you have somebody that has that level of emotional disturbance, they can find fuel anywhere. I just don’t think that you can function that way. The truth is you don’t know what is going to be the fuel for somebody. And it might very well be your question. It might be this moment, right? But you can’t function in life saying, ‘Well, I can’t ask that question for the small chance that somebody might be affected by [it].’ I wouldn’t ask you to do that."
I basically agree with these two. Without evidence of a link between violent movies and violent behavior, if it comes down to a choice between releasing a movie and risking that it may affect people negatively or suppressing it, I’d go with releasing it even if I object to it personally, because I think people should be trusted with their own actions.
Joker poster with Joaquin Phoenix as Joker. Image: Warner Bros. Pictures
On the other hand, I understand you may see things differently if you survived or knew someone who survived a mass shooting. Such is the case for people in Aurora, Colorado, where a mass shooter killed 12 people and injured many others in a theater in 2012. Family members of the victims banded together to pen a letter to Warner Bros. about the film. “, perpetrated by a socially isolated individual who felt ‘wronged’ by society, has changed the course of our lives,” reads the letter, which was obtained by Entertainment Weekly. “When we learned that Warner Bros. was releasing a movie called Joker that presents the character as a protagonist with a sympathetic origin story, it gave us pause.”
"We want to be clear that we support your right to free speech and free expression. But as anybody who has seen a comic book movie can tell you: with great power comes great responsibility. That’s why we’re calling on you to use your massive platform and influence to join us in our fight to build safer communities … keeping everyone safe should be a top corporate priority for Warner Brothers."
I think this point is key. The letter isn’t asking that Warner Bros. not release the film, nor are they boycotting it. They’re asking for the studio to donate money to groups that help victims of gun violence, as well as those that work to “end political contributions to candidates who take money from the NRA and vote against gun reform” and to “use your political clout and leverage in Congress to actively lobby for gun reform.” The letter states out that “ince the federal government has failed to pass reforms that raise the standard for gun ownership in America, large companies like Warner Brothers have a responsibility to act,” pointing out the companies like Walmart have taken steps to curtail gun violence even in the absence of legislation telling them to do so.
And honestly…yeah, I support this. Without getting into the complicated politics surrounding gun control, it’s pretty clear that the federal government isn’t willing to act, so it makes sense to put pressure on private organizations who have the power to do something, even if it’s just donating to groups that can push for change. And the letter doesn’t call for censorship, so I think it has its priorities straight.
RELATED PRODUCT
Joker DC Comics Eekeez Figurine
Buy Now!
Buy Now!
This is a complicated, ongoing issue. Personally, I’m planning to see Joker on opening weekend. What do you all think?
UPDATE: Per Entertainment Weekly, Warner Bros. has issued a statement about the letter:
"Gun violence in our society is a critical issue, and we extend our deepest sympathy to all victims and families impacted by these tragedies. Our company has a long history of donating to victims of violence, including Aurora, and in recent weeks, our parent company joined other business leaders to call on policymakers to enact bi-partisan legislation to address this epidemic. At the same time, Warner Bros. believes that one of the functions of storytelling is to provoke difficult conversations around complex issues. Make no mistake: neither the fictional character Joker, nor the film, is an endorsement of real-world violence of any kind. It is not the intention of the film, the filmmakers or the studio to hold this character up as a hero."
The Century 16 movie theater, where the shooting happened, will not be showing Joker.
To stay up to date on everything fantasy, science fiction, and WiC, follow our all-encompassing Facebook page and sign up for our exclusive newsletter.
Watch Game of Thrones for FREE with a no-risk, 7-day free trial of Amazon Channels