At the 29th Cannes Film Festival in 1976, "Taxi Driver" was awarded the Palme d'Or. Fast forward 48 years to today, "Joker" claims the Golden Lion at the 76th Venice Film Festival. Moreover, the creative inspiration for "Joker" is rooted in "Taxi Driver," and Robert De Niro, the lead in "Taxi Driver," is ironically shot by Joker in the latter film. This intertextuality across time and space adds an intriguing layer. While both films share similarities in themes, acting, and cinematography, a closer look reveals that "Joker" falls short compared to the mastery displayed in "Taxi Driver."
Firstly, in terms of setting, while "Taxi Driver" is set in New York City, "Joker" unfolds in Gotham City. Yet, Martin Scorsese and Todd Phillips share a common goal—to depict a dystopian city plagued by moral decay and distorted humanity, establishing it as an unshakeable premise. By internalizing the societal influence on the protagonist through the overall social environment, both "Taxi Driver" and "Joker" achieve this goal. However, when examining the finesse in shaping and rendering the external environment, Todd Phillips lags noticeably behind Martin Scorsese.
Martin Scorsese understands the balance needed, realizing that true dystopia shouldn't merely be surface-level chaos. "Moral decay" and "human distortion" go beyond mere brawls, disorder, societal unrest, and garbage-strewn streets. They signify deeper societal maladies. Scorsese avoids a monotonous portrayal of moral decay and human distortion throughout the film, introducing contrasts for impact. Here, Scorsese's seasoned craftsmanship shines.
In "Taxi Driver," Scorsese skillfully uses the contrast between "day" and "night," a universal symbol. In the daytime, New Yorkers do their business, contributing to the orderly city and exuding a bourgeois tranquility. Yet, as night falls, pimps, prostitutes, thugs, and drug dealers emerge, merging into the nocturnal chaos of New York. Scorsese paints a picture of refined daytime living and orderly city life, contrasting it with the primal instincts and moral decay enveloped in the darkness. The recurring jazz-style soundtrack and saxophone classical tunes throughout the film turn the chaotic New York nightlife into a refined composition.

This use of the "day" and "night" symbolism is evident in many films. In Luc Besson's "Subway," daytime Paris is romantic and charming, while nighttime is a party of alcohol, rock, and sex. In Leos Carax's "The Lovers on the Bridge," daytime Paris is similarly romantic and poetic, while nighttime belongs to beggars and immigrants. This contrast provides a more substantial impact and reveals that darkness, chaos, corruption, and decay perpetually lurk in the crevices of light and order.

Now, shifting to "Joker," Todd Phillips' understanding of dystopia seems rudimentary and blunt. Gotham City's darkness is portrayed as daytime thugs openly causing trouble, streets strewn with garbage, and nighttime subway rides filled with humiliation. This continuous lack of contrast in presenting dystopia achieves the director's purpose but needs a more nuanced touch, as seen in Scorsese's work.

This is where "Joker" falters. True dystopia isn't just about brawls and disorder; it's rebellion hidden beneath grand order, deformity lurking beneath elegance, and evil veiled beneath sublime justice. Todd Phillips needs to improve in portraying dystopia compared to Martin Scorsese, and this gap is not just in shaping the external environment but also in the divergence of personal fate and the crisis of the era.
In "Taxi Driver," the protagonist Travis, a Vietnam War veteran, struggles in post-war New York, driving a taxi for a living. Travis embodies the disorientation of the post-Vietnam era, mirroring the collapse of beliefs and values, the reconstruction of the post-war spiritual homeland, and veterans' struggles with city life and work systems. Travis's cynicism and societal hatred are universal.
When Travis eliminates the so-called "thugs" threatening the young prostitute Iris, it's an individual act of justice surviving in the dark and chaotic urban landscape. Travis's cynicism and societal hatred ironically spark a sense of justice deep within him. He never thought of changing society independently, as he claimed not to follow social news. Yet, he couldn't ignore the moral decay around him.
Here lies the difference in character portrayal between Todd Phillips and Martin Scorsese. In "Taxi Driver," Travis embodies both the "universal" and the "particular." He represents Vietnam War veterans, the counterculture, and the "lost" generation, serving as a microcosm of these groups. Simultaneously, he possesses compassion and a broad moral perspective that these groups lack. Travis's choices are a blend of individuality and universality.
In Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight," the Joker's unique charm comes from the mystery surrounding his past. He operates outside the norm, and his madness embodies a philosophical idea. However, in "Joker," Phillips attempts to explain Joker's madness through a "social" lens.
Joker faces bullying from thugs, betrayal by colleagues, unjust dismissal by his boss, mistreatment by affluent individuals on the street, mockery by a talk show host, and even abuse by a stepfather from a young age. The film continually emphasizes that Joker is an absolute victim, blaming society for everything.
While Joker's transformation at the end is somewhat cliché but acceptable, the attempt to turn Joker's violence into a catalyst for the lower class's resistance is strained. Joker's experiences, insights, and actions represent only himself. He is a particular case, a mentally ill person, and his experiences are hard to replicate on a large scale.

Todd Phillips acknowledges this, introducing the "rich-poor gap conflict" as a connection point, creating a forced conflict between the upper and lower classes. For example, when Joker kills a Wall Street worker, the lower-class people cheer, seeing him as a hero, while the wealthy Thomas Wayne states that Wall Street workers contribute to society and Joker is the real Joker. This deliberately created conflict transforms Joker's revenge into a heroic feat of eliminating unjust rich people. This, too, is plausible.
However, the fundamental problem lies in that Joker is not the true leader of the resistance group; he is merely a political symbol being exploited. Here, Todd Phillips exposes a flaw in his choice of the film's narrative. Regarding the essence of the "Joker" film, Phillips had two options: firstly, he could express the resonance between personal fate and the era crisis, akin to "Taxi Driver"; secondly, he could convey the absurdity of Joker as an ideological symbol.
Undoubtedly, the second choice is superior from any perspective. Firstly, Joker lacks universality; he can't represent any societal group. Using Joker to express the resonance between personal fate and the era crisis is imbalanced; these two cannot be equated. On the contrary, by portraying Joker as a "utilized political symbol," the film could convey a different, poignant aspect, revealing the inevitable fate of sacrifices in political struggles.
Unfortunately, Todd Phillips wanted to convey the resonance between personal fate and the era crisis, the idea that personal fate decisions determine the course of the era.
Only at this point does the gap between the deep-seated values of "Taxi Driver" and "Joker" become apparent—differences in their acknowledgment of the relationship between personal fate and the era crisis. "Taxi Driver" embodies the resonance of collective destiny and the crisis era, while "Joker" reflects the idea that personal fate decisions shape the course of the crisis era.
This is the gap between "Joker" and "Taxi Driver": "Taxi Driver" doesn't explicitly answer, leaving a universal character's actions in response to his personality transformation to present the societal ailments of that time. This intentional blankness at the "core spirit" allows viewers to interpret the film from multiple dimensions. On the other hand, "Joker's" climactic celebration of the rebel forces seems to signify the film's inclination towards the idea that individual fate decisions shape the era. The viewpoint and attitude are unequivocal.
Furthermore, considering human history, personal fate decisions are ultimately a minute part of the torrent of the times. Joker's flaw lies not only in its ignorance of the art of leaving things unsaid but also in its disregard for the objective laws of the progression of human civilization.
Truly exceptional films can bury seeds of hidden epochal consciousness beneath the smoothly flowing narrative. "Taxi Driver" belongs to this category; "Joker" does not.
Share your thoughts!
Be the first to start the conversation.